Amy Winehouse found dead at her home

Not to mention the probable numbers of enablers and hanger-ons that made it worse.

I just hope her dirtbag husband/ex-husband (?) Blake doesn't capitalize off this. He was the worst thing for her.

RIP Amy....a sad end to a tragic life.

Really good article by Russell Brand (stolen from a UK-Yank who doesn't come here often's FB feed):

http://www.guardian.co.uk/music/2011/jul/24/russell-brand-amy-winehouse-woman

When you love someone who suffers from the disease of addiction you await the phone call. There will be a phone call. The sincere hope is that the call will be from the addict themselves, telling you they've had enough, that they're ready to stop, ready to try something new. Of course though, you fear the other call, the sad nocturnal chime from a friend or relative telling you it's too late, she's gone.

I agree with a lot of his article, but I do have to add that sometimes your loved one doesn't take the help, and it's not always that simple. I know he knows that, but it just sort of adds to the frustration.

Thanks Legs for sharing that great article. I am bummed to see the response on my Facebook feed (and elsewhere) that are trying to compare Amy's death to the tragedy in Norway (as in, why are we celebrating this drug addict when so many other people died). It really bugs me that I have to somehow pick which thing to care about, as if I can't be sad for both - and as if Amy Winehouse was somehow less of a person because she was famous/an addict.

It really bugs me that I have to somehow pick which thing to care about, as if I can't be sad for both - and as if Amy Winehouse was somehow less of a person because she was famous/an addict.

I have noticed this about the way certain things are analysed here in the UK. It may be that I'm just noticing it more here. But they (journalist, talking heads...) seem to hunt around for the sticky point - the rub - and juice it. The guardian has a column where the writer dissects environmental actions and tries to show where even the most altruistic act actually has negative consequences - like when you wash out a tin to go in the recycle bin you actually waste water. I understand the point but a lot of times they leave you high and dry with no good answer. I suppose it is meant to prod us into thinking more about things.

Comparing our responses to different tragedies is the same sort of armchair phychology - like the 'writer' guy in the bar who doesn't engage with the people around him but constantly examines them.

Compared to the tsunami in Japan, these things are small potatoes....but Haiti is worse...and Somalia worse still....

But why do that? I agree that we don't have a limited pot of feelings, and perhaps we have different levels of concern running concurrently.

Thanks Legs for sharing that great article. I am bummed to see the response on my Facebook feed (and elsewhere) that are trying to compare Amy's death to the tragedy in Norway (as in, why are we celebrating this drug addict when so many other people died). It really bugs me that I have to somehow pick which thing to care about, as if I can't be sad for both - and as if Amy Winehouse was somehow less of a person because she was famous/an addict.

Yeah, I've noticed this as well and it's just a really lame response to the situation.  The people who posted those sentiments seem like they think they are nobler for focusing on the "real" tragedy.    Yeah, the media spends way too much time on celebrities in general and not nearly enough time on important issues, but I don't think this is really the right situation to go on about that.  Both are tragic stories and there is no reason why one can't comment on or be sad about both.

Or the people who say, regardless of the story, "You're only sad about <tragedy> because it is on TV.  People die every day."  Well, duh.