There is a recent article in the Daily Mail about Ann Hathaway and how she is perceived by the world:

Hathaway hates that she’s seen as a ‘bizarre-world good-girl character’, and feels she’s labelled as ‘very vanilla, very sweet, very accessible and not interesting,’ despite posing in a corset for a racy new shoot for Harper’s Bazaar magazine.

‘I’m not Rihanna,’ she told the fashion mag. ‘I’m not cool. When people come up to me in the street, they often want a hug not a photo, and they want that because they like my work.

‘For a long time it was me and her [her manager] against the world. I was seen as this bizarre-world good-girl cartoon that I in no way identified with – very vanilla, very sweet, very accessible and not interesting.

‘I had no grit, no sex appeal.’

I don’t know anything about Hathaway, but I have always found her presence to seem different than many of the actresses today.  I found her to be somewhat refreshing in the way she presented herself in her photos as she came across as rather feminine and sweet (These impressions were always guarded as I find it too much to hope for anymore).  Why is this considered such a bad thing?  For goodness sake, she complains that she is not cool like Rihanna.  Does she truly wish to go through what Rihanna went through to seem “cool”?  To not be vanilla?

I’m also baffled by this sense that people want a hug because they like her work, and not a photo.  A hug conveys to me a real affection.  That these fans feel somehow close to her because of what she has done and yet, she would rather be cool and have photos taken.  I suppose she doesn’t feel admired.  But, feelings aside, is it not better to be thought of affectionately than admired?  Admiration for an actor or an actress doesn’t come from actual respect of what she has done or who she is.  It is a desire to be close to her because of her place in society.  Is that something that she should really be striving for when she has more affection, maybe real affection, than most in her position today?

Lastly, I don’t understand this desire for “grit”.  Grit tends to come from a place of hardness.  Yes, women can have this and it can even be admirable.  But when a women presents with this trait she has usually gone through some very tough times to develop it.  She wishes to be interesting.  Is grit the way to accomplish this?  No.  There are any number of things she could do to be interesting, but these things and an acting career do not go hand and hand, I would think.

It seems many in Hollywood want these traits assigned to them to further themselves.  To somehow stand in with the crowd.  On some level, they sense that their lives are quite superficial, yet they fear that in changing that they will then have to give up their lives and the spotlight.  These are all contrivances to seek the next high in being in this light.

When did simple contentment and steadiness become boring and therefore something to look down upon?  Do these traits scream “not interesting” and are something to be avoided?  In the realm of relationships today, would a man overlook a content woman for not being interesting?

It’s Hollywood.  I do realize that and silliness is to be expected, but the levels this is taken to amaze me.