What is 'An Authority'?

[milewalker]

Dave,

I never said that it was a "false" face...here are two "real life" examples by way of explanation.

The way a stockbroker dresses when he is at work, and the way he dresses when he is out shopping on a Saturday are quite likely very different things. It might very well be that his Saturday apparal is more representative of his persona. He may do other things at differently at work as well - like watch his language around women.

Picture a teenaged girl who normally wears a sweatshirt and jeans - she meets a boy she likes, and she decides to allow herself to be seen in more flattering clothing and makeup. - because she wants to catch his eye. She may even walk a bit differently, talk a bit differently - because she wants to impress him. (The same thing might happen if the genders were reversed btw - hopefully without the makeup )

In both cases, the people involved find themselves in a situation where presentation matters - and they react accordingly. That is the very definition of an image.

Yet, even though they are not "false" - at least in the sense we would normally mean that - a person meeting them in only one of those roles may form opinions which are quite different from the reality of the person.

Jon - who has no idea whether a 30 year old Psychology degree makes him an "authority" or not - (I had to get it back on topic )

[Dave]

Hi Jon,

Yes indeed, I see what you mean. It's called "putting on your best face" or "putting your best face forward" or similar, I think. Like my oft-praised telephone manner when I used to work in an office. i.postimg.cc/9fYxy370/smilie-big-grin.gif Yes, we all do that!.

Dave

[roger]

It might be worth quoting a short passage from the autobiography in which Hayley talks about HWI (page 148):

When I get time, I scan the forums to gauge the reaction to a particular song or performance.

So Hayley has faith in us... even if I haven't!

Roger

PS. Thank you, Hayley.

[milewalker]

Hi Roger,

The importance that Hayley places on what is posted here must inevitably depend on her perception of her own needs and goals. If it were me, I might find the reaction of the core fans to a departure like "Summer Fly" , or the diifferent kind of performance she recently gave at Shepherd Bush (?) very useful indeed. If I am right, she will go on to experiment with things (this could be a combination of music and presentation) which are even more different (who is the guy she is touring with in New Zealand? Logically, at some point she will try something which will have a more mixed effect at the center - and her reaction at that point is one of many things about the future which interests me.

[postscript]

milewalker said:

...

What certain forum members have been lucky enough to do is to regularly interact with Hayley under specifically controlled circumstances. I would disagree that this makes them "authorities" about her on that basis alone, because she is only seen in controlled events which are directly involved with her working. What she is like when she gets up in the morning? What is she like when she is having a really bad day personally or when she is in a bad mood? How do you know that she isnt the way she appears at least in part because she understands that it is part of her job? There are after all many things that I do at work - sometimes even things I derive some measure of enjoyment from - that I simply would be very unlikely to do elsewhere. To everything there is a season.
...
Jon

I thought it was time I revisited a thread I had started. I found the many comments and diverse opinions interesting. Because of the timing--and perhaps you have commented elsewhere?--but the answer to the above quoted paragraph is 'read her own words'! I trust In Her Own Voice is shortly to find a place on your bookshelf if it is not already there?

So, back to the point you raised, a lot of what that book tells us many of us knew through diverse interactions. The book is consistent with the image she gives of herself when with HWI people and there are many comments on this forum which show, as a collective whole, the divergence of opinion in defining her. Consistency, especially in diverse circumstances, is an important attribute.

It has been said a long time ago that despite the impressions one might gain of her, there are aspects that are hidden but only to the less accustomed eye. There has been debate here about the extent to which she is 'authoritative' in the way she runs her life and can make clear she expects to have what she wants when she wants it. The book confirms that.

One might even argue she has a tendency to be a 'control freak' from In Her Own Words. I think that would be an exaggeration but I have always maintained she is singularly hard-headed when it matters, to her. This is in direct contradiction to others whose posts imply they do not see this trait or believe (or want her to stay) 'Miss Goody Two Shoes'. Bluntly, they project a 'Peter Pan' view on her.

My point being about this site is that if you take the gamut across all posts it is possible to filter out the subjectivity, to note how subjectivity of any one contributor changes (or doesn't) over time and thereby acquire a reasonably objective view of Hayley.

Like any 'authority' for any researcher anxious to obtain the bare facts no one source of 'authority' is acceptable. It is the ability to weigh and balance a variety of 'authorities' to became 'authoritative' upon the subject themselves. Little research is based upon the opportunity of direct and regular contact with the subject over its growth. Most research is derived from sources whose individual authority has to be weighed up, analysed and compared. The final result itself being subject to the researcher's own subjectivity and ability to be objective.

I refer you to my humorous comment about Professor A and Professor B in the post that started this thread! Oh, by the way, I haven't also forgotten the possibility that the book contains only what she wants to show, not necessarily what we would like her to reveal... but then it comes down to that factor of consistency again and that book is open, honest and true being consistent with all other aspects
she has shown of herself in different circumstances over time.
Peter S.

[martindn]

I have read this thread with interest.

I think it is pretty impossible for an artist that enjoys being close to her audience and her fans as Hayley seems to do to project a false image consistently. I am of the firm opinion that the Hayley that we see and read about is pretty close to the real Hayley. There have been artists in the past that have tried to hide behind their music, Pink Floyd springs to mind, but Hayley is not like that. She is a singer, not an actress. What would she gain by concealing herself from her audience and her fans? Why would she want to go to the trouble of pretending to be something she is not? Whatever she was like (within reason), we would still enjoy her music and buy her records.

Someone in the public eye is always of interest to the media. They can never be sure who is watching whenever they are in public places, ready to splash anything inconsistent or sensational all over the papers or whatever. Some celebrities even play the media at their own game, on the principle that "there is no such thing as bad publicity". But there is always the risk, if trying to project a false image, that the mask will slip. So why do it if there is no need to?

One thing I have noticed about Hayley's performances and interviews is that she seems a very natural and honest person. She would I think be a very consummate actress if that were a false picture and she were able to pull that off consistently. Yes, we don't know if she is grumpy when she gets up in the morning, (she must suffer quite a lot form jet-lag from time to time) but the point is we don't need to know. Hayley's private life is rightly off limits to forums such as this. We should not seek to know anything about her that she does not choose to tell us. Equally, I would hope that anything she tells to a member of this forum in confidence would not be posted here. I'm sure not knowing absolutely everything about her does not detract from our enjoyment of her music, which after all is the reason why we are interested in her in the first place.

So my guess is that you CAN trust the "Authorities". but even if they are wrong, it doesn't really matter.

Martin

[grant]

martindn said:

Equally, I would hope that anything she tells to a member of this forum in confidence would not be posted here.

Hi Martin

We do sometimes find ourselves privileged to hear snippets of information which may or may not be general knowledge. There have been several occasions where Hayley has told me something in answer to a question or in general conversation where I have asked "Can I post that?" So far the answer has always been "yes!" But I would never assume the answer without asking.

Also, I would generally make it clear in any subsequent post that permission had been given for the release of that particular item, either from Steve Abbott or Hayley herself. The example that comes to mind is when Steve told us about the book at Telford.

Hopefully that would prevent panic from our moderators/administrators should they not have been present when the story unfolded (We're conscientious like that! )

Best wishes
Grant

[milewalker]

Martin,

Nowhere, in anything I have written, have I intended to imply that Hayley's public persona is "false", and if this impression has been created I may have misstated myself somewhere. I am not trying to say that the "real" Hayley is somehow lesser than the one she allows us to see, but may very possibly be much more.

Everything I do at work for example stems from the "real me" - and I would not be successful over a period of time is this wasn't the case. But it isn't the "whole" me either - because I have a position of authority there, I generally dont allow myself to become overly friendly with employees lest I be accused of playing favorites. This distinction has little to do with my "private life" - it is simply that an employee encountering me at the zoo on a Sunday afternoon (or a friend meeting me for lunch at work) may be surprised at the difference. I have a "softer" side which I usually dint show at work, but neither "facet" of my persona is "false" The "real me" is both of these and more. The problem is that even though they are not false, both might be misleading to anyone who only sees one side and not the other.

You say that her private life should remain off-limits to forums like this, and in principle I agree with that. However, in reality it isn't that simple. Inevitably, her fans will use such things as the statements she makes in interviews, the selection of songs she chooses to record and increasingly the content of the songs she writes to project their own hopes fears and expectations onto that blank space. Eventually a picture of the "private" person may emerge which may or may not have much bearing on the truth.

None of this may be important as long as her career stays where it is - dominating a niche genre in the UK and NZ. Most of her fans at the moment expect similar things - and the numbers at her concerts are such that she has the luxury to meet with them one-on-one. However, very few things stay the same for long - especially when you are only 20 years old.
Her career may falter over the next five years, or may grow. I doubt very much if it will remain the same.

Were she to become more popular (say her career were to take off in the US or elsewhere for example) those expectations would change and become much more complicated. There would be a lot more people, and they would be expecting a wider range of things of her. She might not do as many meet and greets, and therefore come to be seen as more distant. The various demands of various groups might also be more inconsistent. Through no fault of her own, the public perception of her may become less valid, and she may have to do something someday to correct that. (She already has done this in small ways).

Peter - her book will end up on my shelf in due course, and I will likely read it several times and will docket certain facts and impressions accordingly. But having said this, I must confess that I have difficulties taking the autobiography of any 20 year old too seriously - because even if everything you say about it is true, there are so many things in her life and outlook which could be subject to change in a few years. Once again, this doesn't imply anything false, but merely takes into account the simple fact that she is only 20 years old.

Jon

[martindn]

Hi Jon,

There is always a degree of "management" about the information we see about celebrities. Some deliberately try to hide behind false names and images. Perhaps they see it as "theatre". But despite this, I think it is difficult for them to hide completely and some aspects of the "Real" person will come through. Hayley, I think, is more "natural" than most, and because of that I think we mostly see her as she really is. Not that I would know, but it is what I feel.

The book cannot be anything other than a snapshot of now, and of the way Hayley sees her life so far. Perhaps there will be more books in the future.

Martin