What was interesting to me was the insistence on painting the protagonist as a saint. It felt like Laura had almost TOO MUCH access to the family (same with Jolie), to where, God forbid we show him in a bad light. It's a failure to me as a biography although I'm glad I read it.
I appreciate this. It just struck me at a very bad time. I lost a much-loved cat, Frodo, a few months earlier, and a sweeter animal never existed on this planet. He was a cat, ("only a cat," many would say) but he was funny, sweet, affectionate, loyal, and the best pet ever. Colbert (and Jackson) openly admitting "well, if you want love, dogs are better," just made me do a massive "fuck you" post that was in retrospect unfair. I cared for Frodo from his first day on earth (bottle-feeding him as a 1-day-old kitten), and despite 13 years of seizures and meds, Frodo showed unlimited mildness and patience with all sorts of medical stuff during his life and he never blamed me, never held a grudge, always walked across my desk or couch within minutes with love. His last gesture in life, in my favorite chair at home, was to raise his head to caress my cheek with mine. Purring all the while. And then he died.
So I think part of me was horrified at this and viewed it as a sacrilege. And yes, I think Jackson does not understand cats emotionally as much as he thinks he does, given that he basically notes that they are blase and react biologically (and less emotionally than dogs).
Just, gross to me. And yes, I love dogs (and cats etc).
1. I posted my post on Jackson on a bad day. I was a total jerk. I tried to edit the post (and still cannot do so), so apologize. I'm still kind of cringing that it's out there. See above, but I lost a beloved cat recently (I'd had Frodo since I rescued him day one, along with littermate Batty, and bottle-fed him, so the idea that he can't show 'real love' grosses me out).
I badly summarized the interview, and I sound like Jackson is Hitler or something, and seriously, obviously, stuff was going on with me. So apologies, the guy seems lovely and I'm sorry, I didn't mean to trash him as a phony for a few talk show comments. It was a bad week in a really bad few months. Not that that's okay.
2. But -- still -- Jackson's quotes from this interview to me don't paint him as a passionate cat advocate. He comes off as almost apologetic. And I normally love Colbert but would cheerfully throw him off a metaphorical cliff here:
COLBERT: Do you think cats are capable of loving us?
JACKSON: Of course they are.
COLBERT: Don't say "of course they are." They don't betray a lot of emotion. I had two cats, and I -- liked my cats. Er, I loved my cats. But I didn't always get it back from them. I always get it back from my dog.
JACKSON: Which is why I have dogs. That's exactly it.
ME: EDITORIAL COMMENT: THIS IS WHERE I CHECK OUT as a cat owner. The media's foremost "cat expert" has just admitted he turns to dogs when he needs love and affection. WTF.
COLBERT: So you take care of cats but you live with dogs.
JACKSON: You need that payoff, right? I don't mind that concept of someone coming up and saying, hey, you love me a lot. But then there's sort of that zen love, the "not attached to the outcome" love... the sort of "temporary love," and that's cats. I mean, they definitely put out love, we just don't recognize it a lot of times. We recognize dogs.
ME: AGAIN, I hate this. How is he so tone-deaf? The subtext here is that cats love you temporarily, in spite of themselves, but hey, if you want love, turn to a dog, man (and I LOVE DOGS, just to note). Again, I hate this so much.
COLBERT: Okay, you have said, and let me make sure I've got this right, "Cats are in touch with what lies beyond the tangible." Because it really just looks like they're staring into space.
COLBERT: What do you mean, like, cats can perceive the spiritual realm?
JACKSON: Absolutely. No, I totally think that animals in general are in touch with an energetic place that we just either take for granted, we don't pay attention to it, our minds are too fast...
COLBERT: You mean like, the dog whistles they can hear that we can't... or do you mean spirit realm?
JACKSON: Totally spirit realm. Absolutely spirit realm. And if you've ever seen your cat just... stare at a wall...
ME: Colbert laughs and they banter further on it. But the point is basically, hey, cats can't love you as much as dogs, but they are fascinating.
JACKSON: But I honestly feel like they have the ability to -- not the ability, they just have the -- the presence, the presence of mind -- to be still and observe in a way that we just don't.
COLBERT: Okay, so let's get some cats out here, let's get some cats out here...
(TINY KITTENS are given out and (SURPRISE) are terrified and scared and not "loving" and "adorable" in a huge studio setting. Colbert is not happy visibly and seems prickly at the entire scenario -- unusual for him.)
(KITTEN CUTENESS ENSUES)
(COLBERT IS OPENLY UNCOMFORTABLE WITH KITTEN AND MISSES DOGS. JACKSON IS SUPPORTIVE AND SYMPATHIZES)
So apologies -- I read more into the interview than I should -- I had my cat Frodo put to sleep not long before and it upset me and I personalized it.
I still find it really brutal on cats -- the entire interview hinges (per Stephen, who I normally love) on the idea that cats are inferior and unemotional, and Jackson goes along with that.
And as a cat owner who has had deeply loved and mourned cats who would have jumped down a dragon's mouth for me (no, really), this interview still hits me in a really bad place.
Jackson's statements can certainly open a dialogue that cats don't care as much as dogs in their capacity to love, and yeah, I freaking hate it. Some ARE just as open. Others simply show love differently.
Anyway, I deserved to be called out, and no, Jackson Galaxy is not the Antichrist.
Thanks for bearing with me, all. Apologies to you and Jackson. But he still caved here. He wasn't an advocate for cats. He was an apologist who basically said, "Cats are not really truly loving, like dogs, and yeah, we aren't always sure how they feel." So shoot me.