John Barrowman, entertainer extraordinaire, screen and stage star, is a fairly fine forty-something.
Classically handsome, he does occasionally suffer at the hands of the make-up department who have a penchant for orange foundation, and certain cruel friends of mine accuse him of looking slightly ‘plastic.’
When I meet him in the flesh (and fabulous flesh it is), Barrowman is radiantly beautiful. His skin glows, his eyes are luminous, and he is palpably alive; he looks little older than thirty.
How does he stay looking so good? ‘I drink two litres of water a day. I do drink alcohol, but not to get drunk, I don’t binge drink. If I’m sitting down to dinner, I won’t drink soda, I might have the odd glass of wine, but I’ll drink water.’
I’m sceptical; surely there must be more to it. ‘Well, if you ever need a little bit of help’- he tweaks the corners of his gorgeous eyes, and winks – ‘I’m all for it.’
He exudes vitality – and he certainly needs plenty of energy to keep up with his hectic schedule. But Barrowman doesn’t resent marketing his work. ‘I think of myself as a business – a product.’
After all, he points out, ‘If you become an actor, it’s always at the back of your mind: you could become famous. You shouldn’t pretend to be surprised or angry if it happens.’
This is a man who is booked until 2011 and is thinking even further ahead, planning a return to his first love, musical theatre – a genre he staunchly defends against detractors.
‘I’ve done “serious” theatre, I’ve done Shakespeare… I don’t see anything different about performing in musicals; to me they’re just as serious.’
Musicals are what Barrowman does best; he has appeared in numerous productions in the West End and on Broadway, including the National Theatre’s Anything Goes: ‘That was absolutely one of the most amazing experiences I’ve ever had.’
Currently in talks with Andrew Lloyd-Webber about a sequel to Phantom of the Opera, Barrowman’s also being wooed by Cameron Mackintosh, who wants him to play the title role in Barnum.
‘I’m inclining towards Barnum,’ he says. ‘It’ll mean getting back into serious shape, better than ever before. I haven’t been to the gym in seven months, I haven’t had time, I’ve been so busy with work.
But I’d have to do two months’ intensive circus training to do Barnum.’
Circus training brings to mind spangly, tight-fitting clothes, which would show off that rather fine physique to even greater advantage.
‘God, no, I won’t be wearing lycra,’ he exclaims in horror. And then, with a lingering touch on my shoulder and a glint in his eye, ‘Well, I’d be learning all the trapeze stuff and everything…I suppose maybe a pair of cycling shorts…Or they might even give me a leotard…’
Barrowman is the world’s most outrageous flirt, and delights in being provocative. Even his acting smacks of promiscuity: ‘Whenever I’m playing opposite a leading lady, or leading man, I have to fall in love with them a little bit, for it to be truthful, even if it’s not a romantic relationship.
I have to be in love with them.’ Women as well as men? ‘Yes, I never define myself – it’s unfair. Being gay, it doesn’t mean I don’t fancy women and think they’re beautiful.’
Yet this is all for show. He’s been with his partner, Scott, for nearly 15 years; they celebrated their civil partnership in 2007. ‘A civil partnership is not a marriage,’ Barrowman explains.
‘It’s about being recognisable to society and government, being equal to married people, it’s not actually being married.’ He objects to the terminology; for him, marriage has inescapable religious connotations.
‘Marriage means being part of an organisation that thinks I’m evil.’ He doesn’t just mean the Church. ‘It’s any religion really – they all want to get rid of me because I’m a gay man.’
The issues surrounding the societal acceptance of homosexuality are so important to him that Barrowman is currently filming a BBC documentary, The Truth About You, which aims to discover whether sexuality is determined by nature or nurture.
‘I’m undergoing loads of tests… I believe you’re born gay, but I think environment also has something to do with it. It’ll rock my world if we find out you’re not born gay, so I’m taking a big risk.’
Barrowman is happier about his big break, playing Captain Jack Harkness in the BBC’s Doctor Who and the susequent spin-off, Torchwood.
‘It was a little boy’s dream come true. If I only had to play Jack for the rest of my life, or for the next 15, 20 years, I’d be totally content,’ he says with a grin.
‘I don’t think of him as a character. He’s part of me. It was the easiest casting decision the team ever made; as soon as they saw me on the tapes they said, “That’s him!”’
John and Jack share many traits; they’re expansive and exuberant, and compellingly attractive. I ask how John feels about David Tennant; Jack certainly fancies the Doctor… ‘Jack sees that, I don’t. David’s not my type, he knows that.
We joke about it. People ask if we’d sleep with each other for a million pounds. We look at each other and go, “Ten grand, I would!”’
But if Jack’s a part of John, does that mean Barrowman never stops acting? ‘Oh my GOD!’ leaning forward for another firm but feeling touch on my arm, ‘of COURSE I stop acting!’
This seems rather dramatic, in every sense; I suggest he might be acting all the time. ‘God, no, I’m not acting now,’ with another caress.
‘This is the real me! Scott does say to me sometimes when I get home, ‘Come on, sit down, slow down, you need to relax,’and I do need to switch off. But you can always tell when I’m acting and when I’m being me. There’s a definite distinction. I’m a very real person.’
He may seem too good to be true, but Barrowman is real – I know, I saw him, I touched him, and will be dining out on the story for some considerable time to come.
I nearly ran him over on my bicycle on my way home, as he walked back to his car in the late-night drizzle.
I wonder if he would have come back to life? I like to think so.
Ethical equity
As far back as 1970, the highly influential Nobel prize-winning economist Milton Friedman argued that for the benefit of society as a whole, the primary concern of business should be business, not social responsibility.
It is perhaps unsurprising that free-market economists such as Friedman and Smith would be dismissive of corporate social responsibility. What is interesting is that the ethical concern that may appear to be a contemporary phenomenon is in fact not a new consideration.
What has changed is the attention that it is getting. With NGO campaigns unveiling unethical business practices, and social and environmental concerns becoming important factors in consumer choice, corporations can no longer afford to dismiss their duty to the community.
The World Bank Group defines corporate social responsibility (CSR) as: ‘The commitment of businesses to contribute to sustainable economic development by working with employees, their families, the local community and society at large to improve their lives in ways that are good for business and for development.’
This extends beyond statutory obligations to comply with legislation. It also assumes that companies are accountable to the whole of society and not just to their stockholders.
A major motivating factor behind the recently heightened interest in corporate social responsibility has been the increase in consumer awareness and the emerging focus on the origins of products.
‘Fair trade’, ‘organic’, ‘sustainably sourced’, ‘ethically produced,’ ‘carbon footprint’: accreditations are multiplying and labels and packaging offer an increasing amount of information about how products are made and where they come from.
Books like The Rough Guide to Ethical Living and Oxfam’s The Good Shopping Guide provide detailed information on what brands to buy, which shops to shop in, which services to use, and, more importantly, which to avoid.
Corporations are aware of this increased interest: they want to avoid being pariahs like Nike or Wal-Mart, and they have also realised that having an ethical reputation is itself of commercial worth. Indeed, companies such as The Body Shop and Starbucks have built their brands (and client-bases) around their ethical practices.
Over the years, The Body Shop has initiated campaigns for women’s rights, fair trade, and HIV awareness, and against animal testing among other things. One of Starbucks’ guiding principles is to ‘contribute positively to our communities and our environment.’
It is impossible to enter a branch of either of these companies without being made aware that they take their social responsibility seriously.
This kind of ethical marketing is very much aimed at a lucrative, elite niche: affluent, educated, urban Westerners. Doug Holt, Professor of Marketing at the Saïd Business School, points out that this ethical focus is absent in business-to-business marketing, or in products aimed at consumers of lower socioeconomic standing.
During a recent talk Professor Holt argued that as well as buying into an ‘ethical experience’, consumers are also realising that ‘corporations have become the most powerful actors in society, so they need to believe that they are somehow constrained or doing good.’
Aside from influencing companies to adopt ethical practices to attract customers, the value of having this sort of reputation has also given NGOs leverage, which they can use to shape the behaviour and decisions of large corporations.
In a dispute over the trademarking of premium coffee, Starbuacks was forced to concede victory to the Ethiopian government in May 2007. Trying to trademark three types of coffee native to their country to improve coffee farmers’ revenue, the Ethiopian government ran up against the powerful coffee retailers’ lobby in the US.
These coffees were part of Starbucks’ premium line. Professor Holt assisted the campaign waged by Oxfam to aid the Ethiopian government, as he explained: ‘Starbucks had built up their brand into an ethical myth, but then they were doing something that could blow up in their face.’
By framing the case as an investor issue, with the negative coverage potentially destroying Starbucks’ ethical equity and thus putting the entire brand at risk, Oxfam and Holt managed to get the coffee retailer to back down. The Ethiopian government got its trademarks.
Of course public attention and consumer preferences affect only a very narrow slice of business. While consumers can choose to patronise a different coffee shop or buy a certain body lotion, they don’t choose between different types of copper based on the social responsibility of the mining company. Yet here, again, business incentives can push these companies to operate responsibly.
The NGO Earthwatch helps companies develop environmentally -sustainable practices, working with corporations such as Cadbury Schweppes, British American Tobacco and Newmont Ghana Gold. Whether or not the companies partnering with Earthwatch are genuinely seeking to be socially responsible, self-interested motives remain important.
Companies that work in tourism or natural resources are dependent on the environment and its resources to stay in business. They therefore have a clearly vested interest in the sustainability of their practices. Investing in developing sustainable practices can also be lucrative in an unexpected way, as there is now a market to sell such innovative techniques to other companies.
A number of companies that Earthwatch works with also invest in conservation capacity-building in developing countries where they operate. By building up the skills and knowledge of members of the communities where they mine, grow or extract they are contributing to their long-term prospects in those areas.
Furthermore,in certain other sectors, such as construction, companies known for respecting and surpassing environmental regulations are awarded contracts by planning commissions.
Claire Lippold, of Earthwatch, explained that her NGO works with even the most controversial companies as they are the most important ones to push into adopting sustainable practices.
More importantly, their partnership with Earthwatch isn’t merely ‘Greenwashing’: ‘We have very strict screening process and companies have to prove they are serious about their commitment before we get involved with them.’
Indeed to get the full commercial benefits of social responsibility, corporations cannot simply pay lip-service to ethical practices. Both the FTSE and the Dow Jones have sustainability indexes with which they track the financial performance and social responsibility records of ‘sustainably driven’ companies.
This serves to facilitate investment in these companies and to set a model for other businesses hoping to improve their scores.
While Milton Friedman may have dismissed corporate social responsibility as a form of socialism, what he seems to have missed is that in many cases ethical practices are not merely altruistic but also make sound business sense.
To quote his own words: ‘The most important single central fact about a free market is that no exchange takes place unless both parties benefit.’ This is perhaps the idea that provides the most hope for corporate social responsibility.
That businesses will eventually see that being ethical is to their benefit.