On Telling Old Jokes About Catholics
Re: the Elif Batuman piece: I don't understand this weird sideways vitriol directed at creative writing programs. Is this an American/British thing? I'm a Canadian creative writing MFA, and we seem to have none of the same kvetching about programs up here (or over here, as the case may be) that our Commonwealth head or neighbours to the south have. Creative writers in MFAs up here are just people who've gotten into the program and are choosing to experience their writing development in a peer based workshop environment. Nothing more, nothing less. Comparisons to MFAs as being where the less talented, "third world country" writers (as that piece suggests) hang out are odd in my mind.
In my program, at least, there is a huge amount of diversity in the writing styles and a respect of that by classmates/peers/instructors. No one is asked to scrub their writing of originality. If anything the main plus of the MFA for the writer is creating a supportive peer group that helps you deal with the multifaceted, sometimes demeaning act of being a writer, which is an otherwise solitary profession. In short--in Canada, in general, we're very comfortable with our MFA writing programs and their role. Some writers in MFA programs here succeed wildly, some succeed mildly, and some don't succeed. This is the same as the general writing world, but in the MFA world, we all help and guide each other through this process, which is a nice thing indeed. How could the US/UK programs be all that different?
What's the deal US/UK? Why so vitriolic? Please illuminate me.
0
On Somewhat Live Blogging The Emmys
Did anyone else see Chnandler Bong refuse a beer from Ricky Gervais and then do a "get a load of this guy" face to the person next to him?
"Doesn't he know I'm an alcoholic?" was what that face said. CLASSIC.
0
On Footnotes of Mad Men: From Lubricated to Morose
In either S. 1 or 2, there's a flashback to Don meeting Betty as a model for the furs, I believe? Before that he was a car salesman, right? It's probably just pre-Sally.
0
On Footnotes of 'Mad Men': "A Secretary Is Not To Be / Used for Play Therapy"
Can I just say how much more I enjoy these recaps than the ones on Gawker, which can take a flying leap? That guy throws the word "slut" around in reference to women like its going out of style. And it ain't ironic, methinks. NVC, you are the bees knees. You also undid all the sluts I read over yonder with this: "...a sleepover with the woman who knows what his kids want for Christmas."
EXACTLY. False or quicky intimacy does not a slut make!
It shows that you get it, and that you get Don, and that you get the women and the show and the subtext. You're thoughtful instead of dismissive. Consider your book bought!
0
On Someone Got 'The Daily Show' in My Jezebel and Together They Taste A Little Weird
Totally karion. I kind of tossed that off at the end there without explanation, so I deserve your comment.
I meant the SNL comment in terms of the misrepresentation part of the debate, not the representation part. There are plenty of women in the cast of SNL currently, but at last glance there were ZERO female writers. Not that there has to be, it's just glaringly obvious that there isn't when you watch the show be very dude-centric, with women only used as wives/girlfriends/sexy chicks in the background. (The exception to this is Kristen Wiig, whose oddball talent sets her apart like a Poehler or a Radner.) And you know the audience is hungry for good female comedy, because the Betty White episode, with all the great ladies of past, present and future used often and well proved that.
And when Tina was head writer, there was a more well-rounded nature to the comedy on the show, and the entire cast (male, female, all races) was used better. I'd argue, actually, that this era of SNL is the most male-centric era ever. The jokes are often vaguely misogynistic, the writing panders to dudes, and the talented women are not given a chance to shine. In SNL's culture, cast members are often at the whims of writers to make sure they get on the show, so if you don't have a writer that gets you and wants to write for you, you're not getting on. And the gender issue is a problem not because SNL has to be gender-equal, it's a problem because it HAS BEEN gender equal or at least better balanced in the past and isn't now. Which to me represents a devolution in the show's comedy, which needs to be resolved. FIN.
0
On Someone Got 'The Daily Show' in My Jezebel and Together They Taste A Little Weird
I am a lady, and a comedian, and someone who thinks that gender equality in comedy is NOT THERE YET AT ALL, and a lover of the Daily Show who also sometimes dislikes a joke here and there because of its seeming lack of female perspective (ditto Colbert; actually, Colbert does it far MORE in my nightly view).
Given all this information, which I include just for the sake of disclosure, I have a question for @michelledean. This question is not a snarky one--oh, toneless internet--I'm asking because I really don't know the answer:
Why should the Daily Show's image be one of gender parity?
And questions/inferences from that in initial one, that I'm grasping towards: Must every show--in particular, every comedy show--reflect the gender universe? The best comedy has a point of view, and maybe the Daily Show's point of view is not exactly yours, or mine, or any woman's but it is a very specific one (highly linked to Jon's, I suspect, which is super smart, lefty liberalish, full--at times--of intelligent rage, sometimes a bit politically incorrect).
I think the Daily Show "wins" or "matters" or what have you on a nightly basis because of this specificity of point of view, which Jon likely cultivates and rewards (as the letter from the female staffers implies). It would make sense to me that he/the bosses would seek POV that mirrors his own, since he has to speak it with conviction, and that's why the jokes are male-oriented. It's also whey they're lefty-oriented, white person-oriented, shit--even American-oriented.
I infer that image in this case is two fold: ladies represented (seeming to be involved), and ladies misrepresented (shitty jokes about women).
The times DS has slipped and done something I consider sexist on air are more or less equal to the number of times I feel there have been jokes with ignorance of other cultures (yes, even my, which is to say, Canadian, culture). I consider this a hazard of a nightly comedy show with a specific POV than a definite sexist problem.
My larger question remains: Why does the Daily Show have to show and promote an image of gender equality more than it does now? I am all for women gaining a greater foothold in comedy--I fight for it daily--but why this battlefield? I'm not sure it's the right one.
SNL...now THAT'S a lady comedy battlefield we SHOULD be fighting on.
0
On Sloane Crosley and Emily Gould: So Much In Common!
Re: Sloane: "She chooses a vacation destination by blindly spinning a globe and going wherever her finger lands (Portugal)..."
Pretty lucky landing! I'm guessing that she aimed her finger high...wouldn't want to accidentally choose Ghana, or the middle of the Atlantic, or something like that.
Also, is that really that remarkable? The writer of the article acts like doing that is like having unprotected sex or something. Geez.
0
On Ronnie James Dio, 1942-2010
Is it overly nerdy of me to point out that Gandolf is not how the LoTR character's name is spelled? It's Gandalf.
D&D is one thing, but I have a tattoo in Elvish. Really, it's a tramp stamp in Elvish.
PS: RIP RJD
0
On On Needing Your Mother, Still
I'm not only calling my mom, but sending this to her to read. Jessica Grose was already a favourite. This cements.
I'm also so pleased that we're all saps at heart.
0
On Nearly 100 People Choose Their #1 Album of 2010
The Suburbs was fucking boring. Why do people like it? Me no understand.