After reading this, it wouldn't surprise me if her answer to the question in the OP came from a place of "my life is fucked dude, screw my upbringing I've got it just as bad as my co-stars". Rather than her specifically thinking about class/race.
-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
Daisy Ridley denies that her privilege made her more confident to navigate her celebrity, compares her experience to co-star John Boyega
- Thread starter Deleted member 42105
- Start date
She is wrong. What are you actually doing with this? I see a shitton of white defense from white people.
Correct me if I'm wrong.
Correct me if I'm wrong.
This certainly is a Hot Take.
I gotta love how nominally progressive people buy into the idea that race basically determines how one approaches life/their career. Especially something so vague as "their confidence".
It's obviously a loaded question designed to catch her off guard and garner some snarky reactions on social media.
Whats ironic is so many of these posters want to call out criticism of star wars as being littered with sexism, discrimination, etc (which there is a lot of) but then here do everything they can to defend a white privilege response and saying that asking about privilege is somehow an unfair and trap question, completely tuning out a legitimate question regarding an incredibly important issue in society by a female journalist of color. Theyre showing their asses for the hypocrites they are. They only care about these issues so much as in they can use them to shield star wars from criticism.
it's peak privileged right-wing nonsense to think marginalization has no impact on your life or your career
Not a great answer for sure, but I don't believe any amount of boarding school can prepare your confidence enough to withstand the throngs of angry star wars nerds.
Her response sucked. Hopefully she's gunna reflect on it and come back with a better take
Yep, star wars fans are weird, if you take that shit seriously thats a red flag
considering that the journalist used that part of the interview to mischaracterize daisy, no wonder people aren't to keen to take her side
daisy never said she has no privilege and yet the author is saying that all over twitter.
even boyega is calling the author out ffs
I'm okay with it. If journalists want to do their thing and ask rich people tough questions, let them, the author's weird after reaction on twitter not withstanding.
User Banned (2 Days): Trolling and Avatar Shaming; Prior ban for Trolling
I don't really think anyone in the casting department cared about what school she went to so it's kind of a "gotcha" question.
If there was privilege in her getting the role and even Boyega and Issac getting their roles, it's because they're relatively good looking people to begin with. Which goes for about 95% of actors. She ain't getting cast if she looked like this, I don't care how many private schools she went to or how posh of an upbringing she had.
Any reason you chose to use the photo of a woman who happens to write about intersectional feminism in order to make your point? A photo that is only found in one particular article on the entire internet and nowhere else?
Last edited:
Whether or not that was a mischaracterization-which is debatable given ridley's weird tangent about boyega's background generally-it was an entirely fair question regardless of whether or not the journalist interpreted it differently. Saying it was an unfair question is hand waving away a serious issue. If Daisy had given a great answer to the question, no one would be bemoaning the question at hand. Its only because she gave such a poor response that people are going after the journalist and the question. And its pretty disgusting. But as I said, its a great limitus test for star wars fans to see who wants to show their ass.
Oh, the woman who probably has more YouTube videos about how she's terrible than any living person is a little bit defensive about someone essentially saying that she didn't earn her success? I'm shocked. Shocked!
Instead of an easy step over this pothole, she just effortlessly flopped right into it without blinking.
This seems poorly handled all-round
This seems poorly handled all-round
Last edited:
The structure of this interview lacks any real substance.
Weak bait in a very strange interview overall.
Weak bait in a very strange interview overall.
Just googled average looking white woman and that was one of the pics that came up. *shrugs*. Point is most actors are privileged because they're good looking 95% of the time. That would include Boyega and Issac though too.
There's not many average to below average looking people that get a career in film/television.
How is that relevant in a discussion about privilege when it comes to race and class?
Because actors aren't cast based on a privileged back ground per se. No one cares what boarding school you went to or you uncle worked for the BBC or something if the next person can read the lines the same way and is better looking than you.
Being above average in looks is the real trump card to have for an actor. The average casting director sees like 200 people in a day sometimes, they don't care what neighbourhood you grew up in. There are certainly biases present in casting, but not in the way I think the interviewer is implying here.
So then Hollywood's been white dominant so long because, what, white people are just so much more attractive than other races?
And you must be truly naive to believe having a priviledged background or connections isnt a big advantage when it comes to making it in Hollywood or any industry, for that matter. What world do you live in?
Because Hollywood has a Euro-centrized notion of beauty (as do other industries).
But no, I don't think going to a boarding school versus public school or something specifically makes it more likely that you're going to get cast in anything.
If you give me two actors and one grew up relatively well off and went to acting school, and person B who grew up less well off but is really attractive, both have about equal acting ability, I would bet person B books more roles.
You're not getting anything if you walk into an audition and say "well cast me because my uncle was a sound engineer at the BBC ... 15 years ago" ... no one cares about that.
If the interviewer is implying that she has the job because she went to a boarding school (apparently through a scholarship), I doubt really that really has much to do with the fact that she got cast in Star Wars.
Last edited:
It's honestly a weird question, seems like the interviewer has a specific bone to pick against people who go to private school as if there's some kind of course at private school one gets that teaches you how to deal with movie superstardom. That doesn't exist.
That's not what the interview implies at all.
It's asking if her background of coming from a wealthy White family has helped her navigate her fame.
She's never been asked that before .. and has no clue as to how her privilege of being rich and white might play into that.
Yep. I mean she's certainly privileged, but does her privilege gave her more confidence?
This is a woman who had to leave social media due to harassment. I can see how she's taken aback by it, when she and Kelly Marie Tran cant even exist on social media or talk about Star Wars without nerds nitpicking on it.
Why would there be though specifically with regards to going to a private school vs. public school? Is there some class at private school's that deals with being a famous movie star?
Hollywood certainly has its issues, but this point is just bizarre to me. Many of the biggest movie stars by the way grew up "poor" ... DiCaprio, Cruise, Stallone, Dwayne Johnson, Jim Carrey, George Clooney, Jennifer Lopez, Eddie Murphy, Scarlett Johanson, Sarah Jessica Parker, etc. It's actually a bit of a funny talking point when people for example crap on Clooney for being a "Hollywood elitist" even though he grew up with very little money while voting for Trump who literally has been shitting in gold toilets all his life.
Last edited:
And all the positions behind the cameras like director, cinematographer, producer, etc, that are still mostly white, what about those?
And, again, you are naive. Having connections is one of the best, if not the best ways to get ahead in ANY facet of life. Who you know often matters more than what you know.
It gives you more opportunities and a foot in the door and the more well off you are, the more likely you will have access to those kinds of networks/ know someone who runs in those circles. Fact of life. Basic knowledge.
Youre trying really hard to convince yourself and other people that looks matter more than white privilege or class privilege ( which also benefits white people more) but that's 100% bullshit and Im sure you know it.
And all the positions behind the cameras like director, cinematographer, producer, etc, that are still mostly white, what about those?
And, again, you are naive. Having connections is one of the best, if not the best ways to get ahead in ANY facet of life. Who you know often matters more than what you know.
It gives you more opportunities and a foot in the door and the more well off you are, the more likely you will have access to those kinds of networks/ know someone who runs in those circles. Fact of life. Basic knowledge.
Youre trying really hard to convince yourself and other people that looks matter more than white privilege or class privilege ( which also benefits white people more) but that's 100% bullshit and Im sure you know it.
Maybe for crew positions, but in front of the camera? You're not getting cast in anything over someone else because you went to a private school.
The type of networking you would need to have would be like you went to NYU film school and you know the director and have worked with him/her before and they want you.
That sort of thing certainly, but in casting session I can guarantee you no one says "well we're casting this person over person B because they went to a private school". Hollywood has biases for sure, but not one real care about your educational background when casting a role unless it's something specific to the director of the production or something like that.
Have you read the actual piece? Her Education was 1 of 3 background characteristics
Wealth, Class and Education.
Her Family are Landed Gentry .. it's a term used for the Elites in the UK who's family are Rich Landowners which is passed down in the Family. They practically don't need to work and live off the rental income for their entire life. That sets the stage for living a life of extreme privilege.
And as posted before Private Va Public education sees those that go to private school leave with more confidence and go on to land major jobs in Media.
It's a very fair question to ask to lead actress staring in the biggest film franchise on the planet.
It's a bad answer for sure, but I don't know what the interviewer was trying to get at with that loaded question. I mean, it's kind of an asshole thing to ask out of the blue. How was Daisy supposed to respond? Just a flat "yes"? Even though it's obvious Daisy does have a certain amount of privilege, acknowledging that when on a media tour with POC co-stars only serves to make her feel othered. I'm sure that's a feeling her co-stars are used to for sure, but to throw that question out in an interview is bad form. Pretty shitty, actually. All the same, hopefully Daisy will use this as a chance to reflect a bit.
Trap question
"So Daisy, you didn't work very hard for this at all did you? I mean it was all kind of handed to you and you don't deserve any of it, am I right?"
"So Daisy, you didn't work very hard for this at all did you? I mean it was all kind of handed to you and you don't deserve any of it, am I right?"
No actually I don't think that's a fair question, because there's no real indication anyone in Hollywood gets cast on that basis specifically.
Leonardo DiCaprio grew up rich? George Clooney? Tom Cruise? Dwayne Johnson? Kevin Hart? Scarlett Johanson? Jim Carrey?
What specifically about Daisy Ridley's background versus any other Hollywood actor that's "made it" makes it seem like she specifically should be questioned about that?
Is there any indication JJ Abrams chose to cast her because her grandfather worked at the BBC 50 years ago?
If there really is a bias in that specific way (towards people who grew up wealthier/in private education) then most movie stars should also have that background, but they don't really.
Do you know what a strawman argument is?
You've fabricated an argument that she got the job because of her background which no one has argued and you picking that apart.
The question is asking if her Higher class background helped her navigate her fame. Not did her background land her the job. Where did you get that conclusion from?
I've said clearly that is the question and it's a stupid question quite honestly. Everyone knows there's no "how to be a movie star and deal with fame 101" class or training at any school in the world, private, public, or whatever, so what's the point of the question then other than to really take a passive aggressive jab at the person.
Last edited:
I really don't think Disney casted her because of anything to do with her upbringing, but her family's wealth did help give her the opportunity to go for acting in the first place. Acting isn't exactly a job you get to make money off of fast (let alone get the lead in a Star Wars movie). Her ability to kind of go with the flow in being in a lot of shorts while not having to have a "day job" without any huge pressure on her is in fact a privilege to have.
With all that said, still, being the lead in a SW movie is just winning the lottery. She had the right tone in her voice, the right understanding of Rey, and the right physical apperience for what they wanted. That's ultimately what got her the job.
With all that said, still, being the lead in a SW movie is just winning the lottery. She had the right tone in her voice, the right understanding of Rey, and the right physical apperience for what they wanted. That's ultimately what got her the job.
Depending on your background - some people are well suited to dealing with Fame, especially if you come from a privileged family.
That's why she compared herself to Boyega because he does not come from that type of background but has dealt with Fame very well.
The Question itself got her to question her own privilege something she's never done before in that manner. It's a good question.. and the purpose of an interview.
You mean like Carrie Fisher who grew up as "Hollywood royalty" and grew up relatively well off ... how did she handle fame?
It's a disingenuous question because IMO the interviewer doesn't like the fact she went to a private school but is too chicken shit to say that to her face so it comes forth in a veiled question.
Everyone knows full well there is no preparation or "school" that can prepare you to deal with fame, we have plenty of stories of children of famous actors and singers who should have the best training anyone can get for that who succumb to a lot of issues in life.
Pretty much.
How do you expect someone to respond to such a loaded question out of the blue?
Why is it then that 40% of BAFTA winners are privately educated, compared to less than 10% of the general population in the U.K.? Class absolutely gives you a leg up in the film industry.
Socioeconomic background shapes the likelihood of even getting in front of a casting director in the first place. One of the reasons it's so hard for working class actors (and artists in general) is that the job pretty much guarantees that there will be often lengthy periods of no work which most people couldn't afford.
It's like asking an NBA player whether they'd be any good if they weren't as tall.
First of all, the implication of the question is insulting to begin with.
Handling fame in the 70s compared to now are not the same and you know that very well.
That's a strange way to look at the interviewers questions .. she makes it very clear that they are both privileged and she's not criticising her.
How many of the biggest movie stars are wealthy people growing up? Maybe 5-10%?
The majority of the big movie stars are actually in fact usually poor growing up. The "actor sleeping on friend's couches/in their car until they make it in Hollywood" thing isn't a myth, many of the "made actors" had to do that.
Yeah, it's even worse now than it was in the 70's.
And hard disagree on the latter considering her commentary in the article and conduct on Twitter.
Is Daisy Ridley even "rich"? Like wasn't she bartending before she got the Star Wars job? She shouldn't have to apologize for getting a scholarship to a private school.
this is completely untrue. what leads you to believe something like that?
