What distinguishes the average celebrity from the average person? Among other things, it is their range of emotional intensity. Consider the following figure.

The emotional intensity of an average celebrity fluctuates between +5 and -5. See the red line. In contrast, the emotional intensity of the average person fluctuates at lower intensities, between +2 and -2. See the green line. When a celebrity is cheerful, he is much more cheerful than the average person. When he is depressed, he is much more depressed.

Beyonce is a major celebrity. She’s been dubbed Fun, Fearless Female of the year by Cosmopolitan. She’s a multiple Grammy award winner, winning five Grammys in one year. And, she’s number one on the annual Askmens.com top 100 Most Desirable Women of 2007. She’s most well known for singing, but she is truthfully the ultimate Renaissance woman. Beyonce Knowles is a song writer, a dancer, and a fashion designer with her own label. As a major celebrity you would expect her to show the high emotional intensity that causes the extreme behavior typical of other celebrities. However, in her private life she shows a range of emotional intensities at even lower levels than the average person. She is always in control. You would never see Beyonce ecstatic or in aguish. Why? Why is she so different from other celebrities?

Beyonce is a major celebrity. She’s been dubbed Fun, Fearless Female of the year by Cosmopolitan. She’s a multiple Grammy award winner, winning five Grammys in one year. And, she’s number one on the annual Askmens.com top 100 Most Desirable Women of 2007. She’s most well known for singing, but she is truthfully the ultimate Renaissance woman. Beyonce Knowles is a song writer, a dancer, and a fashion designer with her own label. As a major celebrity you would expect her to show the high emotional intensities that cause the extreme behaviors typical of other celebrities. However, in her private life she shows a range of emotional intensities at even lower levels than the average person. She is always in control. You would never see Beyonce ecstatic or in aguish. Why? Why is she so different from other celebrities?

A psycholinguistic analysis of Beyonce’s words reveals that despite her enormous success, she is under immense pressure. The analysis tells us that she is afraid of becoming obsolete, irrelevant, a mere fad. Beyonce fears of being labeled an “oldie,” “irrelevant,” and “stale.” As she said to Star Jones Reynolds in an interview on Larry King Live, “I guess, you know, people get used to things and it’s not as exciting.” In fact, she admits she has the same feeling about her art “certain things don’t excite me because I’ve been doing this for so long.” The psycholinguistic analysis assigned to these two phrases has an emotional intensity of more than 90%. However, despite her fears and concerns, she is still in complete control of her emotions. In the figure her intensities never exceed the +1 or -1 level, much lower than the intensities experienced by the average celebrity, or even the average person. How is this possible? Why isn’t Beyonce showing signs of stress? Is she incapable of deep emotions? No. On stage she is fabulous and fierce, with her outlandish outfits and her outrageously vivacious dance moves. See, for instance, two of her videos, here and here.

So, how can she be so in control in her private life? Because she has an emotional buffer. Her family functions as an emotional buffer. Her family converts the high emotional waves that surround her into a quiet ripple.

When Beyonce was asked, “What is the biggest challenge of being a celebrity?” she answered, “The hardest thing is balance.” And when she was asked, “What keeps you balanced?” She said “My family, definitely. There’s always one or two family members with me at all times. They’re right there [points to the back of the room]. I don’t go anywhere without someone that loves me and that can tell me the truth. Family is so important to me.” She continues, “My balance comes from my family. I have reality around me, and they tell me when I need to calm down, take it down a couple notches. Then they tell me when I do something good. I think what celebrities lose is that they lose touch with reality.” (The psycholinguistic analysis assigned this segment an emotional intensity of more than 90%. The underlined phrase was assigned an intensity of above 96%.)

Note that the phrase, “they tell me when I need to calm down, take it down a couple notches,” actually describes the buffering process.

Much of the buffering is performed by her father. Matthew Knowles first came to her rescue in 1992, when Beyonce’s first group Girls Tyme, later renamed Destiny’s Child, lost the US talent show, Star Search. To save the day, he decided to manage the group himself. He quit his six-figure salary job as a multi-million dollar equipment salesman at Xerox, and then sold the family home in 1996 to keep the group going. Whenever there was trouble, dad Mathew came to the rescue, financially, physically, and emotionally. But, dad Matthew doesn’t have his own buffer, and unlike Beyonce, he cannot hide his stress.

In the recent past, Beyonce’s father has publicly lashed out against what he felt were transgressions against his daughter. It is not simply transgressions, however, that stir his anger, it is the fear that these transgressions mark the end of her career. Matthew Knowles’ fear of Beyonce’s decline turned him into a transgression monger, an insatiable beast constantly searching for signs or indications of decline. For instance, in her most recent film, Dreamgirls, Beyonce Knowles shared the screen with co-star Jennifer Hudson. It soon became obvious that Jennifer shone brighter in the spotlight, receiving more screen time and stronger singing opportunities. Naturally, the buzz in the industry was focused on Beyonce’s co-star and not on Ms. Knowles herself. In reaction to what he saw as an attempt to damage Beyonce’s career, Matthew Knowles chastised the film’s director telling him that Beyonce’s character in the film was ill-portrayed. In addition, he lashed out against Ms. Hudson. During a screening of the film he and his wife, Tina Knowles, acted coldly towards Jennifer, pretending not to see her when she greeted them that evening. It was also reported that Mr. Knowles “shot her dirty looks” throughout the evening, probably trying to intimidate Ms. Hudson and discourage her from stealing the spotlight from his daughter ever again.

Another incident occurred when Beyonce lost in the Golden Globe awards to two legendary performers. Prince, a legendary singer, won the Best Original Song, and Meryl Streep, a legendary actress, won the Best Lead Actress in a Motion Picture - Musical/Comedy. Matthew Knowles was unable accept the loss. He perceived the loss as a rejection, as a refusal to let Beyonce join the circle of legends, a denial of his most profound wish. Following the event he is quoted as saying, “Today is Martin Luther King’s birthday and it saddens me to say that things have not changed for blacks. Working class blacks and blacks in Hollywood are still being discriminated against. We still have a long way to go.” He felt that Beyonce was denied membership in the select group of legends, that she was measured and found wanting.

Rather than Beyonce becoming upset, it is her father, Matthew, who absorbs all the reverberations. It is her career that is threatened, and yet it is he who lashes out, Beyonce stands calmly by his side, seemingly unaffected, impossibly calm.

An average celebrity combines powerful performances and intense emotions. The Knowles family, Matthew Knowles in particular, is able to divide the two functions. Beyonce is delivering the powerful performance while her father is riding the emotional roller coaster.

The psycholinguistic analysis of Beyonce’s words reveals a separation between performance and emotion. Can we learn something from Beyonce’s mental underpinning? Yes. When you need to deliver a powerful performance, recruit an emotional buffer.

Daniel Day Lewis is famous in the film industry for his eccentric behavior. Why does he show such odd behavior?

DDL is famous for his long breaks between movies. In 1989 he starred in My Left foot, for which he won an Academy Award. Three year later, in 1992, he accepted the lead role in The Last of the Mohicans, for which he was nominated for British Academy of Film and Television Arts (BAFTA) award. In 1997 he stared in The Boxer and received a Golden Globe nomination. Five years later, in 2002, he accepted the role of the villain gang leader “Bill the Butcher” in Gangs of New York, for which he was nominated for the BAFTA, Golden Globe, and the Academy Award for Best Actor. Less decorated actors such as, George Clooney and Brad Pitt, both starred in 20 films in the last 10 years. Daniel Day Lewis participated in only 9 movies in the last 19 years. Why the long breaks?

DDL is also famous for his insistence on staying in character during filming. While filming My Left Foot (1989), for example, he adamently refused to break character. To do justice to his role as the severly paralyzed Christy Brown, he insisted on being wheeled around in his wheel chair even after the cameras stopped rolling. He even went as far as assuming the physical ailments of his character during filming, breaking two ribs from remaining in the awkard hunched body posture of his character. While filming Gangs of New York (2002), he insisted on maintaining the harsh persona of his character, including his New York accent. During filming, he was diagnosed with pneumonia. He refused to wear a warmer coat or to be treated for the disease, arguing that it was not keeping with the time period. Why the strong insistence on staying in character?

A psycholinguistic analysis of Daniel’s words reveals an inflexible transition between mindsets. Take two minds. Mindset 1 represents DDL as himself. Mindset 2 represents DDL in character. The analysis reveals that DDL has to invest large amounts of energy to shift from being himself, or “in person” to being “in character.” The following figure compares the transition energy in DDL and the average person.

The blue circle in the following figure illustrates Daniel Day-Lewis. The red circle illustrates the average person. To move from mindset 1 to mindset 2, the blue circle needs to overcome a higher barrier or activation energy level, than the red circle. However, the resting energy of the blue circle in mindset 2 is much lower than the resting energy of the red circle. This means that the red circle is much more likely to return to mindset 1 than the blue circle. (More on activation energy in chemistry literature, activation energy, Wikipedia.)

The psycholinguistic analysis marked the following segment in an interview with filmcritic.com with emotional intensity above 90%, and the underlined phrases with intensity above 95%.

“filmcritic.com: Why did it take you so long to decide to do this movie?

DDL: A few years, actually. It’s hard to answer that because you can never fully put your finger on the reason why you’re suddenly, inexplicably compelled to explore one life as opposed to another, or one story as opposed to another. But it happens in moments and I think in all the occasions when I’ve gone back to work, it’s always with that sense of - it sounds grandiose - but inevitability. And that may be a complete delusion, but nevertheless it’s the one that I need to get out of bed and go about my business. That sense that I can’t avoid this thing. I better just get on with it.”

Note the phrase “suddenly, inexplicably compelled” above. In terms of the figure, the peak of the blue line is very sharp. The circle cannot rest on this peak. The moment the circle arrives at the peak it begins to fall toward its new resting place, the “in character” mindset. The transition between the “in person” and “in character” is very sharp. DDL is never locked between mindsets. Also note the phrase “it happens in moments.”

The sharp distinction between mindsets is also hinted in the phrase “to explore one life as opposed to another or one story as opposed to another.” DDL sees the two mindsets “in person” and “in character” as opposing each other, not as extensions of each other.

Note the phrase “I think in all the occasions when I’ve gone back to work, it’s always with that sense of - it sounds grandiose - but inevitability.” Inevitable means “incapable of being avoided or evaded.” Once DDL switches to the “in character” mindset, there is no going back. In terms of the figure, the “in character” mindset rests behind a high barrier called deactivation energy. Unlike DDL, an average person requires a little push and he is able to shift back to mindset 1. It takes DDL much longer to commit, but once he made up his mind there is no going back. The inevitability is also hinted in the phrase “That sense that I can’t avoid this thing. I better just get on with it.”

Note the phrase “And that may be a complete delusion but nevertheless it’s the one that I need to get out of bed and go about my business.” This phrase reveals his struggle against the high activation energy. He needs to convince himself to commit to a project. He has to attach a “grandiose” value to it to get started. Only an enormous significance can overcome the excessively high activation energy.

The need to deceive himself is also revealed in a segment from a recent interview with Rob Carnevale. The psycholinguistic analysis assigned this segment an emotional intensity above 90%. According to DDL: “… you have to kid yourself all the time. It’s really just a game, the whole thing, and the game is to kid yourself into believing something.” (The underlined phrases were assigned an emotional intensity of above 94%.)

DDL mentions several times that he needs to convince himself to kid himself. He needs a complete conviction, not a mere interest to change his mindset. This requirement is depicted in the figure as high activation energy.

The psycholinguistic analysis assigned an emotional intensity above 90% to the following segment from another interview:

“Question: Did that time off recharge you as an actor?

DDL: I must say, I think some actors are capable; they thrive on working at a much greater pace than I do. Everybody just has to know for themselves what they’re capable of. To me, for some reason, at a stage even many years ago, when I was, when I really didn’t know where the next work was coming from, like most of us at that stage in our lives, we were just raking in anything that came towards us. Hungry to make a mark and get that work and use our energy and so forth.”

Note the phrase “Everybody just has to know for themselves what they’re capable of.” DDL admits that his slow pace results from his “incapability” to commit. Only rarely he masters the energy required to overcome the activation barrier.

Finally, note the phrase “Hungry to make a mark and get that work and use our energy and so forth.” Hunger was a catalyst that lowered the activation level, the energy needed to take action. When he was young, the threshold to take action was lower. Today, this threshold is much higher. Also note that the phrase includes a direct reference to energy.

Can we learn something from DDL eccentricities? Yes. Don’t rush to commitment, and once you are there, once you have committed to something, don’t look back.

Madonna is perhaps the most controversial star in the music industry. Time and again she clashed with society, challenging its norms and testing the limits of propriety. But, why is she so rebellious? Why does she create so much chaos and disorder?

In 1984 she sensually emerged from a giant wedding cake during her performance at the MTV Video Music Awards. She continued to sexually writhe around on stage, tangling herself in the layers of her wedding dress, adorned with the ever so infamous “Boy Toy” belt buckle. She shocked the industry and the world then and she hasn’t stopped since.

In 1992 Madonna released Sex, a coffee table book containing nude pictures of herself others such as Naomi Campbell and Vanilla Ice. The book took on the themes of lesbianism, sadomasochism, anilingus, rape, role playing and other numerous fetishes. The book made it through publication and onto the shelves of bookstores all over the world. Because of its limited publication and its immense popularity, it became a vastly desired collector’s item almost immediately. Her public scandals continued with a controversial appearance on the Dave Letterman show, a romantic escapade with basketball’s bad-boy, Dennis Rodman, and a live on-stage make-out session with pop-stars nearly half her age, Britney Spears and Christina Aguilera .

Her music and her performances continually offend and upset conservative members of various religious groups world-wide. During her Confessions Tour her performances were canceled in Moscow and in parts of Italy for what was conceived of offensive use of religious symbols. She even went as far as to personally invite the Pope to her concert after he petitioned for its cancellation. Needless to say, he was deeply offended and never attended any of her performances.

Why is she behaving is such a way? What drives Madonna to show such extreme behavior?

A psycholinguistic analysis of her words revealed a belief in a false reality. Madonna believes that everything around her is an illusion. She is constantly trying to escape this false reality, similar to Neo struggling to free himself from the Matrix (see more on simulated reality in Wikipedia). Madonna behaves as if she subscribes to what Morpheus explains to Neo about the world he is living in:

Have you ever had a dream, Neo, that you were so sure it was real? … What you know you can’t explain, but you feel it. You’ve felt it your entire life, that there’s something wrong with the world. You don’t know what it is, but it’s there, like a splinter in your mind, driving you mad. … The Matrix is a system, Neo. That system is our enemy. But when you’re inside, you look around, what do you see? Businessmen, teachers, lawyers, carpenters. The very minds of the people we are trying to save. But until we do, these people are still a part of that system and that makes them our enemy. You have to understand, most of these people are not ready to be unplugged. And many of them are so inert, so hopelessly dependent on the system that they will fight to protect it.

Madonna believes that she is trapped in a dream, and she hates it.

The psycholinguistic analysis found traces of this belief in most everything she says. For example, during an interview with Larry King she is quoted as saying:

And if you get attached to the good things or nice things people say about you, and you get attached to wanting approval from people, then you’re going to also be affected by people saying negative things about you, and I’d rather just be detached from it all because it doesn’t mean anything in the end. It’s completely ephemeral. Completely illusionary, and so I’d like to pay attention to what’s real.

She considers the people and the life around her illusionary, ephemeral, not real. She detaches herself from society, constantly trying to escape its impression, hoping to reach the true reality. In the same interview she describes what attracted her to Kabala.

I was looking for something. I mean, I’d begun practicing yoga and, you know, I was looking for the answers to life. Why am I here? What am I doing here? What is my purpose? How do I fit into the big picture? I know there’s more to life than making lots of money and being successful and even getting married and having a family.

The psycholinguistic analysis assigned to these two segments an emotionally intensity of about 90%, and to the underlined phrases an emotional intensity above 98%.

Her words and phrases in an interview with David Letterman also gained an emotional intensity above 90%.

“David Letterman: [sighs] You know, it’s seems like we know almost everything there is to know about you.

Madonna: Really?

David Letterman: Tell us something we don’t know.

Madonna: You don’t know a (god) damn thing. (Emotional intensity of 97%)

David Letterman: Yeah? Like what?

David Letterman: What’s the next look? What’s the next incarnation? What’s the next sort of a image, what do we uh…?

Madonna: That’s what you want to know?

David Letterman: Yeah.

Madonna: No, that’s not what you want to know.”

According to Madonna, knowing the next look, the next incarnation, or the next new image, is not knowing “a (god) damn“ thing. They mean nothing because they don’t exist. They are illusionary and not real.

Madonna is searching for the pillars of false reality and is trying to destroy them. Her words disclose contempt to these pillars. For instance, she is quoted as saying: “I wouldn’t have turned out the way I was if I didn’t have all those old-fashioned values to rebel against.” Note the phrase “to rebel against.” Also “Are you ready to start a revolution? … Are you ready to change history?” Note the phrase revolution. She refuses to accept the known history, the ‘official’ description of reality. She believes in the existence of a different reality, a true reality. She hopes that when the pillars of the false reality come crashing down, the true reality will be revealed. Her desire to carry out such a task resulted in the scandals described above.

According to the psycholinguistic analysis, the belief in a false reality is the driving force behind Madonna’s extreme behavior. Can we learn something from Madonna’s mental underpinning? Yes. Doubt reality. Fight its limits.

Madonna is perhaps the most controversial star in the music industry. Time and again she clashed with society, challenging its norms and testing the limits of propriety. But, why is she so rebellious? Why does she create so much chaos and disorder?

In 1984 she sensually emerged from a giant wedding cake during her performance at the MTV Video Music Awards. She continued to sexually writhe around on stage, tangling herself in the layers of her wedding dress, adorned with the ever so infamous “Boy Toy” belt buckle. She shocked the industry and the world then and she hasn’t stopped since.

In 1992 Madonna released Sex, a coffee table book containing nude pictures of herself others such as Naomi Campbell and Vanilla Ice. The book took on the themes of lesbianism, sadomasochism, anilingus, rape, role playing and other numerous fetishes. The book made it through publication and onto the shelves of bookstores all over the world. Because of its limited publication and its immense popularity, it became a vastly desired collector’s item almost immediately. Her public scandals continued with a controversial appearance on the Dave Letterman show, a romantic escapade with basketball’s bad-boy, Dennis Rodman, and a live on-stage make-out session with pop-stars nearly half her age, Britney Spears and Christina Aguilera .

Her music and her performances continually offend and upset conservative members of various religious groups world-wide. During her Confessions Tour her performances were canceled in Moscow and in parts of Italy for what was conceived of offensive use of religious symbols. She even went as far as to personally invite the Pope to her concert after he petitioned for its cancellation. Needless to say, he was deeply offended and never attended any of her performances.

Why is she behaving is such a way? What drives Madonna to show such extreme behavior?

A psycholinguistic analysis of her words revealed a belief in a false reality. Madonna believes that everything around her is an illusion. She is constantly trying to escape this false reality, similar to Neo struggling to free himself from the Matrix (see more on simulated reality in Wikipedia). Madonna behaves as if she subscribes to what Morpheus explains to Neo about the world he is living in:

Have you ever had a dream, Neo, that you were so sure it was real? … What you know you can’t explain, but you feel it. You’ve felt it your entire life, that there’s something wrong with the world. You don’t know what it is, but it’s there, like a splinter in your mind, driving you mad. … The Matrix is a system, Neo. That system is our enemy. But when you’re inside, you look around, what do you see? Businessmen, teachers, lawyers, carpenters. The very minds of the people we are trying to save. But until we do, these people are still a part of that system and that makes them our enemy. You have to understand, most of these people are not ready to be unplugged. And many of them are so inert, so hopelessly dependent on the system that they will fight to protect it.

Madonna believes that she is trapped in a dream, and she hates it.

The psycholinguistic analysis found traces of this belief in most everything she says. For example, during an interview with Larry King she is quoted as saying:

And if you get attached to the good things or nice things people say about you, and you get attached to wanting approval from people, then you’re going to also be affected by people saying negative things about you, and I’d rather just be detached from it all because it doesn’t mean anything in the end. It’s completely ephemeral. Completely illusionary, and so I’d like to pay attention to what’s real.

She considers the people and the life around her illusionary, ephemeral, not real. She detaches herself from society, constantly trying to escape its impression, hoping to reach the true reality. In the same interview she describes what attracted her to Kabala.

I was looking for something. I mean, I’d begun practicing yoga and, you know, I was looking for the answers to life. Why am I here? What am I doing here? What is my purpose? How do I fit into the big picture? I know there’s more to life than making lots of money and being successful and even getting married and having a family.

The psycholinguistic analysis assigned to these two segments an emotionally intensity of about 90%, and to the underlined phrases an emotional intensity above 98%.

Her words and phrases in an interview with David Letterman also gained an emotional intensity above 90%.

“David Letterman: [sighs] You know, it’s seems like we know almost everything there is to know about you.

Madonna: Really?

David Letterman: Tell us something we don’t know.

Madonna: You don’t know a (god) damn thing. (Emotional intensity of 97%)

David Letterman: Yeah? Like what?

David Letterman: What’s the next look? What’s the next incarnation? What’s the next sort of a image, what do we uh…?

Madonna: That’s what you want to know?

David Letterman: Yeah.

Madonna: No, that’s not what you want to know.”

According to Madonna, knowing the next look, the next incarnation, or the next new image, is not knowing “a (god) damn“ thing. They mean nothing because they don’t exist. They are illusionary and not real.

Madonna is searching for the pillars of false reality and is trying to destroy them. Her words disclose contempt to these pillars. For instance, she is quoted as saying: “I wouldn’t have turned out the way I was if I didn’t have all those old-fashioned values to rebel against.” Note the phrase “to rebel against.” Also “Are you ready to start a revolution? … Are you ready to change history?” Note the phrase revolution. She refuses to accept the known history, the ‘official’ description of reality. She believes in the existence of a different reality, a true reality. She hopes that when the pillars of the false reality come crashing down, the true reality will be revealed. Her desire to carry out such a task resulted in the scandals described above.

According to the psycholinguistic analysis, the belief in a false reality is the driving force behind Madonna’s extreme behavior. Can we learn something from Madonna’s mental underpinning? Yes. Doubt reality. Fight its limits.

What distinguishes the average celebrity from the average person? Among other things, it is their range of emotional intensity. Consider the following figure.

The emotional intensity of an average celebrity fluctuates between +5 and -5. See the red line. In contrast, the emotional intensity of the average person fluctuates at lower intensities, between +2 and -2. See the green line. When a celebrity is cheerful, he is much more cheerful than the average person. When he is depressed, he is much more depressed.

Beyonce is a major celebrity. She’s been dubbed Fun, Fearless Female of the year by Cosmopolitan. She’s a multiple Grammy award winner, winning five Grammys in one year. And, she’s number one on the annual Askmens.com top 100 Most Desirable Women of 2007. She’s most well known for singing, but she is truthfully the ultimate Renaissance woman. Beyonce Knowles is a song writer, a dancer, and a fashion designer with her own label. As a major celebrity you would expect her to show the high emotional intensity that causes the extreme behavior typical of other celebrities. However, in her private life she shows a range of emotional intensities at even lower levels than the average person. She is always in control. You would never see Beyonce ecstatic or in aguish. Why? Why is she so different from other celebrities?

Beyonce is a major celebrity. She’s been dubbed Fun, Fearless Female of the year by Cosmopolitan. She’s a multiple Grammy award winner, winning five Grammys in one year. And, she’s number one on the annual Askmens.com top 100 Most Desirable Women of 2007. She’s most well known for singing, but she is truthfully the ultimate Renaissance woman. Beyonce Knowles is a song writer, a dancer, and a fashion designer with her own label. As a major celebrity you would expect her to show the high emotional intensities that cause the extreme behaviors typical of other celebrities. However, in her private life she shows a range of emotional intensities at even lower levels than the average person. She is always in control. You would never see Beyonce ecstatic or in aguish. Why? Why is she so different from other celebrities?

A psycholinguistic analysis of Beyonce’s words reveals that despite her enormous success, she is under immense pressure. The analysis tells us that she is afraid of becoming obsolete, irrelevant, a mere fad. Beyonce fears of being labeled an “oldie,” “irrelevant,” and “stale.” As she said to Star Jones Reynolds in an interview on Larry King Live, “I guess, you know, people get used to things and it’s not as exciting.” In fact, she admits she has the same feeling about her art “certain things don’t excite me because I’ve been doing this for so long.” The psycholinguistic analysis assigned to these two phrases has an emotional intensity of more than 90%. However, despite her fears and concerns, she is still in complete control of her emotions. In the figure her intensities never exceed the +1 or -1 level, much lower than the intensities experienced by the average celebrity, or even the average person. How is this possible? Why isn’t Beyonce showing signs of stress? Is she incapable of deep emotions? No. On stage she is fabulous and fierce, with her outlandish outfits and her outrageously vivacious dance moves. See, for instance, two of her videos, here and here.

So, how can she be so in control in her private life? Because she has an emotional buffer. Her family functions as an emotional buffer. Her family converts the high emotional waves that surround her into a quiet ripple.

When Beyonce was asked, “What is the biggest challenge of being a celebrity?” she answered, “The hardest thing is balance.” And when she was asked, “What keeps you balanced?” She said “My family, definitely. There’s always one or two family members with me at all times. They’re right there [points to the back of the room]. I don’t go anywhere without someone that loves me and that can tell me the truth. Family is so important to me.” She continues, “My balance comes from my family. I have reality around me, and they tell me when I need to calm down, take it down a couple notches. Then they tell me when I do something good. I think what celebrities lose is that they lose touch with reality.” (The psycholinguistic analysis assigned this segment an emotional intensity of more than 90%. The underlined phrase was assigned an intensity of above 96%.)

Note that the phrase, “they tell me when I need to calm down, take it down a couple notches,” actually describes the buffering process.

Much of the buffering is performed by her father. Matthew Knowles first came to her rescue in 1992, when Beyonce’s first group Girls Tyme, later renamed Destiny’s Child, lost the US talent show, Star Search. To save the day, he decided to manage the group himself. He quit his six-figure salary job as a multi-million dollar equipment salesman at Xerox, and then sold the family home in 1996 to keep the group going. Whenever there was trouble, dad Mathew came to the rescue, financially, physically, and emotionally. But, dad Matthew doesn’t have his own buffer, and unlike Beyonce, he cannot hide his stress.

In the recent past, Beyonce’s father has publicly lashed out against what he felt were transgressions against his daughter. It is not simply transgressions, however, that stir his anger, it is the fear that these transgressions mark the end of her career. Matthew Knowles’ fear of Beyonce’s decline turned him into a transgression monger, an insatiable beast constantly searching for signs or indications of decline. For instance, in her most recent film, Dreamgirls, Beyonce Knowles shared the screen with co-star Jennifer Hudson. It soon became obvious that Jennifer shone brighter in the spotlight, receiving more screen time and stronger singing opportunities. Naturally, the buzz in the industry was focused on Beyonce’s co-star and not on Ms. Knowles herself. In reaction to what he saw as an attempt to damage Beyonce’s career, Matthew Knowles chastised the film’s director telling him that Beyonce’s character in the film was ill-portrayed. In addition, he lashed out against Ms. Hudson. During a screening of the film he and his wife, Tina Knowles, acted coldly towards Jennifer, pretending not to see her when she greeted them that evening. It was also reported that Mr. Knowles “shot her dirty looks” throughout the evening, probably trying to intimidate Ms. Hudson and discourage her from stealing the spotlight from his daughter ever again.

Another incident occurred when Beyonce lost in the Golden Globe awards to two legendary performers. Prince, a legendary singer, won the Best Original Song, and Meryl Streep, a legendary actress, won the Best Lead Actress in a Motion Picture - Musical/Comedy. Matthew Knowles was unable accept the loss. He perceived the loss as a rejection, as a refusal to let Beyonce join the circle of legends, a denial of his most profound wish. Following the event he is quoted as saying, “Today is Martin Luther King’s birthday and it saddens me to say that things have not changed for blacks. Working class blacks and blacks in Hollywood are still being discriminated against. We still have a long way to go.” He felt that Beyonce was denied membership in the select group of legends, that she was measured and found wanting.

Rather than Beyonce becoming upset, it is her father, Matthew, who absorbs all the reverberations. It is her career that is threatened, and yet it is he who lashes out, Beyonce stands calmly by his side, seemingly unaffected, impossibly calm.

An average celebrity combines powerful performances and intense emotions. The Knowles family, Matthew Knowles in particular, is able to divide the two functions. Beyonce is delivering the powerful performance while her father is riding the emotional roller coaster.

The psycholinguistic analysis of Beyonce’s words reveals a separation between performance and emotion. Can we learn something from Beyonce’s mental underpinning? Yes. When you need to deliver a powerful performance, recruit an emotional buffer.

Daniel Day Lewis is famous in the film industry for his eccentric behavior. Why does he show such odd behavior?

DDL is famous for his long breaks between movies. In 1989 he starred in My Left foot, for which he won an Academy Award. Three year later, in 1992, he accepted the lead role in The Last of the Mohicans, for which he was nominated for British Academy of Film and Television Arts (BAFTA) award. In 1997 he stared in The Boxer and received a Golden Globe nomination. Five years later, in 2002, he accepted the role of the villain gang leader “Bill the Butcher” in Gangs of New York, for which he was nominated for the BAFTA, Golden Globe, and the Academy Award for Best Actor. Less decorated actors such as, George Clooney and Brad Pitt, both starred in 20 films in the last 10 years. Daniel Day Lewis participated in only 9 movies in the last 19 years. Why the long breaks?

DDL is also famous for his insistence on staying in character during filming. While filming My Left Foot (1989), for example, he adamently refused to break character. To do justice to his role as the severly paralyzed Christy Brown, he insisted on being wheeled around in his wheel chair even after the cameras stopped rolling. He even went as far as assuming the physical ailments of his character during filming, breaking two ribs from remaining in the awkard hunched body posture of his character. While filming Gangs of New York (2002), he insisted on maintaining the harsh persona of his character, including his New York accent. During filming, he was diagnosed with pneumonia. He refused to wear a warmer coat or to be treated for the disease, arguing that it was not keeping with the time period. Why the strong insistence on staying in character?

A psycholinguistic analysis of Daniel’s words reveals an inflexible transition between mindsets. Take two minds. Mindset 1 represents DDL as himself. Mindset 2 represents DDL in character. The analysis reveals that DDL has to invest large amounts of energy to shift from being himself, or “in person” to being “in character.” The following figure compares the transition energy in DDL and the average person.

The blue circle in the following figure illustrates Daniel Day-Lewis. The red circle illustrates the average person. To move from mindset 1 to mindset 2, the blue circle needs to overcome a higher barrier or activation energy level, than the red circle. However, the resting energy of the blue circle in mindset 2 is much lower than the resting energy of the red circle. This means that the red circle is much more likely to return to mindset 1 than the blue circle. (More on activation energy in chemistry literature, activation energy, Wikipedia.)

The psycholinguistic analysis marked the following segment in an interview with filmcritic.com with emotional intensity above 90%, and the underlined phrases with intensity above 95%.

“filmcritic.com: Why did it take you so long to decide to do this movie?

DDL: A few years, actually. It’s hard to answer that because you can never fully put your finger on the reason why you’re suddenly, inexplicably compelled to explore one life as opposed to another, or one story as opposed to another. But it happens in moments and I think in all the occasions when I’ve gone back to work, it’s always with that sense of - it sounds grandiose - but inevitability. And that may be a complete delusion, but nevertheless it’s the one that I need to get out of bed and go about my business. That sense that I can’t avoid this thing. I better just get on with it.”

Note the phrase “suddenly, inexplicably compelled” above. In terms of the figure, the peak of the blue line is very sharp. The circle cannot rest on this peak. The moment the circle arrives at the peak it begins to fall toward its new resting place, the “in character” mindset. The transition between the “in person” and “in character” is very sharp. DDL is never locked between mindsets. Also note the phrase “it happens in moments.”

The sharp distinction between mindsets is also hinted in the phrase “to explore one life as opposed to another or one story as opposed to another.” DDL sees the two mindsets “in person” and “in character” as opposing each other, not as extensions of each other.

Note the phrase “I think in all the occasions when I’ve gone back to work, it’s always with that sense of - it sounds grandiose - but inevitability.” Inevitable means “incapable of being avoided or evaded.” Once DDL switches to the “in character” mindset, there is no going back. In terms of the figure, the “in character” mindset rests behind a high barrier called deactivation energy. Unlike DDL, an average person requires a little push and he is able to shift back to mindset 1. It takes DDL much longer to commit, but once he made up his mind there is no going back. The inevitability is also hinted in the phrase “That sense that I can’t avoid this thing. I better just get on with it.”

Note the phrase “And that may be a complete delusion but nevertheless it’s the one that I need to get out of bed and go about my business.” This phrase reveals his struggle against the high activation energy. He needs to convince himself to commit to a project. He has to attach a “grandiose” value to it to get started. Only an enormous significance can overcome the excessively high activation energy.

The need to deceive himself is also revealed in a segment from a recent interview with Rob Carnevale. The psycholinguistic analysis assigned this segment an emotional intensity above 90%. According to DDL: “… you have to kid yourself all the time. It’s really just a game, the whole thing, and the game is to kid yourself into believing something.” (The underlined phrases were assigned an emotional intensity of above 94%.)

DDL mentions several times that he needs to convince himself to kid himself. He needs a complete conviction, not a mere interest to change his mindset. This requirement is depicted in the figure as high activation energy.

The psycholinguistic analysis assigned an emotional intensity above 90% to the following segment from another interview:

“Question: Did that time off recharge you as an actor?

DDL: I must say, I think some actors are capable; they thrive on working at a much greater pace than I do. Everybody just has to know for themselves what they’re capable of. To me, for some reason, at a stage even many years ago, when I was, when I really didn’t know where the next work was coming from, like most of us at that stage in our lives, we were just raking in anything that came towards us. Hungry to make a mark and get that work and use our energy and so forth.”

Note the phrase “Everybody just has to know for themselves what they’re capable of.” DDL admits that his slow pace results from his “incapability” to commit. Only rarely he masters the energy required to overcome the activation barrier.

Finally, note the phrase “Hungry to make a mark and get that work and use our energy and so forth.” Hunger was a catalyst that lowered the activation level, the energy needed to take action. When he was young, the threshold to take action was lower. Today, this threshold is much higher. Also note that the phrase includes a direct reference to energy.

Can we learn something from DDL eccentricities? Yes. Don’t rush to commitment, and once you are there, once you have committed to something, don’t look back.

Amy Winehouse is the winner of five Grammy awards including Record and Song of the Year for her album Rehab, an album that received universal acclaim. Her newest album, Back to Black, is soon to go triple platinum and its title track has claimed the no. 1 spot on the Billboard Chart. She is no doubt a unique and exciting talent that is only beginning to make her mark on the music industry.

Is there more to Amy’s success than her musical talent? How does someone with little formal training at the young age of 24 accomplish all this? Is it purely her voice, reminiscent of the old days of jazz and blues, a voice that channels the vocal stylings of Aretha Franklin and Etta James? Or is it perhaps her unique image and her controversial lifestyle that draws us to her?

What is it that makes Amy Winehouse great?

A psycholinguistic analysis of Amy’s words reveals a deep seated fear of planning for the future. Not a fear of the future itself, just a fear of planning for it. This fear runs so wide and so deep that it manifests itself in major decisions as well as trivial ones. She refuses to be involved in any marketing decisions concerning her new CDs because these decisions address forthcoming events. According to Amy: “I just wrote the songs, and I sing them. That’s pretty much it for me. I guess the rest of it’s all record company stuff, right?” The psycholinguistic analysis assigned to this segment an emotionally intensity of more than 90%. Note the words “just,” “it,” and “all” in the phrases “just wrote the song,” “that’s pretty much it for me,” and “the rest of it’s all record company staff.” She detaches herself from anything that involves planning for future events.

The psycholinguistic analysis also assigned higher than 90% emotional intensity to a segment describing Amy’s reaction to ordering from a catalogue:

Interviewer: And finally, the Popjustice keyboard wrist rest thing recently exploded, and there’s horrible gel stuff all over our desk. Using skills picked up during your time as a secretary, could you order us a new one?

Amy Winehouse: Well, I was the sort of secretary where it’d be, ‘Amy, make me a cup of tea’, ‘No, fuck off’. You should call Rymans for their catalogue (Rymans is a UK specialist supplier of Stationery and Office Products). Hang on, are you taking the piss out of me? You fucker! Really? Call Rymans. Or… Are you being serious? Just go to another secretary and get her to order it. You were taking the piss, weren’t you?”

Why does Amy exhibit such a strong emotional reaction? Why asking her to order from a catalogue is such an offensive request? Why is it such an emotional trigger? Ordering from a catalogue requires one to plan for a future event, i.e. the arrival of the merchandise. One must show confidence in the likelihood that the plan will materialize, i.e. that the merchandise will indeed arrive. One would not bother ordering something from a catalogue if he did not trust or expect the order to be carried out. However, Amy believes that any plan for the future, and the execution of such a plan, is mocking the gods. For her, to order from a catalogue will result in being expelled from heaven, punishment enough to scare the bravest heart, and evoke the most intense emotional reaction.

To plan is to jinx, to place a hex on whatever you expect to happen as a result of your actions. The saying: “G-d laughs while we are making plans … “ is one that Amy Winehouse believes wholeheartedly. According to Amy, any plan is a recipe for failure, frustration, and pain. She believes that plans curse the future, and that they are a guarantee for not getting what she wants. She feels that when she plans something, life is mooching her, or using her own words life “takes the piss out of me.” Her fears are so extreme that sometimes she will plan and work in opposite directions of her real intensions just to leave the landscape open for the winds to bring about her true wishes. For Amy, playing opposites is the only viable option to realizing her wishes.

An interesting result of her fear of planning is her attitude towards time. One would expect that with such a fear she will concentrate on living the moment. But she doesn’t. Instead of scanning the future she has decided to survey the past. Instead of trying to learn the current waves in her art and infer about their evolvement in the future, she studies the past and ponder its intricacies. Through this process she became a master in the music of time gone by; a testament to all the greatness of the styles of old. As she said in an interview with higher than 95% emotional intensity: “I don’t really know about new bands today. I’m like an old Jewish man. Maybe I’m out of the loop, I don’t know.” Instead of listening to current music, she prefers older music, such as Motown and the 60’s group The Shangri-Las. This expertise has helped her to find her unique style.

Despite all her personal problems and issues, Amy has succeeded where so many others have failed. Can we learn something from Amy’s mental states? Yes. To succeed in the future, study the past.