My final word on the Emmys In Memoriam

I’ve heard, read and been involved in conversations regarding this year’s “In Memoriam” segment shown on Sunday’s Emmy telecast. Guess what? So far everyone has gotten it wrong. It’s time to straighten them out.

If you didn’t hear the hoopla prior to the Emmys or if you didn’t see it live Sunday evening, this year’s tribute called out special considerations for five individuals throughout the show: For writer / producer Gary David Goldberg and for actors Jean Stapleton, Jonathan Winters, James Gandolfini and Cory Monteith. The biggest controversy came courtesy of Monteith’s inclusion within the exclusive spots.

Name it and it’s been discussed. Forget the fact Monteith was “relegated” to the level of Stapleton, Winters and Gandolfini; did he have a body of work comparable to any of the other three actors? Was it simply a matter of the Emmys playing to a younger crowd for this and future airings? Was Monteith’s unfortunate self-destructive passing worthy of all the negativity surrounding the tribute and Jane Lynch‘s eulogization? Overall, was he plainly and simply not deserving of such a gratitude? Those are just a few of the things that have been questioned of his tribute.

But I have a better question: Were any of them deserving of being called out for special recognition let alone the thoughts offered by Michael J. Fox, Rob Reiner, Robin Williams, Edie Falco or Lynch? I say no. None of those acknowledge were. Goldberg wasn’t. Stapleton wasn’t. Winters wasn’t. Gandolfini wasn’t. Monteith wasn’t.

Understand, no matter the circumstance of their passings, they are gone. All had fans, all had colleagues, all had families who will miss them in some way. To put one person “above” another could be considered a slight to any who flashed before our eyes during the In Memoriam segment. Regarding the actors specifically, it’s best to show respect in the form of short clips of their works or note their contributions and let each person viewing reflect as they see fit.

Do anything else — such as pay special and individual tribute as witnessed in the telecast — and you inevitably step on toes. Comparisons arise. Controversy takes hold of emotion, often in a bad way. Debates form wondering why Michael Ansara‘s body of work was the lesser of James Gandolfini’s. Why no standout recognition for Eydie Gormé? Do you see where I’m going with this? Award program memorials should never be about who was better than the other, who got picked over someone else.

And it’s definitely not about whether Cory Monteith was worthy. I sat next to the young man and conversed one-on-one with him barely a year ago and he was a fine, accommodating, intelligent actor.

But the sad fact of the matter is: He’s dead now. As are they all. They’re gone.

And that’s the common denominator. That’s what levels the playing field. And, in that case, there’s no room for controversy. There shouldn’t be.

The only things left are the fact we will miss them and that we will remember them.