Amy Winehouse RIP

[Juggling Goth]

I just heard Amy Winehouse has died in so-far-unexplained circumstances. (Source: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/celebritynews/8656961/Amy-Winehouse-dies-aged-27.html.) Predictable as it may have been, I'm sorry to hear it. She had a lovely blues voice, and while I liked Back to Black less than Frank, apart from the singles, she was doing something nobody else was and she could have made so much more awesome music.

And yeah, for anyone interested (I was), she's joined the 27 Club.

[GrlumpTheElder]

I just heard Amy Winehouse has died in so-far-unexplained circumstances. (Source: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/celebritynews/8656961/Amy-Winehouse-dies-aged-27.html.) Predictable as it may have been, I'm sorry to hear it. She had a lovely blues voice, and while I liked Back to Black less than Frank, apart from the singles, she was doing something nobody else was and she could have made so much more awesome music.

And yeah, for anyone interested (I was), she's joined the 27 Club.

When I first heard she died, I immediately wondered if she was 27...
Turns out she was...

Cause of Death unknown - can't say I was a fan, but it's still sad when someone dies, especially at a young age.

[Serpentine]

Just heard about this. To reiterate my previous response: Holy crap!

[Moff Chumley]

I've always been a fan. It's an absolute shame she never recorded more music, and an even greater shame she let her life deteriorate the way it did. May she rest in peace.

[Maxios]

I've only heard a couple of her songs in the past. It's a shame that she died. I hope she rests in peace :smallfrown:

[Blisstake]

Just heard about this. To reiterate my previous response: Holy crap!

Actually, I didn't find this much of a surprise. The way she was going, this seemed almost inevitable...

Still, I'm sorry to see her go.

[Juggling Goth]

I wasn't surprised, but I was really, really disappointed. I liked her a lot.

[Psyren]

Is it bad that "Rehab" is the only song of hers I know?

And while the cause isn't "known," I have a feeling it won't shock anyone once discovered...

[Tirian]

I honestly hadn't heard a single song of hers until after learning of her death. I think she had a nice sound; it's clear why her fans would keep coming back despite her touring and personal ... inconsistency.

I hope that some people will learn the lessons that she could not, that sometimes you don't get to hit rock bottom before your ride is over.

[Psyren]

I honestly hadn't heard a single song of hers until after learning of her death. I think she had a nice sound; it's clear why her fans would keep coming back despite her touring and personal ... inconsistency.

I hope that some people will learn the lessons that she could not, that sometimes you don't get to hit rock bottom before your ride is over.

And sometimes, you should go to rehab.

(I know, I'm so original.)

[factotum]

And sometimes, you should go to rehab.


She did! Didn't seem to help much...

[Ravens_cry]

Those that burn hottest, burn fastest. What a waste.

[Serpentine]

Actually, I didn't find this much of a surprise. The way she was going, this seemed almost inevitable...Yeah, I know. It's a shame she didn't get herself together :smallfrown:

My Boy's always wondered whether, if Winehouse died young and half-way through her music career, she would be considered a tragic artist along the lines of Kurt Cobain and Janis Joplin and other members of the 27 Club and similar. Now that it's happened, what do you think?

[Ursus the Grim]

Yeah, I know. It's a shame she didn't get herself together :smallfrown:

My Boy's always wondered whether, if Winehouse died young and half-way through her music career, she would be considered a tragic artist along the lines of Kurt Cobain and Janis Joplin and other members of the 27 Club and similar. Now that it's happened, what do you think?

Honestly, not by a long shot. There were signs that Cobain had problems, but he wasn't quite the train wreck that Winehouse was until about a month before he killed himself. I think Cobain was still considered a major artist when he died. No offense to her fans, but I don't know any of Winehouse's songs. Only one person I know did. Whenever I heard of her, it was as the butt of a joke or in the news going "look what that silly Winehouse is up to now". Kind of like Courtney Love.

I can't see kids 16 years from now worshiping her as some sort of symbol of the times like they still due with Cobain. Especially because the last big name to still lodge in my mind is Heath Ledger (whom again, I hadn't heard of before his death, but after I saw Dark Knight I think he deserved the respect.) No offense to Winehouse fans, but I think there's a huge difference between her and Cobain and Ledger. It isn't the Y Chromosome either.

[JoseB]

My Boy's always wondered whether, if Winehouse died young and half-way through her music career, she would be considered a tragic artist along the lines of Kurt Cobain and Janis Joplin and other members of the 27 Club and similar. Now that it's happened, what do you think?

I don't know. Truth be told, other recognized "27-clubbers" had either a bigger influence, significantly more output, or both. Jimi Hendrix, Joplin herself, Brian Jones... I will always thiink that they are all head and shoulders above Amy Winehouse.

Also, those artists, before dying, showed signs of being able to still produce great works and develop their careers into even higher greatness (well, Jim Morrison, not really -- but he had been enormously influential before burning out).

By contrast, Amy Winehouse gave the impression (at least to me) of being already burnt-out, a completely spent force going nowhere, with a rather small output and not having been really influential (her style was more reminiscent of the classic R&B's than of anything new that developed music). Her later concerts where painful to watch (remember when she cancelled her European tour after a horrid "performance" in Serbia). She was not even professional enough to give her fans a minimally decent show in her later concerts.

Technically speaking, her voice was amazing, that is true. But that was about it, in my opinion.

It is always a pity when a young person dies. But I am not surprised *at all* that she self-destroyed in such a way. If anything, the question wasn't "if", but rather "when" she would kill herself with her beyond reckless behaviour.

[Serpentine]

Comparison to Cobain seems to be getting emphasised. But what about a comparison to, say, Janis Joplin? She was a trainwreck at the end, drunk at performances and so on. Yet 30-odd years later, she's considered an amazing musician.
Even if you (general you) don't know much of her music, both of Winehouse's albums were critically acclaimed, Grammy winning and the like.

[Ursus the Grim]

Comparison to Cobain seems to be getting emphasised. But what about a comparison to, say, Janis Joplin? She was a trainwreck at the end, drunk at performances and so on. Yet 30-odd years later, she's considered an amazing musician.
Even if you (general you) don't know much of her music, both of Winehouse's albums were critically acclaimed, Grammy winning and the like.

I didn't mention Joplin because she died nearly 20 years before I was born. I've heard the name before and I've heard some of her music but its hard to compare if we're trying to draw parallels between them. I don't have 20 year foresight so the best I can do is use something that is more contemporary.

Looking at Joplin's discography.
Cheap Thrills was double platinum.
Kozmic Blues went platinum.
Pearl went quadruple platinum.
Greatest hits was seven times.

Both of Winehouse's albums went multiplatinum.

Nirvana. Well, it would take a while to sort out exactly what went Diamond and what was just multiplatinum.

I wouldn't consider the Grammies an indicator of an artist's cultural impact any more than I would consider the decisions of the US Senate to adequately represent the wishes of the people. Which is why I'd defer to record sales and career length when considering a lasting impact.

Brian Jones. Rolling Stones. 6 Gold albums, 3 Platinums and a Multi-platinum. Died 5 years into the Stones career but the band still plays today.

Hendrix. Gold, Platinum, 2 Double Platinums, a Quadruple Platinum. Died 3 years after his first Studio Album.

Morrison. The Doors. Every single studio album released before his death went Platinum. One went double platinum. Another went platinum five times. Died 4 years in. The Doors continued to play until the early 90s.

Oh. You know what I just realized. I've got a skewed viewpoint here. See, here in the States Winehouse was significantly less successful than she was in the UK. Frank wasn't released Stateside until 2007 and barely made a splash and her other album only went double platinum. In the UK, Frank went Triple and a total of 8x combining the Standard and Deluxe Editions for Back to Black. Comparing them with the largely successful in America members of the 27 Club is inherently flawed.

[Kislath]

Wild lifestyle aside, didn't she have some very serious illness like Cystic Fibrosis or something? That would have killed her about this age anyway.

[Mauve Shirt]

My father is absolutely heartbroken. She was one of his favorite singers. He's been playing her music nonstop.

[Worlok]

Well, ****. Just had put in "Back to Black" when I found this thread. Talk about awkward. I'll miss her and her music. :smallfrown:

[factotum]

Wild lifestyle aside, didn't she have some very serious illness like Cystic Fibrosis or something? That would have killed her about this age anyway.

No, she didn't have anything like that. She had early signs of emphysema, I believe, but that was largely down to her substance abuse rather than being an illness she would have had anyway.

[hustlertwo]

I dunno, I usually save my sadness for people who die from things beyond their control, like starving to death or car accidents. Troubled rich girl poisons body and pays the price...eh. It's not like the potential impact of smoking cigarettes and crack is unknown. There's been one or two...thousand PSAs about it.

[Ursus the Grim]

I dunno, I usually save my sadness for people who die from things beyond their control, like starving to death or car accidents. Troubled rich girl poisons body and pays the price...eh. It's not like the potential impact of smoking cigarettes and crack is unknown. There's been one or two...thousand PSAs about it.

Thats generally my sentiment, but one I keep to myself because people inevitably lash out at me for being insensitive or not understanding 'their life and their problems'.:smallwink:

[RabbitHoleLost]

Frankly, here in the US she was known more for being the butt of jokes than she was her music, anyways- I didn't realize her music was more popular in other parts of the world, and was kinda baffled why people were sad/didn't see it coming in the first place.

The interesting bit is that a friend of mine asked on my birthday party on Thursday if she was still alive :smalleek:

I don't think she'll become a tragic artist like Morrison or Joplin.
Why?
Because her music, atleast in the US, wasn't nearly as popular as theirs at the time of their deaths. Because Janis and Jim didn't have a memebase in their time that mocked them relentlessly so that most people on the internet knew them only as a cracked out meme.
Because Janis and Jim didn't openly mock rehab, didn't flaunt their lack of remorse about their poor life choices and drug addictions.

[hustlertwo]

This is the Internet, mate. If you're not going to express your unpopular opinions here, where else?

With all the young celebs who kick off like this, it's also hard to be too broken up, even if you liked their work, because their lifestyle reflects that deep down, this is what they wanted. There is almost never an old age for someone who burns through life like this. They sought out death. It found them. Someone getting what they want is not an extremely sad thing.

[Tirian]

Comparison to Cobain seems to be getting emphasised. But what about a comparison to, say, Janis Joplin? She was a trainwreck at the end, drunk at performances and so on. Yet 30-odd years later, she's considered an amazing musician.
Even if you (general you) don't know much of her music, both of Winehouse's albums were critically acclaimed, Grammy winning and the like.

At this point, I think that both comparisons are not completely inappropriate. Janis Joplin, Kurt Kobain, and Amy Winehouse all inspired musicians and non-musicians to explore musical styles that hadn't been thought of as musical before they came along, and they all loosened up record labels to start signing new acts to cash in on the next generation of whatever sound that was.

It'll take some time to sort it all out. There was some grumbling after Cobain died that he didn't belong in the top tier of the 27 Club himself.

[Yora]

I strongly disapprove of anything that somehow presents lethal drug addiction and mental breakdown as signs of great artists.
Putting people with mental illnesses and addictions on a pedestal and twisting them into martyrs of the art world seems just wrong. True, when you are addicted, you're no longer able to get yourself out of it again by yourself, but starting with drugs is your own descision and so it's all your own fault. There are some circumstances when a person is not to blame, when they have nothing else to lose, but when you're rich and famous, there's no excuse.
There's nothing glamerous about stars who died from drugs. They brought it all on themselves and should not be seen as role models.

It's the whole "oh these tragic geniuses all used drugs" thing that gets musicians to start drugs to begin with.

[Serpentine]

By that same measure, I don't think dismissing the death of another human being because of their mental illnesses and addictions is exactly sending a terribly good message, either. In my opinion, "it's not a tragedy if a drug addict dies, especially if it's from an overdose" (which we don't know yet, by the way) is a horrific attitude. There's a lot of parents, siblings and offspring out there addicted to drugs. That doesn't make them worthless.

[Mauve Shirt]

By that same measure, I don't think dismissing the death of another human being because of their mental illnesses and addictions is exactly sending a terribly good message, either. In my opinion, "it's not a tragedy if a drug addict dies, especially if it's from an overdose" (which we don't know yet, by the way) is a horrific attitude. There's a lot of parents, siblings and offspring out there addicted to drugs. That doesn't make them worthless.

Thank you. I was typing up a post like that, yours is much better.

[hustlertwo]

By that same measure, I don't think dismissing the death of another human being because of their mental illnesses and addictions is exactly sending a terribly good message, either. In my opinion, "it's not a tragedy if a drug addict dies, especially if it's from an overdose" (which we don't know yet, by the way) is a horrific attitude. There's a lot of parents, siblings and offspring out there addicted to drugs. That doesn't make them worthless.

It also doesn't make their deaths even an iota as tragic as someone who wanted to live, and was not able, either due to the machinations of others or the capricious whims of fate and their own traitorous bodies.

These were people who were aware they had illnesses and addictions. They did not take sufficient steps to combat the problem, either due to lack of interest in a clean lifestyle, or simply not wanting to deviate from the course of self-destruction. Certainly the issue wasn't lack of finances for such treatments.

And a parent addicted to drugs is, in fact, pretty worthless as a general rule. I'm sure there are exceptions. I'm also sure there aren't all that many.

[Psyren]

I don't think any of us is really in the position to judge the worth of a human life, especially compared to other people who didn't get to hold onto theirs. Let's just be happy for the ones we have, no?

[Serpentine]

Yeah... No. It's pretty much exactly as tragic, all other things being equal. A person who uses - or is addicted to - drugs is not one iota less human, or of lesser value, than a person who does not. And no, not every addict is "aware they had illnesses and addictions" - in fact, isn't the first bit of Alcoholics Anonymous "the first step is admitting you have a problem"?
So yeah, I reject your claim that the death of a drug addict is less tragic than the death of a non-drug addict simply on the basis of their addiction, categorically and completely, and find it deeply disturbing and not a little offensive.

[hustlertwo]

I guess we have to agree to disagree. If we have a 9 year old girl, suffering excruciating 3rd degree burns on most of her body who likely won't live out the night, and her crack-addled mother whose cigarette fell from her sleeping mouth and lit the flames...I can't see those as being equal. The mere thought of it is appalling.

[TheLaughingMan]

Yeah... No. It's pretty much exactly as tragic, all other things being equal. A person who uses - or is addicted to - drugs is not one iota less human, or of lesser value, than a person who does not. And no, not every addict is "aware they had illnesses and addictions" - in fact, isn't the first bit of Alcoholics Anonymous "the first step is admitting you have a problem"?
So yeah, I reject your claim that the death of a drug addict is less tragic than the death of a non-drug addict simply on the basis of their addiction, categorically and completely, and find it deeply disturbing and not a little offensive.

I don't think they're dismissing her death outright, but rather expressing that she was the cause of her own downfall. It's always sad when someone dies, but at the same time, I can understand if one might be less sympathetic towards one who threw their own life away. They have no one to blame but themselves. There was always a way out, and she never took it. Sad, true, but death does not absolve a person of all their stupid decisions.

EDIT: ^That too.

[ForzaFiori]

This sucks. While I don't have any of her CDs or anything, my ex does, so I've heard several of her songs. It's always bad when an artist dies this young, even if they seem burned out (people have come back from obscurity before, after all)


There are some circumstances when a person is not to blame, when they have nothing else to lose, but when you're rich and famous, there's no excuse.


Really? So its A-ok for poor people to do drugs, but not the rich? Why is that? Have they already thrown away our lives, or is it just cause they're not in the spotlight and so no one has to look at it?

How about the fact that nearly every member of the 27 club probably started drugs when they were poor and unknown, and had their addiction problems before they went big?

As for equating excellent music with drugs, lets take a look at some of the big names in music, who also did drugs (just off the top of my head):


Elvis - OD'd
The Beatles
Hendrix - OD'd
Joplin - OD'd
Elton John
The Rev (Avenged Sevenfold) - OD'd
Michael Jackson - OD'd
John Bonham (Led Zepplin) - OD'd
The Flea
The entire Greatful Dead
Bradley Nowell (Sublime) - OD'd
Cobain - Suicide, probably influenced by drugs
Pink Floyd


It really seems that (especially in rock, and rock related genres) that there is a distinct link between drug use and influence. Everyone on that list was unimaginably influential, some of them even creating their own freaking genres because they were that forward-thinking. Everyone one of them had drug problems, and most are dead. (granted, that's because the drug users who are still alive don't get as much press coverage). Definitely seems like a connection though.

[TheLaughingMan]

Elvis - OD'd
The Beatles
Hendrix - OD'd
Joplin - OD'd
Elton John
The Rev (Avenged Sevenfold) - OD'd
Michael Jackson - OD'd
John Bonham (Led Zepplin) - OD'd
The Flea
The entire Greatful Dead
Bradley Nowell (Sublime) - OD'd
Cobain - Suicide, probably influenced by drugs
Pink Floyd


It really seems that (especially in rock, and rock related genres) that there is a distinct link between drug use and influence. Everyone on that list was unimaginably influential, some of them even creating their own freaking genres because they were that forward-thinking. Everyone one of them had drug problems, and most are dead. (granted, that's because the drug users who are still alive don't get as much press coverage). Definitely seems like a connection though.

I hope you're not implying what I think you're implying.

[Serpentine]

I guess we have to agree to disagree. If we have a 9 year old girl, suffering excruciating 3rd degree burns on most of her body who likely won't live out the night, and her crack-addled mother whose cigarette fell from her sleeping mouth and lit the flames...I can't see those as being equal. The mere thought of it is appalling.No, because that woman was clearly a terrible mother. Say her death was less tragic because of the harm to her child, of the irresponsibility, of her age. But not just because of her drug addiction, which was itself a tragedy.
We are not talking about someone who let their addiction hurt others. We are talking about someone whose lifestyle hurt themselves, and may have resulted in their own death.

My uncle is probably addicted to something or other. He's certainly a heavy weed user, and I'm sure he's at least tried pretty much every substance under the sun. It's probably messed up his body in a significant way, and maybe done something to his brain - but he could just be weird anyway. But it was his choice, and he enjoyed it and did it because he wanted to. His addiction, if he does have one, doesn't impact his life in a negative way, and if he did have negatively impacting addiction sometime in the past then he managed to overcome it, which I'm proud of him for. If he one day chooses to have something harder again, happens to get a bad batch and dies because of it? Then damn straight that will still be tragic - at least as tragic as someone his age, say, breaking their neck skiing, or whose shute fails to open when they go skydiving, or who crashes their car speeding. Yes, he made a concious decision in full knowledge of the risks. It might even have been dumb. But the assertion that this risk means his death would not be tragic is absolutely disgusting to me.

I don't think they're dismissing her death outright, but rather expressing that she was the cause of her own downfall. It's always sad when someone dies, but at the same time, I can understand if one might be less sympathetic towards one who threw their own life away. They have no one to blame but themselves. There was always a way out, and she never took it. Sad, true, but death does not absolve a person of all their stupid decisions.These:

I dunno, I usually save my sadness for people who die from things beyond their control, like starving to death or car accidents. Troubled rich girl poisons body and pays the price...eh. It's not like the potential impact of smoking cigarettes and crack is unknown. There's been one or two...thousand PSAs about it.

I strongly disapprove of anything that somehow presents lethal drug addiction and mental breakdown as signs of great artists.
Putting people with mental illnesses and addictions on a pedestal and twisting them into martyrs of the art world seems just wrong. True, when you are addicted, you're no longer able to get yourself out of it again by yourself, but starting with drugs is your own descision and so it's all your own fault. There are some circumstances when a person is not to blame, when they have nothing else to lose, but when you're rich and famous, there's no excuse.
There's nothing glamerous about stars who died from drugs. They brought it all on themselves and should not be seen as role models.

It's the whole "oh these tragic geniuses all used drugs" thing that gets musicians to start drugs to begin with.sound like dismissing her death on the basis of her addictions to me. There have also - and I'm almost certainly channelling it here, which I admit I shouldn't be - been far more gratuitious examples elsewhere on the internets.

[Ursus the Grim]

I think I agree with too many opinions here to really know where I stand.

I don't think death is fine if someone's an addict.
However, I don't think people should be surprised or that upset when someone dies of substance abuse after mocking rehab.
I do think there is a correlation between illegal substances (most of which alter thinking) and certain popular musical artists.
I do not think that makes it 'cool' or 'artful' or 'forward' to do drugs or drink exhaustively.
By linking dangerous substances with musical 'talent' we imply that good musicians are bound to die early. Which means we should just accept it?

I also think certain artists in several different mediums are more famous than they would merit had they not died early. Heath Ledger comes to mind. He was lauded as the best actor of a generation even BEFORE Dark Knight came out. Of course, I'm not sure if that's actually because he died early or if its because he starred in the biggest successful Hollywood film about homosexuality. I can almost guarantee that we're going to see a spike in Winehouse sales in part due to this phenomenon.

And out come the pitchforks.

[hustlertwo]

It's certainly going to be sad for you, to lose someone you care about. But if someone actively seeks out self-destruction on a regular, repeated basis, fully aware of what they are doing, then how can you call it a tragedy when they find it? Consciously or subconsciously, it's clearly what they wanted. True to a lesser extent with unnecessary risk-taking like bungie jumping or the like, but the big difference between those things and substance abuse is with substance abuse, it's not a question of if you are hurting yourself. The only question is how much.

It's all about choice. You don't choose to get bone cancer. You don't choose to get T-boned by a drunk driver. You don't choose to get Alzheimer's and waste away with drool puddled on your shirt. But every time you put pipe to mouth, needle to vein, you're making a choice. If someone is going to choose to devalue their life like that, then it can't be seen as a shock when others regard your life in a similar fashion.

Is it a shame that Amy Winehouse is dead? To a degree, yeah. Certainly doesn't seem to be a good thing. Just saying that anyone who considered it a truly awful tragedy needs a refresher on the proper definition of the word.

[Yora]

Really? So its A-ok for poor people to do drugs, but not the rich? Why is that? Have they already thrown away our lives, or is it just cause they're not in the spotlight and so no one has to look at it?
It's not okay, but when you're poor, alone, and without any hope for improvement, I can somehow see why people want some distraction and don't care about how it kills them. But when you're rich and famous, I don't see any good reasons for drug except thinking it's cool or a game. If you're burned out, you can easily retire and you have health insurance.
Most of these people appear to me that they either don't know what they are doing, or they think they are so special that bad things can never happen to them. Both would be just very stupid.

[Green-Shirt Q]

I actually really didn't know anything about Amy Winehouse except apperently there were a whole bunch of jokes about her in the leaked script for the upcoming Deadpool movie. Which means they're probably going to have to change those if they don't want to get really tragic.

Also, she sounded really cool. Despite not really knowing her at all, this is a sad death. Heard she was only 27, too. Shame. :smallfrown:

[Moff Chumley]

Dying as a result of a drug addiction is no more your choice than dying in a car accident. Doing drugs is dangerous. So is getting in your car. Does that mean that dying in a car accident, "actively seeking out destruction on a regular basis", means you deserve no sympathy?

I'm going to agree with Serps: I find that attitude disappointing, if not a little sickening.

[hustlertwo]

That's a terrible analogy, Moff. The only way habitual drug use is like driving a car is if you always drive your car 50 miles per hour over the speed limit while taking regular hits off the car's exhaust fumes.

[factotum]

Actually, I think it's a pretty accurate analogy. People who do drugs don't do it because they think it'll kill them, any more than someone who smokes regular tobacco does. People who get in cars to drive somewhere don't think it's going to kill them, either. Yet in both circumstances the decision can and does lead to people dying.

[TheLaughingMan]

That's a terrible analogy, Moff.

Seconding this. I mean, really, what the hell?

[Knaight]

It's not okay, but when you're poor, alone, and without any hope for improvement, I can somehow see why people want some distraction and don't care about how it kills them. But when you're rich and famous, I don't see any good reasons for drug except thinking it's cool or a game. If you're burned out, you can easily retire and you have health insurance.

Being rich and famous doesn't stop making one human. We can be afflicted with depression, huge amounts of stress, huge amounts of grief, so on and so forth, and trivializing problems like these simply because someone has money, and saying that deaths which are essentially complications of emotional states don't matter is an incredibly cold and disdainful attitude.

You want to know what "actively seeking out destruction" is? A suicide attempt. Now, if you want to argue that the deaths of people who commit suicide aren't tragic, go right ahead. The rest of us will view them as the tragedies they are.

[Ursus the Grim]

Actually, I think it's a pretty accurate analogy. People who do drugs don't do it because they think it'll kill them, any more than someone who smokes regular tobacco does. People who get in cars to drive somewhere don't think it's going to kill them, either. Yet in both circumstances the decision can and does lead to people dying.

You have roughly A 1 in 67 chance of dying in a car accident in your lifetime if you're an American.. You've probably been in a car before you can drive. Thats about 1.5%. Scary.

According to a model developed by Sloan Kettering, a someone who is 75 years old and has smoked 10 cigs a day since 20 and has fortunately still not developed lung cancer has an 8% chance of getting it within the next ten years, assuming other factors don't kick in first.

Not that high, comparatively. But you can avoid or choose not to partake in smoking, substance abuse, or alcoholism a lot more easily than you can choose to never get in a car.

Edit:
Most people who drive do it to get from point A to point B.

Most people who do drugs do it for the altered state it puts them in, which is by its nature, harmful to the body.

Car danger is coincidental and parallel to car usage.
Drug danger is the cause of and reason for drug usage.

[Raistlin1040]

Furthermore, there is a certain level of Acceptable Target that Amy Winehouse (probably underservedly) got. Let's put this into perspective with other musicians.

Ozzy Osbourne is often made fun of for his speaking style and the fact that he shakes. A lot of people have said it's because of all the drugs he did. While I'm sure that's a factor, he also has a form of Parkinson's. So mocking him is probably not in good taste. Yet, still gets done often.

Steven Tyler imploded his hugely successful band in 1979-1980 by doing too many drugs. He fell off stages (a practice he STILL continues, despite claiming that he's clean) and pretty much turned his band into a laughingstock. It took 6 years after the band exploded for him to actually attend rehab, and even then, it was a gamble because he only went because his manager ordered him to. A LOT of Aerosmith's early songs are totally glorifying of the drug lifestyle.

Actually, a lot of rock songs PERIOD glorify drug use. Amy Winehouse may be the only one who has a chart-topping song about it, but lots of artists have made fun of the idea of rehab or written songs about how drugs are great. People go to rehab, then relapse, or put off going, or whatever. Doing drugs doesn't make you a bad person, and dying of an overdose is pretty tragic. Layne Staley, former singer of Alice In Chains, was a huge talent. He wrote great songs, was a great singer, and had a horrible drug problem. Everyone knew he was going to die of drugs. Spoiler Alert: He did. His death was sad, Amy Winehouse's was as well.

Death is sad, period. The fact that someone's death is a joke is, as Moff said, a bit sickening.

[Ursus the Grim]

Ozzy Osbourne is often made fun of for his speaking style and the fact that he shakes. A lot of people have said it's because of all the drugs he did. While I'm sure that's a factor, he also has a form of Parkinson's. So mocking him is probably not in good taste. Yet, still gets done often.

I must apologize for what I'm sure is a swordsage to your post, given the tone you started it off with. I would like to point out that Winehouse, Ozzy, and many others actually make light of their addictions and making light of their addictions has brought a certain amount of commercial benefit.

That being said, I'm going to reiterate that my viewpoint isn't "lol, a druggie is dead" but rather "meh, she died but its to be expected because she drugged herself."

[hustlertwo]

I must apology for what I'm sure is a swordsage to your post, given the tone you started it off with. I would like to point out that Winehouse, Ozzy, and many others actually make light of their addictions and making light of their addictions has brought a certain amount of commercial benefit.

That being said, I'm going to reiterate that my viewpoint isn't "lol, a druggie is dead" but rather "meh, she died but its to be expected because she drugged herself."

Pretty much mine as well.

And unlike Winehouse, I'm a huge Ozzy fan. Arguably my favorite musical artist, between his solo work and old school Sabbath. But if he got back on the junk and died next year because of it, I might be sad at the cessation of his production, or for his family for their loss. But not so much for him. He knew what the drugs could do, and had already done, to him. If he kept doing them, his loss.

[zeratul]

Actually if you're going by the traditional definition of what "tragic" or "tragedy" mean then the death of someone by suicide or drugs or something of that nature is much more "tragic" than someone say getting struck by lightening or getting a terminal illness or something given that traditionally a "tragic figure" is someone who has a major character flaw which leads to their downfall. This is not to say that the death of someone without this kind of flaw wouldn't be sadder but (and I'm saying this as someone who isn't really a winehouse fan at all) saying that the deaths of Amy Winehouse or other drug addled icons aren't tragic simply displays a misunderstanding of the word.

Now if the question is weather her death is as sad as the death of somone in a situation which they had no control over is a completely different issue, and really can't be quantified. It's all a matter of how empathetic one is and what ones personal values are. There's really no point in arguing about it.

[Knaight]

...the death of someone by suicide or drugs or something of that nature is much more "tragic" than someone say getting struck by lightening or getting a terminal illness or something given that traditionally a "tragic figure" is someone who has a major character flaw which leads to their downfall.
Depression is not a character flaw.

[zeratul]

Depression is not a character flaw.

true but given that the actual act of suicide is a choice rather than something that just happens to someone it falls under the means by which someones death might be considered "tragic" whereas a tree falling on someone would not be.

[FlashRah]

Oh damn. I always meant to check out that Back To Black thing. I guess I'm going to now. Man that sucks, I heard about it yesterday at the market when some guy was discussing it very loudly over the phone. I'm not especially good at conveying sadness over text so you'll have to take my word for it.

[Serpentine]

It's certainly going to be sad for you, to lose someone you care about. But if someone actively seeks out self-destruction on a regular, repeated basis, fully aware of what they are doing, then how can you call it a tragedy when they find it? Consciously or subconsciously, it's clearly what they wanted. True to a lesser extent with unnecessary risk-taking like bungie jumping or the like, but the big difference between those things and substance abuse is with substance abuse, it's not a question of if you are hurting yourself. The only question is how much.Maybe some users of drugs are "actively seeking out self-destruction on a regular, repeated basis", but I'm willing to bet that the vast, vast majority are doing it because they enjoy it, and are doing so in what they believe to be a safe way. I can guarantee that my uncle has not done it because "consciously or subconciously" he wants to die. He's doing it because he likes the feeling those drugs give him. That's it, completely and entirely. And no, not all drug users are hurting themselves. There are a very large number who are well-adjusted, healthy, well-off, and invisible.
Moreover, if someone is taking drugs as well as their deaths, tragic.
That's a terrible analogy, Moff. The only way habitual drug use is like driving a car is if you always drive your car 50 miles per hour over the speed limit while taking regular hits off the car's exhaust fumes.No. Compare it with a Formula 1 race-driver. It's dangerous, they know it is, they do it anyway, they take steps to make it less dangerous, they do it because they enjoy it... and then maybe one day it will kill them, or maybe it won't. Presumably, then, Peter Brock's (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_Brock#Death) death was not a tragedy.

[Vacant]

I'm very sad about this, been listening to her on-and-off since it happened. I won't weigh in on the debate about drug use in the interest of maintaining some basic civility. Suffice it to say I disagree with hustlerwo to the point that "a little sickening" doesn't even cut it.

[Juggling Goth]

It's certainly going to be sad for you, to lose someone you care about. But if someone actively seeks out self-destruction on a regular, repeated basis, fully aware of what they are doing, then how can you call it a tragedy when they find it? Consciously or subconsciously, it's clearly what they wanted.

Maybe. Except that if someone is, in fact, actively seeking out self-destruction (are cigarette smokers doing that? Their habit is more often fatal) then that's a pretty good sign that they have mental health problems and they need help, not contempt. Drug and alcohol abuse is much harder to treat when it's comorbid with mental illness, too - you wind up with a vicious circle of causation, and treating just one is a waste of time, because the other will probably cause a relapse.



true but given that the actual act of suicide is a choice rather than something that just happens to someone it falls under the means by which someones death might be considered "tragic" whereas a tree falling on someone would not be.

The misinformation about suicide drives me up the wall, I swear. Everyone should read Kay Redfield Jamison's Night Falls Fast. Here, have the Cliff Notes version:

One, most suicides have depression or manic depression. It cannot be understood outside this context. It's not something that just happens out of the blue; it's what happens when a long-term illness finally kills someone. Too much talk about suicide ignores the fact mental illness tends to be chronic and potentially fatal. Mental illness can kill you as surely as the physical kind.

Two, suicide does not always occur in the depths of depression. Worryingly, and very few doctors will tell you this, the mixed moods when you're getting better are more dangerous. People get depressed in autumn and winter, but they kill themselves in spring and summer. Most suicides have antidepressants in their bloodstream - but not enough to make them all the way better. So, suicide can actually be the result of making the best possible choices about treatment. They just didn't make it through the rocky first bit.

Third, this idea that suicide is a choice that people consider all the pros and cons for is largely a myth. Ignoring for a moment the question of whether you can even make that decision when you have depression any more than a person with a cold chooses to sneeze, most suicides are impulsive, and take place when the person is under the influence of alcohol or drugs. Plus, the impulsive methods are more likely to work - they're quicker and more violent.

In conclusion: no, it's not a choice.

[toasty]

Hmm... thoughts.

Yeah, she was a drug addict. As a person who has had two cousins go through rehab rather recently, if you're going to do hard drugs, I'm not going to have a lot of respect for you. What my cousins did to my aunt (there mom) in terms of psychological torture (nothing direct, but ... they were on drugs) was terrible. I don't plan on putting anyone through that. Its not worth it.

People like Winehouse should know what the risks of drugs are. If they take them and then suffer the consquences its there choice. Sure, they probably don't actually want to die (in most cases), but they should know that they could and if they don't believe that then they're arrogant and foolish.

Another observation: Moff, you compare driving a car to drugs. This isn't entirely fair, becuase the way the United States has set up its transportation system, there are areas where people are basically required to drive in order to go anywhere of merit. For instance, my grandparents have to drive about 5 minutes just to get to the grocery store. Nobody has to do drugs in order to live (at least, not until they're addicted).

Finally, just because it could be argued that Winehouse, and the other various drug addicts that die every year from Overdoses or as a result of there drug addictions "had it coming" doesn't mean I don't pity them at some level. I would be angry if a friend of mine died from a drug-related cause because of the harm they had inflicted me by their own free choice, but I would also be extremely sad that they were now gone. I think I have the same reaction, though much more muted because I have never actually listened to any of Winehouse's work (though I may now that she died. Funny how that works. :smalltongue:) and didn't have any vested interest in her wellbeing. That is to say: Winehouse brought this tragedy upon herself, but that doesn't mean its not a tragedy.

[Killer Angel]

We are not talking about someone who let their addiction hurt others. We are talking about someone whose lifestyle hurt themselves, and may have resulted in their own death.


Amy's death was indeed very sad, but you can't blame peoples that save their tears for those who died for something they didn't brought upon themselves, rather than for those with a self destructive lifestyle.
There will be more mourning at the funeral of a child killed by leukemia, rather than at the funeral of a known alcoholist, that died drunk in a car accident.

[JoseB]

We are not talking about someone who let their addiction hurt others. We are talking about someone whose lifestyle hurt themselves, and may have resulted in their own death.


Just a quick comment: I can guarantee that somebody who is such an addict as Amy Winehouse was is definitely hurting others.

What about her parents, her immediate family? Do you think that they are all happy and joyful about the degradation her own daughter subjected herself to? What pain are they suffering? Are they not hurt because of this?

Are they not hurt because her own daughter died basically at her own hand? ("unknown" cause of death, my behind -- I am willing to bet my right hand that it was related to drugs).

All this that I write about Amy Winehouse can be applied to anybody who becomes a complete addict and ends up dead. They are guaranteed to hurt their nearest and dearest by what they do --unless their own family had disowned them at some point, and that is in itself hurtful for everybody involved.

[Parra]

("unknown" cause of death, my behind -- I am willing to bet my right hand that it was related to drugs).

Current line of investigation is apparently looking at some dodgey excasty and alcohol combination.

This whole thing kinda reminds me of similarish incident a little while back (in Ireland). A young and up and coming model (Katey French) died from a bad batch of drugs, a few others were hospitalised from it also. For weeks the media was plastered with news around the event, how tragic it was, how it could have happened, what was being done to bring the person who supplied the bad drugs to justice, etc etc.
It struck me that, terrible as it was, she was just another junkie who died from her addiction. Why was she so deserving of this attention and not any other of the dozens of addicts who die each year?
Same for Amy Winehouse. Terrible yes, but why the furor and police resources used to investigate her [seemingly] drug caused death when similar happens daily to many others and goes largely ignored?

More than anything thats what bothers me about this.

[The Succubus]

I have a confession - I've been finding the coverage of this rather amusing.

Let me quickly point this out - *not the actual death*, but the media's reaction to it. For the past several years, they've been painting Amy Winehouse as some kind of alcoholic, drug addicted social wreckage and last week they made the mother of all U-turns and are now painting her as some bright, beautiful talent whose life was tragically cut short. They've thrown out the stock photos of her with bags under her eyes, looking thin, gaunt and hung over and brought out the nice photos from long term storage before they started a persecution campaign that the Nazis would have been proud of.

It's not the first time this has happened either - we went from Lady "Bury Me in a Y-shaped Coffin" Diana to "The People's Princess" in a matter of nano-seconds following the car crash (which incidently is an amusing irony in itself).

Got to love the media, cynical swine to a man.

[Serpentine]

See also: Michael Jackson.

[The Succubus]

Perhaps a song might be appropriate for the occasion? Oooo, I know, we could get Elton John's help!

"And it seems to me, that you lived you life, like a candle in the wind...."

We could re-mix it as a soul version and make millions off the back of Amy's death. Elton would need to pretend to have been a long term friend of Amy though to avoid making it look tacky.

The record companies will love it!

[Juggling Goth]

I have a confession - I've been finding the coverage of this rather amusing.

Let me quickly point this out - *not the actual death*, but the media's reaction to it. For the past several years, they've been painting Amy Winehouse as some kind of alcoholic, drug addicted social wreckage and last week they made the mother of all U-turns and are now painting her as some bright, beautiful talent whose life was tragically cut short. They've thrown out the stock photos of her with bags under her eyes, looking thin, gaunt and hung over and brought out the nice photos from long term storage before they started a persecution campaign that the Nazis would have been proud of.

It's not the first time this has happened either - we went from Lady "Bury Me in a Y-shaped Coffin" Diana to "The People's Princess" in a matter of nano-seconds following the car crash (which incidently is an amusing irony in itself).

Got to love the media, cynical swine to a man.

Of course they're gutted. Amy Winehouse dying sells a lot of tributes and exclusive interviews in one go. Amy Winehouse living, drunk, showing her knickers, getting in fights, inspiring tearful interventions from 'close friends' - that was a gift that kept on giving. Think of all the stuff they won't be able to sell off the back of her looking hammered anymore.

[dehro]

afraid I'm going to have to "side" with those who say that however sad it may have been, she has ultimately brought it upon herself, and has therefore my sympathy..but to a lesser degree than if she'd died by other means.
I've liked what I've heard of her (the music, not the newsflashes), tho I can only remember the tune of rehab, off the top of my head, so..yeah..sad that there's one less talented voice in the world.

there is of course an issue with family, managers, "friends" and whatnot who probably could have done more to help, instead of milking the situation for all it was worth, which is something that I seem to vaguelly remember has actually happened..(I seem to recall her dad giving out interviews like there was no tomorrow, on the eve of one of her many "moments", but I might be wrong).

In my book, doing drugs does automatically put someone on a "don't respect them very much" list.. especially so if they've done nothing to get out of it and have had all the resources and opportunities to do so. If one checks out of rehab and gets drunk/doped a day or two after, he's an idiot, plain and simple.
Legend has it that one of the classic authors in italian literature knew he was a lazy git and easily distracted, so he had his butler tie him up to the chair, forcing him to study and to focus.
I don't know much about the finer points of how to fight an addiction, and don't know if something similar would have worked with her...
maybe her family could indeed have done more..we'll never know.

That said, every life lost is sad in it's own right, but the woman had all the chances in the world to get help and still managed to off herself in the most horrid of ways.
I've lost a few friends to some of the nastiest stuff that goes around.. and in every single case I can't help but confirm that they simply didn't WANT to quit...or didn't want it enough..which ammounts to the same, in the end

I do get more than a little irritated when I see comparisons being drawn between car crashes, bunjee jumping, of all things, and drugs abuse... in no conceivable way are those things in any way comparable.

Bunjee jumping is a legal high, a stunt performed under controlled circumstances, using equipment that is thoroughly checked and tested to be as safe and safekeeping as possible. it does not cause an addiction...and IF it did, it still wouldn't be a lethal one, unless one doesn't do his homework and check the equipment/location or the company he "jumps" with.
One gets in a car to go somewhere..more often than not, it's to go to work, or to do chores. occasionally it's also to go someplace fun... even less frequently, it's simply to enjoy the ride, not really going anywhere but "for a ride". almost every time, when done responsibly, it's a calculated risk for a tangible and purposeful result.
doing drugs is ALWAYS about tripping, getting high, acting like an idiot, "chilling" or otherwise spacing out.. it's the coward's escape from the hardships in life and the moron's shortcut to a state of "having fun".
there simply is no way to do it responsibly. This is made even worse by the fact that we have known for a good century that drugs is dangerous stuff, impacts directly on your health (in most heavy cases it does so instantly and every time, not just over time as an addiction develops), is potentially fatal and indeeds develops into an addiction that is very hard to walk away from with one's health, or even life. (and I'm not even going to mention how it impacts on those who love and care for us). Over the last decades this has been proven right again and again...and anybody of our generations with even the most basic level of awareness knows this. If you ignore it and then fall prey to an addiction, sorry but you're on your own and can't claim ignorance.
When you get into a car, you know what you're doing (supposedly), you're protected (or should be) by airbags, a seatbelt, rules and traffic regulations..there are people (cops) out there to try and protect you from other people who drive irresponsibly, and there are scores of people whose job it is to work towards making driving cars as safe as possible...by testing, developing new technology and rules, etc. etc..

when you put a needle in your arm you "may think" you know what you're doing, but you're all alone, and playing a russian roulette, with bullets made of hope... hope that the guy you bought the stuff from didn't use glue to cut up your drug of choice, hope the dose won't be too much for your body to handle, hope your body has already absorbed those shoots of alcohol you took an hour or so ago.. hope that if something goes wrong people won't just run away from the "crime scene" but will actually call an ambulance... hope that you'll be able to come down from this high without developing an addiction and needing another fix sooner than you thought you would...

how anybody in his/her right mind can even think to compare a car crash to taking drugs...
meh..I'll stop ranting before I start calling people names.

to get back on topic, yes..it's a pity, and no, I don't think she'll have quite the lasting effect on music and the history of music some of the other members of the 27 club had..
I cannot respect her for the way she died (and I'm not going to apologize for that), but I do respect her talent and her artistic qualities...and I'm sure there will be people in her immediate family and friends circle who will be strongly affected by her passing. ..for those reasons, it's a sad thing she has indeed died so young.
she's had an impact on the world, probably more than I ever will, and one must respect that, and try to remember only the good things that impact has brought. I'm sure, in time, her music will be what she'll be mostly remembered for, and I reckon that's a good thing.

[dehro]

See also: Michael Jackson.

the Michael Jackson jokes, both about his life and about his death, were better than the ones I'm starting to receive about Amy Winehouse

[Serpentine]

Bunjee jumping is a legal high, a stunt performed under controlled circumstances, using equipment that is thoroughly checked and tested to be as safe and safekeeping as possible. it does not cause an addiction...and IF it did, it still wouldn't be a lethal one, unless one doesn't do his homework and check the equipment/location or the company he "jumps" with.People do get addicted to extreme sports. It releases various chemicals, which people quite literally get addicted to, up to and including the need to get bigger "hits" for the same result.
Drug taking can also be under controlled circumstances, with thoroughly-checked equipment and testing and so on. Extreme sports quite commonly have lethal outcomes, and not everyone does it in the safest way possible - by that same token, not everyone does it, or drugs, in the most dangerous way possible, either.

doing drugs is ALWAYS about tripping, getting high, acting like an idiot, "chilling" or otherwise spacing out...Pretty much, yeah.
it's the coward's escape from the hardships in life and the moron's shortcut to a state of "having fun".Way to insult millions and millions of perfectly intelligent, reasonable, well-functioning people all over the world.

there simply is no way to do it responsibly. This is made even worse by the fact that we have known for a good century that drugs is dangerous stuff, impacts directly on your health (in most heavy cases it does so instantly and every time, not just over time as an addiction develops), is potentially fatal and indeeds develops into an addiction that is very hard to walk away from with one's health, or even life.Not all of this applies to all drugs in all cases.

how anybody in his/her right mind can even think to compare a car crash to taking drugs...Personally, I'll compare it with drag racing in isolated areas, not normal driving.

I cannot respect her for the way she died (and I'm not going to apologize for that),Who's asking you to? :smallconfused:

[dehro]

People do get addicted to extreme sports. It releases various chemicals, which people quite literally get addicted to, up to and including the need to get bigger "hits" for the same result.
fair enough.. but then..if somebody jumps down the niagara falls looking for a bigger high, I don't call his death a tragedy..sad, yes... an accident, yes.. not a tragedy, which is what people seem to want us to consider Winehouse's death.
in the same spirit, skydiving over a populated area and ending up electrocuting oneself on some cable, is an accident, is sad but not a tragedy. skydiving in a remote and wild area, and being blown towards a nearby town by some unforeseable freak of nature wind, and THEN electrocuting oneself, I do call a tragedy

Drug taking can also be under controlled circumstances, with thoroughly-checked equipment and testing and so on.
yeah...no.
my grandmother was high on morphine most of the time in her last days, when she was dying of cancer. that's about the only controlled circumstance one can ever have, when taking heavy drugs.
by heavy drugs I mean class A..illegal in most if not all states, which by their nature must be acquired through illegal channels, in a less than "controlable" environment. there go your controlled circumstances right out of the window, because I am positive that 99% of the people who do class A drugs don't have the skills, knowlegde and equipment to check the quality and "dangerousness" of what they aim to shoot up their veins. Unless they bake their own acids and grow their own supply line of cocaine or what have you, there is ALWAYS going to be a risk involved in the basic quality of what they're going to use..no matter how much they may want to control the situation by using a new syringe or whatever other "safety precaution" they may put in place. "lower grade" drugs such as say..marihuana.. the science is still debating whether it's letal in and per se, whether it will always cause brain damage or not, whether it is a gateway drugs or not.
one can grow ones own pot in the garden, and that's about the only way to make sure you have indeed a controlled environment..otherwise, the sourcing is again going to blow this idea right out of the water.
Extreme sports quite commonly have lethal outcomes, and not everyone does it in the safest way possible - by that same token, not everyone does it, or drugs, in the most dangerous way possible, either.
again, sad, and accidental (to a point..there's a difference between doing rafting someplace dangerous and doing rafting in the same place but during the wrong season.. with the wrong weather forecasts)..not a tragedy per se.

Pretty much, yeah.
then you agree that it cannot be compared to driving a car

Way to insult millions and millions of perfectly intelligent, reasonable, well-functioning people all over the world.
again, I'm talking class A drugs. they simply go beyond "recreational".. they fall into the realm of selfharm, and if anybody feels insulted by this..well..tough, I suggest they find other less idiotic ways to raise their spirits or have fun.
Not all of this applies to all drugs in all cases.
true
Personally, I'll compare it with drag racing in isolated areas, not normal driving.

I don't understand drag racing, or the fascination it has.. so I'm not qualified to comment.. but what got me writing was the comparison between OD-ing and dying in a car accident..which didn't sound like who wrote it had drag racing in mind. I apologize if I misunderstood.

[Mauve Shirt]

Hey guys, remember when Michael Jackson died and the thread turned into an argument between people saying he was a horrible person and people saying we should respect the dead, and then the thread was locked?
If you don't approve of her because of how she died, why come in here? Seems like you're trying to convince the people who liked her and are sad that they're wrong to.

[dehro]

Hey guys, remember when Michael Jackson died and the thread turned into an argument between people saying he was a horrible person and people saying we should respect the dead, and then the thread was locked?
If you don't approve of her because of how she died, why come in here? Seems like you're trying to convince the people who liked her and are sad that they're wrong to.

meh..as I said, I am as sad as one can be by the news of her death..considering I'm not a die hard fan or a personal aquaintance.
that wasn't the point tho.. people were simply commenting on the manner of her passing..entirely appropriate to the topic..some passed a judgement about how se died, and were scolded for being less than sympathetic, not seeing the tragedy, being a bit creepy or what have you. somebody mentioned a U-turn of the media with regards to bashing on her for her antics and then glorifying her for her talent once she died.. I try to be a little more coherent than the media and don't like it when people try to make me feel guilty because of it.

[Ursus the Grim]

Hey guys, remember when Michael Jackson died and the thread turned into an argument between people saying he was a horrible person and people saying we should respect the dead, and then the thread was locked?
If you don't approve of her because of how she died, why come in here? Seems like you're trying to convince the people who liked her and are sad that they're wrong to.

I think its more of a thing were some people expressed less sympathy than Winehouse fans thought appropriate, and then were forced to explain and defend their viewpoints. I shut up on the topic because I realized a fight was coming and the point was made.

[Killer Angel]

If you don't approve of her because of how she died, why come in here?

Well, the answer comes in three steps:
1 - I mourn the artist
2 - I pity the girl
3 - I cannot sympathize with her lifestyle


Seems like you're trying to convince the people who liked her and are sad that they're wrong to.

The other side of the coin is: peoples who liked her and are sad, shouldn't try to argue that are "bad" peoples (where bad means: without empathy), the ones who don't excuse Amy for her self destructive path.

edit: but yeah, i don't see this debate as a productive thing

[Moff Chumley]

how anybody in his/her right mind can even think to compare a car crash to taking drugs...
meh..I'll stop ranting before I start calling people names.

By all means go ahead. It wouldn't be the first time today or yesterday my intelligence has been insulted for making that post. Giant in the Playground's famed civility only goes so far, I guess.

Every time you get in the car, there's a chance you'll crash, and every time you do hard drugs, there's a chance you'll OD. ODing is no more guaranteed when you do drugs than is crashing your car when you drive.

I'm not defending the use of hard drugs, by any stretch of the imagination. My point is, claiming that an OD was a foregone conclusion, inevitable, not worth thinking about, is the same as brushing off someone's death in a car accident. They were both sudden, unpredictable, and while the driver or drug user absolutely knew the risks he or she was taking, they had no way of knowing what was about to happen.

Furthermore, if any of you are going to categorically flame all drug users, please consider that given the statistic of Americans (I don't know the statistics internationally) who've smoked weed is 40%, GitP inevitably has plenty of smokers, who probably aren't going to be thrilled about any sweeping generalizations you wanna lump them into.

[Juggling Goth]

Every time you get in the car, there's a chance you'll crash, and every time you do hard drugs, there's a chance you'll OD. ODing is no more guaranteed when you do drugs than is crashing your car when you drive.

I'm not defending the use of hard drugs, by any stretch of the imagination. My point is, claiming that an OD was a foregone conclusion, inevitable, not worth thinking about, is the same as brushing off someone's death in a car accident. They were both sudden, unpredictable, and while the driver or drug user absolutely knew the risks he or she was taking, they had no way of knowing what was about to happen.


Indeed, there are drugs available over the counter that it's extremely easy to fatally OD on. Paracetamol, anyone? (I believe Americans call it Tylenol.) You don't need to take many of those before you need a new liver. Dunno about across the pond, but British cold remedies and suchlike have big block letters saying "CONTAINS PARACETAMOL" after one too many accidental ODs.

Don't assume "illegal" means "more likely to kill you and you were stupid to take that risk". Sometimes. Not always.

[Moff Chumley]

Tylenol, Benadryl, Robitussin, I'm aware. Legality and safety don't have much to do with each other. That said, if you've taken enough of any of the above to OD, you were clearly trying to either harm yourself (tylenol) or took about twice the dosage necessary to heavily hallucinate (Benadryl and Robitussin).

[dehro]

Every time you get in the car, there's a chance you'll crash, and every time you do hard drugs, there's a chance you'll OD. ODing is no more guaranteed when you do drugs than is crashing your car when you drive.


driving a car does not inherently cause you brain, hearth and liver damage before you even get to the stage where you have an accident.
driving a car is, in most cases, done with a purpose other than "getting high".
sticking a needle in your arm or lighting a crackpipe has no other purpose than getting you high, and is a completely different situation. the comparison simply doesn't hold
(again, I don't know how else to reiterate my point, I'm talking about people who are abitual users of class A drugs)
so..yes.. a car crash I call a tragedy, especially if the person involved was not driving drunk at the time of the crash.
somebody who tries a cocktail of drugs for the first time in their life and it so happens that one of the ingredients was of less than adequate quality and killed them.. to some extent I do call a tragedy.
somebody who is a known druggie, constantly boozed up and using and abusing his or her own body, who dies by OD.. whilst sad and "unpredictable" (but is it, really??), is not a tragedy in my very own personal opinion, because, however you may want to put it, there is an element of "s/he should have known better and had ample opportunities not to get to that stage"

the darwin awards give us all a nice chuckle, whether they're true or urban myths.. and I don't see how somebody who basically kills himself bit by bit and then gives himself a coup de grace by OD-ing can be put on the same level of somebody who is driving to work and dies because of a blown tire, a patch of ice on the road or something like it. all life is sacred and it's passing should be mourned,.. it sounds very nice..but it works two ways.. when you're given a life you're not supposed to throw it away just for the selfish pleasure of being high. if you do so, I reserve the right to be less than impressed.. and voice that opinion without being told I lack sensitivity or don't "get" the tragedy. sorry, but no, it isn't unforseable nor a tragedy. it could have happened in 10 years time..or maybe rehab might have worked... or it could have happened earlier. unforeseable? I think not.

anyway, I didn't mean to debate the validity (or lack thereoff) of a comparison between a car crash and an OD...but rather voice the fact that we do not all have the same frame of reference when it comes to these events.. and that nobody should feel it is their right to look down on others for not sharing their level of dismay over Mrs Winehouse's death.

of course I did so by showing my own judgemental attitude towards drugs and some of the arguments I've read on this thread.. which either shows I'm no better than anyone else and invalidates my arguments.. or maybe proves my point.
anyhoo, I've given it entirely more thought than I should have, and will stop boring everybody with my rant

[averagejoe]

The Mod They Call Me: Locked for review.