"It’s a lot easier to try and do the Hollywood thing when your parents can always pay your rent, when your parents can take as much time off of work as they need, when your parents can chase your dream across the country…. Wouldn’t it be nice to always have a safety net, when you’re trying to vault into the stars?"
A different time, a different place, a slightly different industry, but the authors of "How To Have The Number One Hit Single In Britain In 90 Days Or Your Money Back!" (available for free on the internet, and itself a fascinating, if dated read) indicate that you *have* to be on the dole and broke for the steps to work.
This isn't because Artistic Integrity, far from it. Rather, it's because you need to be in a place where you have nothing to lose and are putting yourself in even more desperate straits, no money, no prospects, no talent, to the point where you'll try any novelty., any dopey shtick that might get you out.
Don’t forget how shitty “thank you for smoking” was!  Why has Jason Reitman been able to make so many shitty movies? Why are we all watching all these shitty Jason Reitman movies?
My critique of this framing is that "nepo baby" oversimplified compared to what is going on.
When I think of "nepotism" I think of a family member either giving you, or at least calling in a favor to get you a job. I'm sure that this is a factor in the success of some second- or third-generation actors, but it is hardly the only factor.
You touch on two other factors in your article - heritability and wealthy parents being able to support a kid pursuing a questionable career choice. However, there are other factors as well.
-Even if your actor parent doesn't get you a job, they have some experience on how best to get one as an actor and can advise you on what to do
-if your parent is an actor, you and your parent are both more likely to see acting as a reasonable career aspiration and less likely to decide that it's a pipe dream and you should really become an accountant or something
-if your parents are actors or in the entertainment industry, you are likely to live in LA or NY or somewhere else where there are a lot of acting opportunities and/or where you may organically make connections. It's easier to get a bit part in a movie in LA than rural Kansas.
These are all significant advantages (privileges if you will) that children of actors have over other people, that will help them break into acting if they want to. However, they are all distinct from the idea that your dad got you the job. Just saying that people got their job through nepotism ignores these factors, which is bad, especially since these factors give people a leg up in other professions as well and need to be accounted for when someone claims that they just want "equality of opportunity."
I do think part of the issue is that we treat entertainment professionals as being some sort of weird aristocracy.
Across all walks of life, it's pretty normal (especially historically) for children to follow in the footsteps of their parents. Aside from nepotism, there's a lot of logic to this - who is better suited to train you for a profession than your own parents? To me it doesn't seem especially nefarious if the child whose parent runs a plumbing business ends up picking up a lot of plumbing skills and becoming a skilled plumber in their own right.
With entertainment it's feels weirder though, maybe because of a baked in assumption that OF COURSE everyone wants to be in entertainment. So nepotism dynamics feel unfair in entertainment in a way they don't with other (still potentially lucrative, but) less prestigious professions.
But to me it feels a little dystopian to try and interrupt an otherwise relatively benign desire of parents to pass down their profession to their children. What we realistically need is not pure meritocratic access to the entertainment industry, but rather a downgrade of the prestige associated with it (as part of a general project of leveling prestige across different lines of work).
I wonder how many nepo babies are actively trying to secure auditions and gigs for their own kids, while they claim they had no advantage. Probably a lot of them.
Honestly, if nepotism only operated in Hollywood and similar rarefied fields, I wouldn’t care (Jason Reitman aside). The problem is that nepotism is a necessary part of the hiring process for any job that anyone would want to have. We call it networking, but if we are honest, we ought to admit that networking is nepotism--exploiting our connections to powerful and influential people in order to get an advantage denied to other, likely equally skilled and hardworking, people. What talents are we wasting, what contributions are we denying ourselves, and which pressing societal problems remain unsolved, because our system is set up so that in order to have a shot at an interview, job candidates need a powerful person to vouch for them first?
Your Beast article isn't very good. In the piece you pandered way too hard to their editors in order to get published there, and for what? That site is even more pathetic than the NYT.
You also committed the very common error of calling twitter a "public square." It is not public, and it most certainly isn't square (unless you're referring to the monitor through which you view it.).
Nothing digital can ever even come close to replacing the actual public square, because it exists in reality. You can walk on it. No algorithmic demons can ban you from it. It's that simple. Digital imitations are too pathetic to even be comparable.
There's a very, very simple solution to nepotism. First, children must be separated from their families and communities by age 5. At this point, each child is given a randomized name and moved at least 100 miles away from their place of birth. All employers, in all fields, are required to report job opportunities to a centralized agency. All those seeking work are given another randomized professional name. Resumes are not permitted to name prior employers, university education, or personal interests. Internal opportunities are governed by the Office on Internal Recruitment, and those wishing for a promotion must undergo name randomization to avoid any perception of bias. Hiring outside the central agencies is illegal, with employer being punished by hefty fines and employee being subject to minimum 20 year prison sentences.
I don't have much to say about the "Nepo Babies" article because I am one, and probably the most "nepo" of them all. You are absolutely correct that we live in a culture where chance rules but people still believe in just deserts. I laugh about it from atop my mountain every single day.
Hollywood nepotism is more pernicious than the other industries. First, there are SO few winners. An unconnected kid who goes to law school will still make a middle class living; a struggling actor often won’t. Second, the privileges are SO insane. A lawyer or doctor may enjoy a high salary, but they’re also slogging unglamorous 80 hour weeks. And finally, there is no objective, merit-based filter at all (unless you’re a musician and your records simply don’t sell). That doctor had to take the MCAT and boards, which assures SOME level of qualification even if they had an easier time due to family background.
Oh God, Ghostbusters Afterlife. I can’t recommend the Red Letter Media review enough: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=nMtrjNPcjR0
"It’s a lot easier to try and do the Hollywood thing when your parents can always pay your rent, when your parents can take as much time off of work as they need, when your parents can chase your dream across the country…. Wouldn’t it be nice to always have a safety net, when you’re trying to vault into the stars?"
A different time, a different place, a slightly different industry, but the authors of "How To Have The Number One Hit Single In Britain In 90 Days Or Your Money Back!" (available for free on the internet, and itself a fascinating, if dated read) indicate that you *have* to be on the dole and broke for the steps to work.
This isn't because Artistic Integrity, far from it. Rather, it's because you need to be in a place where you have nothing to lose and are putting yourself in even more desperate straits, no money, no prospects, no talent, to the point where you'll try any novelty., any dopey shtick that might get you out.
Take him from the planet Earth 😂😂 that was a good morning laugh for me that led to a very productive cough.
Don’t forget how shitty “thank you for smoking” was!  Why has Jason Reitman been able to make so many shitty movies? Why are we all watching all these shitty Jason Reitman movies?
My critique of this framing is that "nepo baby" oversimplified compared to what is going on.
When I think of "nepotism" I think of a family member either giving you, or at least calling in a favor to get you a job. I'm sure that this is a factor in the success of some second- or third-generation actors, but it is hardly the only factor.
You touch on two other factors in your article - heritability and wealthy parents being able to support a kid pursuing a questionable career choice. However, there are other factors as well.
-Even if your actor parent doesn't get you a job, they have some experience on how best to get one as an actor and can advise you on what to do
-if your parent is an actor, you and your parent are both more likely to see acting as a reasonable career aspiration and less likely to decide that it's a pipe dream and you should really become an accountant or something
-if your parents are actors or in the entertainment industry, you are likely to live in LA or NY or somewhere else where there are a lot of acting opportunities and/or where you may organically make connections. It's easier to get a bit part in a movie in LA than rural Kansas.
These are all significant advantages (privileges if you will) that children of actors have over other people, that will help them break into acting if they want to. However, they are all distinct from the idea that your dad got you the job. Just saying that people got their job through nepotism ignores these factors, which is bad, especially since these factors give people a leg up in other professions as well and need to be accounted for when someone claims that they just want "equality of opportunity."
I do think part of the issue is that we treat entertainment professionals as being some sort of weird aristocracy.
Across all walks of life, it's pretty normal (especially historically) for children to follow in the footsteps of their parents. Aside from nepotism, there's a lot of logic to this - who is better suited to train you for a profession than your own parents? To me it doesn't seem especially nefarious if the child whose parent runs a plumbing business ends up picking up a lot of plumbing skills and becoming a skilled plumber in their own right.
With entertainment it's feels weirder though, maybe because of a baked in assumption that OF COURSE everyone wants to be in entertainment. So nepotism dynamics feel unfair in entertainment in a way they don't with other (still potentially lucrative, but) less prestigious professions.
But to me it feels a little dystopian to try and interrupt an otherwise relatively benign desire of parents to pass down their profession to their children. What we realistically need is not pure meritocratic access to the entertainment industry, but rather a downgrade of the prestige associated with it (as part of a general project of leveling prestige across different lines of work).
I wonder how many nepo babies are actively trying to secure auditions and gigs for their own kids, while they claim they had no advantage. Probably a lot of them.
Honestly, if nepotism only operated in Hollywood and similar rarefied fields, I wouldn’t care (Jason Reitman aside). The problem is that nepotism is a necessary part of the hiring process for any job that anyone would want to have. We call it networking, but if we are honest, we ought to admit that networking is nepotism--exploiting our connections to powerful and influential people in order to get an advantage denied to other, likely equally skilled and hardworking, people. What talents are we wasting, what contributions are we denying ourselves, and which pressing societal problems remain unsolved, because our system is set up so that in order to have a shot at an interview, job candidates need a powerful person to vouch for them first?
Your Beast article isn't very good. In the piece you pandered way too hard to their editors in order to get published there, and for what? That site is even more pathetic than the NYT.
You also committed the very common error of calling twitter a "public square." It is not public, and it most certainly isn't square (unless you're referring to the monitor through which you view it.).
Nothing digital can ever even come close to replacing the actual public square, because it exists in reality. You can walk on it. No algorithmic demons can ban you from it. It's that simple. Digital imitations are too pathetic to even be comparable.
There's a very, very simple solution to nepotism. First, children must be separated from their families and communities by age 5. At this point, each child is given a randomized name and moved at least 100 miles away from their place of birth. All employers, in all fields, are required to report job opportunities to a centralized agency. All those seeking work are given another randomized professional name. Resumes are not permitted to name prior employers, university education, or personal interests. Internal opportunities are governed by the Office on Internal Recruitment, and those wishing for a promotion must undergo name randomization to avoid any perception of bias. Hiring outside the central agencies is illegal, with employer being punished by hefty fines and employee being subject to minimum 20 year prison sentences.
Between Monday's Moldy Peaches shout-out and today's Juno gripe, Kimya Dawson's having a banner week over here...
I don't have much to say about the "Nepo Babies" article because I am one, and probably the most "nepo" of them all. You are absolutely correct that we live in a culture where chance rules but people still believe in just deserts. I laugh about it from atop my mountain every single day.
"In the piece you pandered way too hard to their editors in order to get published there"
This is expressed with perfect confidence, about something you can't possibly have any information on, and entirely wrong.
I actually liked "Up In The Air". Go figure.
Hollywood nepotism is more pernicious than the other industries. First, there are SO few winners. An unconnected kid who goes to law school will still make a middle class living; a struggling actor often won’t. Second, the privileges are SO insane. A lawyer or doctor may enjoy a high salary, but they’re also slogging unglamorous 80 hour weeks. And finally, there is no objective, merit-based filter at all (unless you’re a musician and your records simply don’t sell). That doctor had to take the MCAT and boards, which assures SOME level of qualification even if they had an easier time due to family background.