Actress Tatiana Maslany recently criticized Tom Selleck and Michael Jordan, calling their decision to keep politics out of much of their work “cowardly.”
You might be thinking: Who are they? Well, Maslany, known for winning an Emmy for “Orphan Black” and starring in “She-Hulk: Attorney at Law,” has a career many would envy. Still, Selleck and Jordan are iconic figures whose appeal has endured for generations.
I can’t help but wonder if Maslany has considered the reasons behind their choices.
During her appearance on Mehdi Hasan’s show, she contended that all entertainment carries political significance. Selleck had previously mentioned that he believed it made little sense to alienate half of the population when his role was to entertain. Jordan’s famous quip about Republicans purchasing sneakers echoed that sentiment. Maslany branded such restraint as cowardly.
It’s interesting to think how fame and wealth can give a false sense of invulnerability. At the peak of their careers, Selleck and Jordan could have easily pushed their views on audiences, but they wisely reflected on the potential fallout from doing so — and questioned whether politics was even necessary in their work.
In building their careers, they established legacies that would outlast the fleeting moments when fans clamored for their signatures.
On a more personal note, I’ve observed this kind of dynamics in a much smaller context. When my wife received treatment at a teaching hospital, some of the young residents had pronouns on their badges, but none of the attending surgeons did. While I could select my surgeon, the residents were assigned to her.
To be frank, when professional presentation includes pronouns, it catches my eye. It suggests priorities I’d rather not see intermixed in a relationship defined by competence and trust. While I had no say in the residents, I certainly chose who would treat Gracie.
Should the attending surgeons be considered cowardly for skipping pronouns? I can’t say what they think. However, I can assert that during Gracie’s surgeries, their personal beliefs and politics never came up, which was critical when standing outside the operating room.
Maslany’s public stances function similarly. She is free to criticize Selleck and Jordan. Meanwhile, I, too, am free to choose whether to support her work.
For instance, I can’t view a Robert De Niro film now without hearing his political rants rather than focusing on the character. My viewership of football dwindled when players began kneeling during the national anthem, and nearly a decade later, I have yet to return. The NFL has continued without me, just as I’ve moved on from it.
Similarly, I distanced myself from Gillette after its commercial addressing “toxic masculinity.” I didn’t publicly announce a boycott; I simply opted for a different razor. It was noteworthy to later discover Dana Perino mentioning that her husband did something similar.
How many customers silently made analogous choices?
There’s no need for a formal boycott. People can just find an alternative product, movie, or way to spend Sunday afternoons. Businesses may never grasp why certain customers vanished.
Maslany recently turned 41—she’s not a newcomer hoping for her break. She understands the blend of talent and luck required to capture a memorable role, though the future remains uncertain.
Perhaps she’ll find new supporters for her statements. Perhaps she won’t miss out on roles or paychecks. Or maybe some viewers she hopes to attract with her performances will quietly drift away, affecting others who depend on her success.
This aspect of celebrity political expression is often overlooked. The audience isn’t obligated to stay engaged with the performer.
If Maslany is correct in asserting that all art is political, then let that art speak for itself. We need performances compelling enough to draw us in. It’s perhaps easier to label others as cowards than to consistently deliver work that resonates across decades.
Selleck and Jordan seem to grasp an essential truth about fame: The audience isn’t owned by celebrities.
Maslany is welcome to share her thoughts. But the rest of us equally have the freedom to decide if we wish to listen further.
