Yes. Miley Cyrus.
I'm actually going to discuss Miley Cyrus.
But as ever, there's a reason.
So.
Lately I've been thinking a lot about public image and the people represented by a certain image, whether the image serves them or they serve the image.
Context. I went through a week or so of watching Inside the Actors' Studio. (If you don't know what this is, and you like actors, or acting, or interesting people, or interviews, or whatever, watch them. They're great. Very honest and good.) And I was watching Johnny Depp's one. And he was talking about how his first agent (I think) turned him into this pretty-boy-child-"star". And how this became his type-cast and how at some point he realised that was not what he wanted to do or wanted to be.
Therefore, being an example of the person serving the image, as opposed to the image serving the artist.
The reason I've been thinking about this is fairly simple: I'm growing up. I've been doing this singing thing at home for a long long time by now, and I've started feeling like the image I now serve is not the right one. Or maybe it used to be the right one, but is no longer. Blah blah, whatever, point being it's just not "right" right now.
And this is where Miley steps into view, kinda.
Miley and hair.
I don't like her. Maybe that's too strong. Let's just say, she leaves me cold. I don't feel affected by what she does or her movies, like "LOL" - it is simply not my cup of tea.
However, whether the hair idea was hers, and she just fancied it, or something to do with her PR team no one knows - regardless, it's brave, you know?
Hair.
Something so so simple. Most people have it, most people do stuff with it.
I dip-dyed mine some time ago, and a few people at home appear to be "shocked" because it's not "me".
I mean,
what does that even mean?
I hadn't seen or heard of Miley's "big hair change" until someone mentioned it. Something along the lines of "that's not very Miley Cyrus".
Hair.
And what it symbolises.
I'm not a massive fan of her new hairstyle, which consequently is not the point either.
I simply give points to her for having balls and doing it.Going from the top picture, to the bottom one, with her image as it was, to something else. It is brave.
So I salute that. The bravery to change.
Many of us censor ourselves, whether in the eyes of an audience, or in the eyes of our families. Hair, seemingly not very important - but what's to say we don't end up doing that with other decisions that carry more gravity? My hair, my skin, my life.
If I want another tattoo - how is it going to alter your life? It's not.
I respect Miley (3 words I thought I'd never say) for doing this.
Because it doesn't
really change anything. Okay, some of her audience might go "uh-oh" but for the majority it doesn't really matter. Or if it does, then positively so. Most of her fans won't go OMG EW WHAT MILEY WHAT. It's hair. If anything, she's got some serious kudos for it.
So the bottom line is, if you feel like you want to change something, or purple hair might make you happier and therefore more confident as a person and therefore make you shine in your own skin - Jesus, go for it!!
Because regardless of the fact that someone might not like it, it's hair. YOUR hair.
Or your education.
Or your skin.
Or your sexuality.
Or your religion.
And this is not far fetched. It comes from the same thing.
This does not just apply to people under some form of public scrutiny, it's everywhere, all the time, with everyone.
So I'll take my dip-dye, and be ecstatic about it, thank you very much.
And I might get another tattoo. And then I might cut my hair quite short. And then I might get a piercing. Cause, heaven forbid, I might have some fun?
Seriously. If a person doesn't have anything else to worry about than
someone else's hair they should re-assess some stuff, pronto.
This has all been very ramble-y. But I hope you kinda got what I meant.
Am I a lesser version of myself with dip-dyed hair?
I don't think so.M.
