Addictions, depression, anxieties, phobias and compulsive disorders are common to neurotic people in general. But the mere fact that Lindsay is most likely neurotic doesn't make her comparable to Edie Sedgwick. You need to look more into personality, religion, upbringing, school, interests to make a conclusion if two people represent the same figure. I don't really know Lindsay and her story, but Edie was from very elite background, "old money" , famous ancestors. That is one of the reasons for how she was looked at by the public. She became famous for being wealthy socialite. She befriended Warhol and was around Factory. This fact lead her to appear in some movies, and finally she also did "Ciao, Manhattan" - the proper movie with Roger Vadim among cast, the director who discovered Brigitte Bardot. So basically, she never actually had to make it in movies, she was very well off, but also very damaged by her family. I don't want to sound like psychiatrist, but in my opinion, the reason for her decent was disillusionment with Warhol and Factory, and there is nothing Andy could do. As far as I see it, Edie was treated very badly by father and mother, she was hurt from seeing her two brothers committing suicides, so when she met Warhol she probably built this fantasy family with Andy being a father figure, and Factory visitors as her siblings, she probably trusted everyone, and thought they relate to her as their daughter. But actually Factory was a collective of individuals, just like any collective, and it was wrong to expect family relationships there. At one point Edie realized that and since it was second disillusionment for her, and her mental health was already shaky, she lost confidence and turned to drugs which she probably knew very well before. Heroin is most likely came into picture from doing too much speed. Heroin is highly addictive and dangerous drug, lots of people died from it overdose. Heroin changes a person physically and mentally. With such low resistance from her tired brain it wasn't surprising she wasn't able to kick the habit.
reply
share
12 years ago
[deleted]
DivingIntheBlue
11 years ago
No - because Lohan has talent.
Lohan was a good child performer, yes, but that talent did not translate into her adulthood. I think that has a lot to do with people telling her she was the greatest thing ever as a kid. When she became of age, she lost her damn mind and kept relying on old accomplishments as proof that she should be a huge star today. If anything, child stars have to work harder to prove that they deserve their star status as an adult and Lohan still hasn't done that. She's done some decent work in a few films as an adult but people still keep bringing up Parent Trap and Mean Girls as examples of her talent. If she had some now, people would not have to reach so far back.
As an Edie fan, I have no problem saying she didn't have much talent as an actress. She only "acted" in one film, Ciao! Manhattan, and she wasn't terribly good. The movie itself is bizarre and she was bombed out of her mind during filming, but it's obvious that acting wasn't her forte. She became famous for being herself and that's not exactly a talent. I do find Edie fascinating and she was beautiful but I will admit that she was basically a glorified reality star before reality television was invented. She wasn't as calculating or media savvy as say Kim Kardashian or Paris Hilton but let's be real here, she was their predecessor. Famous for being rich and pretty...that's about it.
Comparing Lohan to Sedgwick is probably a bit lopsided. The only thing the two have in common are screwed up families and drug habits. As marginally talented as I think Lohan is now, she did start off with some talent and wasn't just handed a career.
reply
share
11 years ago
[deleted]
DivingIntheBlue
11 years ago
I was unaware that I had to explain and/or defen why I find something interesting. I like Edie because I find the entire Warhol Factory era interesting. I also like Candy Darling and some of the other superstars like Ondine because they refused to hide who they were in an era when being different was not something that was terribly acceptable or celebrated.
I think it's possible to like something without thinking it is perfect. That whole scene was shallow and I have no problem admitting it.
I'm not going to deride Edie because other rich socialites came along and became attention who*es. It wasn't her fault and she certainly wasn't the first rich woman to fascinate the press for simply existing.
reply
share