Well I wouldn't give my money directly to Scientology (any more than I would donate to the causes/orgs that other actors or musos were involved in) and that's because I don't support them. Once you start unpicking who is aligned with whom and then decide whether you are going to watch/listen to them it becomes a different story.
Would you not listen to Wagner for example? There is a difference between the individual and the art they create. Luckily for me, I don't like a lot of Tom Cruise's stuff, but he isn't as bad an actor as some would have.
Wagner was an anti-semite who was popular with the Nazis, but that doesn't mean if I buy a record of Wagner's that the money goes to the National Front (unless Deutches Gramaphone is a National Front front.) As Cruise acts as a producer of his films, the flow of revenue from his films is less clear.
I think the Scientologists have been very clever in pushing their celebrity acolytes into positions where they can raise funds either explicitly or implicitly. There was an old story in Spy about how Tom Cruise got the studio making "Far and Away" to buy a sound system from the Scientologists because he was convinced it would remove his lisp.
A sore point with me is the "Writers of the Future" competition run by Scientology each year (through a shelf organisation, but the prize money comes from Scientology.) It's been very helpful to some writers' careers (including friends of mine) but its ultimate goal is a marketing exercise for Scientology.
The title of the post is "Why I'll never...". That's my decision to make, I'm not making it on anyone else's behalf. The article made it clear to me that Cruise at least is far more familiar with the dark side of Scientology than most people would believe. I have seen and heard nothing to change my opinion that Scientology is a dangerous cult that been able to propagate itself through its infiltration of Hollywood.
Oh no, I agree absolutely with your right to make that decision. In fact, of course, you could decide not to go and see his films because of his hair colour, or an annoying facial tic.
I agree, though, that the fact that the money goes to the organisation does make a difference. It's also a serious concern that it does not invite debate or dissent.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
jack_ryder) wrote2011-02-08 03:56 pm
no subject
Would you not listen to Wagner for example? There is a difference between the individual and the art they create. Luckily for me, I don't like a lot of Tom Cruise's stuff, but he isn't as bad an actor as some would have.
no subject
I think the Scientologists have been very clever in pushing their celebrity acolytes into positions where they can raise funds either explicitly or implicitly. There was an old story in Spy about how Tom Cruise got the studio making "Far and Away" to buy a sound system from the Scientologists because he was convinced it would remove his lisp.
A sore point with me is the "Writers of the Future" competition run by Scientology each year (through a shelf organisation, but the prize money comes from Scientology.) It's been very helpful to some writers' careers (including friends of mine) but its ultimate goal is a marketing exercise for Scientology.
The title of the post is "Why I'll never...". That's my decision to make, I'm not making it on anyone else's behalf. The article made it clear to me that Cruise at least is far more familiar with the dark side of Scientology than most people would believe. I have seen and heard nothing to change my opinion that Scientology is a dangerous cult that been able to propagate itself through its infiltration of Hollywood.
no subject
I agree, though, that the fact that the money goes to the organisation does make a difference. It's also a serious concern that it does not invite debate or dissent.