Showing posts with label Oprah Winfrey. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Oprah Winfrey. Show all posts

Wednesday, April 16, 2014

pharrell takes over the world

In case you missed it, Pharrell Williams got something in his eye when he sat down to talk to Oprah the other day. It is pretty amazing how infectious his song "Happy" is. It is definitely striking a chord with people all over the world.

" ... people are putting up their own videos. It was, like, no longer my song."





And if having such a huge smash song wasn't enough, Pharrell is set to join the music competition show The Voice next year as a judge. Sounds like a reason to tune in again. Keep surfing this wave Pharrell, and making folks happy.

Thursday, September 01, 2011

scandalous

In How to Become a Scandal author Laura Kipnis proposes the study of scandal as a new line of social enquiry. So-called bad behavior has always been, but, according to Kipnis, few have studied it. She proceeds to do so, while also gleefully admitting to a love of all things salacious and untoward,
“Please note that I speak as a scandal fan myself. I confess, I love these stories … the detritus of other people's lives, the quirky plot twists and emotional carnage ... Who doesn't love them — as long as you're not the one stuck explaining to your spouse why you won't be going to work the next day and federal marshals are in the den seizing the home computer.”
As much as I applaud her for admitting up-front that she enjoys her subject and is not taking a faux-clinical stance, I’m not sure she should assume that everyone is as scandal-hungry as she. Of the four major scandals she has chosen to focus on in her book, I was only familiar with the last two, which were unavoidable on a nationwide news cast.



Not everyone seeks out scandal, and Kipnis leaves Hollywood out of her sights, which most people would be more prone to equate with the word “scandal” in the first place. I’m not sure that is such a great strategy, as one of her main premises is that people seek out their own punishment. Surely she could have found one example of a starlet on the road to ruin that would have served her narrative and pulled in more readers. As she outlines,
“Someone decides to act out his weird psychodramas and tangled furtive longings on a nationwide scale, playing out his deepest, most lurid impulses, flamboyantly detonating his life — it's like free public theater.”
She has missed an opportunity to give some scandals an extended run.

Kipnis is an compelling writer with a good turn of phrase, and How to Become a Scandal moves along at an entertaining clip. But it seems that once Kipnis brings up these past naughty bits she is loath to really indulge in them, just giving brief, businesslike descriptions. In a book about scandal one would expect more revelation, more dirt. A little more of a water-cooler whisper session vibe.

The four scandals Kipnis chose are:

“The Lovelorn Astronaut”: Jilted astronaut Lisa Nowak drove non-stop, across country, maybe wearing disposable diapers (that's the scandalous part), to enact something — whether it was revenge or humiliation or something more sinister is not really clear, on other woman Colleen Shipman, in her love triangle with fellow astronaut William Ofelein.

“An Unreasonable Judge”: In another love triangle of sorts, New York’s chief justice Sol Wachtler stalks ex-lover Joy Silverman, utilizing threats, disguises, extortion and other bizarre behavior.

“The Whistle-Blower”: Kipnis focuses on Linda Tripp and her betrayal of Monica Lewinsky’s friendship in the Clinton sex scandal.

“An Over-imaginative Writer”: Author James Frey’s memoir and its exposure as part-fiction on Oprah Winfrey’s television show come under scrutiny.

Of the four stories, as scandalous as they must have been (and may still be) to the participants and their families, the first two fall into the rather typical woman scorned or lover spurned category. Kipnis has a lot more interesting meat to deal with in the last two scandals, and I wish she had expanded those sections and maybe found other more nation-shocking scandals, even further back in history if necessary, to compare and contrast. Kipnis writes, "When I hear the word 'scandal' I want shattered lives, downfall, disgrace, and ruin, the rage of the community ..." That doesn’t really fit the bill in either Nowak's or Wachtler’s stories.

Whereas the impeachment of a president after an affair with an intern does cause rage in the community. Politicians are no strangers to extracurricular activity, but Clinton and Lewinsky were part of an elaborate sting operation, which does feed into Kipnis’ theory of people wanting to bring down their fellows. They both acted as if they would not get caught, the president thinking his behavior was beyond reach, and Monica thinking she could trust a girlfriend to keep a confidence. There is definitely self-destruction in both of their deluded viewpoints, as Kipnis writes,
“Scandals aren't just fiascoes other people get themselves embroiled in while the rest of us go innocently about our business … scandalizers screw things up in showy, provocative ways and the rest of us throw stones, luxuriating in the warm glow of imaginary imperviousness that other people's life-destroying stupidities invariably provide.”
But Kipnis doesn’t want to analyze this scandal, so she keeps veering off from main players Clinton and Lewinsky and instead focuses on the phone call taping, wire-wearing, duplicitous Linda Tripp. She posits that Linda Tripp’s appearance wasn’t just a cruel comic sidebar, but the root of her desire to bring down some cheater, any cheater — and she hit the big time when Monica started blabbing about her relationship.

Kipnis quotes George Orwell, "'... by age fifty everyone has the face he deserves,’" and goes on to say,
"Linda Tripp's face...became an instant icon, a defining negative moment in American visual culture. By common consensus, it was ugly ... There was tacit agreement that two decades of feminist language reforms notwithstanding, the word ugly could be applied with impunity and that the country's collective dispute with Tripp's brand of friendship could be expressed through jokes about her face."
Kipnis hints at the possibility that ugly is as ugly does, but what she doesn’t seem to realize as she is writing about Tripp is that her own focus on Tripp’s looks is an essentially female and certainly not feminist, position to take. Late night male talk show hosts may have all called Tripp ugly, but they didn’t obsess about it. Does Kipnis really think that Tripp’s looks caused President Clinton to be impeached? It seems that for Kipnis’s argument the opposing political forces at work were not as formidable as Tripp’s outrageous hairdo and facial expressions.

In her final scandal analysis, Kipnis writes about the author James Frey, whose blockbuster debut, A Million Little Pieces was initially heralded by Oprah Winfrey, and through her Oprah’s Book Club, catapulted to huge success. But when The Smoking Gun began to investigate Frey and determined that his book was less fact than fiction, Oprah came down as hard on him as she had originally praised him, this time demonizing the author and focusing on herself and her betrayal at his hands.

Kipnis quotes George Bernard Shaw, "All autobiographies are lies." and comes down firmly on Frey’s side, stressing that the public is just fooling themselves to take all confessionals and memoirs as verbatim. She begins an interesting argument, but gets sidetracked by Oprah’s weight issues rather than calling the television host on her need to raise and then vilify James Frey. Oprah’s reaction to Frey was the most perfect example of Kipnis’s initial definition of why she believes people love scandal — that we secretly want to screw up and be punished, and also that we need and want to punish others for their screw-ups. But Kipnis seems reluctant to completely point the spotlight on such a powerful person as Oprah, which ultimately dilutes the book and its ending.

Kipnis also avoids any discussion of herself. She quotes Sigmund Freud, who spent his life listening to and interpreting other’s secrets, "No mortal can keep a secret. If his lips are silent, he chatters with his fingertips; betrayal oozes out of him at every pore."

I didn’t necessarily require the author to unburden herself of some past indiscretion, but she also doesn't give a “we’ve all been there” nod to her own vulnerability. How to Become a Scandal rollicks along easily enough on Kipnis’s engaging prose, but it feels a little lost, not sure whether to try to titillate or keep a more respectful tone. And respect is the death of scandal.
Enhanced by Zemanta

Friday, December 10, 2010

babawawa

I'm not sure that I would term anyone Babs featured on her back-to-back specials last night as fascinating, except maybe Betty White, who got short-shrift. And why was Walters's post-script such a blatant plea for sympathy, that "it was so hard for her to do two specials in a row?" No one is forcing you ...

Let's start with Oprah, who at least got an hour, (or much less, considering all the commercial breaks). I liked it when Oprah said that having celebrities on her show was not her favorite thing, as they were mostly there to sell product—a new movie, book, whatever. Of course her sitting down with Barbara Walters was just one big ad for her new television network. Irony ...

I don't watch Oprah, as the television doesn't go on around here during the day during the week. But I've seen plenty of her shows in the past. I love how she literally puts her money—and lots more than I realized—where her mouth is. And I don't just mean the crazy give-aways, although that's part of her obvious desire to give back to her fans. I love her love of books and reading. I think that she is extremely smart and that her new network will be very successful. I also think she is down-to-earth while at the same time being incredibly full of herself. OK, she's a little fascinating.


You can never completely quash gay rumors. For whatever reason, being publicly labeled or identified as gay still seems to be the ultimate gossip. It's a shame that Oprah has to "authenticate" her two closest relationships, but she treated Barbara's intrusive questions honestly and with grace and a little bit of shocked outrage. She's straight, America. Get over it.

What I found even more intrusive than the gay fol-de-rol was Barbara's needling questions about why Oprah didn't become a parent. What was the purpose of those questions, if not to make Oprah feel bad or defensive? Why should we know what her private decisions on that subject might be? She and her partner made a choice, just like they made a choice to not marry. Why, almost eleven years into the 21st century are we still trying to publicly shame people or feign surprise when they don't walk the most familiar paths in our society?

Barbara implied that she was somehow superior to Oprah, as she had a child—but then admitted her daughter was not always happy with a mother who put career first—and then, even more strangely, told O to call her if she ever needed advice in that area, as if she still might choose a path to motherhood. Talk about a lack of self-awareness. I think Oprah will no longer be idolizing Barbara ... I'm a mom, raising my child on my own, but I don't feel the need to compare myself to others by my status. I'm not superior to folks who haven't had a child. Nor am I inferior to families with two parents. I have encountered those outdated attitudes and prejudices. I guess I'm a little shocked that someone with Oprah's bucks and position in society still has to put up with that shit too.



I'm not sure if it was conscious on Walters's part or not, but parenting seemed to be a subtext for many of the brief segments in the second hour—"the most fascinating people of 2010." Uh huh. One of the better interviews was Justin Bieber. Yes, Bieber. Raised by a "very strict" single mom, the kid was completely at ease and charming with Walters. In fact he was the only one who seemed to shake her out of her View persona. He is obviously talented. Whether he becomes more than just this year's sensation remains to be seen, but he looks to have a strong foundation at present.

Betty White could gave easily been devoted the whole hour. Why not talk about her long career in television or why an almost ninety-year old lady struck a chord with so many people this year? In our youth-obsessed culture? No, Barbara just asked her if she was still getting any. Looking for some tips? Sandra Bullock didn't fare much better. Here would have been an opportunity to really talk to a woman who has hit the heights and the depths in a short time-frame. A new mom, going forward on her own. But it was a gloss not even worthy of People or InTouch. Jennifer Lopez will be a judge on American Idol. This is fascinating? Why? No reason was given. Why not interview Simon Cowell about why he had enough? What I took from this—JLo's kids are adorable.

And then there was Sarah Palin. I'm no fan, and certainly no supporter, but it was strange to me to see Barbara suddenly put on her interrogator's hard-hat with Palin, when everyone else got the fluffy approach. Walters's dislike became increasingly evident throughout the interview and that was not exactly fair or even good television.

I still don't get a certain segment of America's fascination with this woman and her brood. The naked ambition of her husband was unpleasant to watch—"Yes, I would like to see her as President," stated while he was perched on the arm of his wife's chair, but he couldn't even take off his stupid baseball cap in front of two ladies and on national television. I can only hope and pray that he is seriously deluded. The only fascinating aspect of the interview was trying to figure out why Palin seemed so pissed off. At everybody, all the time, who might, well, piss her off. I try to keep an open mind, but they both just sounded like rubes. People who don't know how to behave properly in public. And certainly not people I would trust to speak for me or for anyone. Their unprofessionalism is more than a little shocking after all this time in the spotlight that they relentlessly pursue.

The rest of Barbara's victims are hardly worth mentioning. The cast of The Jersey Shore (a little bit of a shark jump here, dontcha think?), Kate Middleton (hardly a scoop), LeBron James (who will likely be far more fascinating next year), Mark Zuckerberg—was there even an interview there? He might be fascinating, but you'd never know from this show. At the end she did pick someone newsworthy in her choice of General Petraeus as her most fascinating person of the year. He was certainly the subject of most substance, but it pains me to think of what he is trying to do in Afghanistan being called "fascinating."

I'm not sure there is a place for these silly sorts of shows anymore. The Internet can send a meme around in seconds, with much more interesting lists and choices made by people from around the world. We all have opinions. Why are Barbara's and her staff's any more fascinating than ours? Go on, meme it out. Your most fascinating people of 2010. And then Barbara won't have to work so hard. Or complain about it.
Enhanced by Zemanta