Friday, October 3, 2014

The Problem With "Gone Girl" Is That There's No "Cool Girl"

David Fincher’s film, based on Gillian Flynn’s novel, doesn’t so much bring the “Cool Girl” polemic to the masses as dilute its scathing argument. Warning: This post contains MAJOR SPOILERS if you have not read or seen Gone Girl .



Rosamund Pike as Amy Dunne and Ben Affleck as Nick Dunne in Gone Girl


Merrick Morton / Twentieth Century Fox and Regency Enterprises


I spent the first hour of David Fincher's Gone Girl watching Rosamund Pike's performance as Amy Dunne very, very closely. I've admired Pike's work ever since her turn as the amiable eldest Bennet sister in the 2005 version of Pride and Prejudice. But I also knew that she could play icy: Just looking at her in the mostly forgotten 2007 movie Fracture, playing alongside The Gos and Anthony Hopkins, you can see that this doe-eyed girl was capable of menace. Not like Helena Bonham Carter-style menace, but Ice Queen, passive-aggressive, manipulative-bitch-with-a-perfect-manicure-style menace.


That's the sort of menace you need to pull off the Amy in the second half of the movie. The Amy who's not evil so much as cunning and fiercely unsentimental. The Amy who speaks truth to the lies of performance set up in Part 1 — the performance of the "Cool Girl."


Gillian Flynn's novel Gone Girl became a publishing phenomenon for its deft plotting, riptide of a narrative, and complex net of twists. But lots of books have good, addictive mysteries at their core. What's set Gone Girl apart, then, is the incredibly culturally resonate trope of the "Cool Girl." When the narrative switches to Amy's perspective in Part 2, the character offers a trenchant commentary on the type of femininity she had been performing — and with which her husband, Nick, had fallen in love — in the first half of the book:



Men always say that as the defining compliment, don't they? She's a cool girl. Being the Cool Girl means I am a hot, brilliant, funny woman who adores football, poker, dirty jokes, and burping, who plays video games, drinks cheap beer, loves threesomes and anal sex, and jams hot dogs and hamburgers into her mouth like she's hosting the world's biggest culinary gang bang while somehow maintaining a size 2, because Cool Girls are above all hot. Hot and understanding. Cool Girls never get angry; they only smile in a chagrined, loving manner and let their men do whatever they want. Go ahead, shit on me, I don't mind, I'm the Cool Girl.


Men actually think this girl exists. Maybe they're fooled because so many women are willing to pretend to be this girl. For a long time Cool Girl offended me. I used to see men — friends, coworkers, strangers — giddy over these awful pretender women, and I'd want to sit these men down and calmly say: You are not dating a woman, you are dating a woman who has watched too many movies written by socially awkward men who'd like to believe that this kind of woman exists and might kiss them. I'd want to grab the poor guy by his lapels or messenger bag and say: The bitch doesn't really love chili dogs that much — no one loves chili dogs that much! And the Cool Girls are even more pathetic: They're not even pretending to be the woman they want to be, they're pretending to be the woman a man wants them to be. Oh, and if you're not a Cool Girl, I beg you not to believe that your man doesn't want the Cool Girl. It may be a slightly different version — maybe he's a vegetarian, so Cool Girl loves seitan and is great with dogs; or maybe he's a hipster artist, so Cool Girl is a tattooed, bespectacled nerd who loves comics. There are variations to the window dressing, but believe me, he wants Cool Girl, who is basically the girl who likes every fucking thing he likes and doesn't ever complain.



I quote the passage at length because it's just so incredibly on point — and reflective of a certain mode of femininity that our current cultural moment valorizes and celebrates. (See especially: the star image of reigning starlet Jennifer Lawrence). And Flynn, who also adapted the screenplay, recognized its importance, so much so that it's reproduced, almost verbatim, in voiceover as the "Gone" Amy drives toward her new life. As the voiceover points to the various iterations of the Cool Girl — the one that matches the vegetarian, or the hipster artist — the camera cuts to other cars on the road, filled with Cool Girls matching that description.


I'd been waiting to see how Flynn and Fincher handled the evocation of the Cool Girl, and the scene— the one time in the film that the camera focuses on someone outside of the narrative — definitely felt like a disruptive turning point, and not just because Amy's voice is inflected with the menace and misogyny that would flower for the remaining 90 minutes of the film. It feels disruptive because the Cool Girl that Amy is describing — and that the character Amy portrays so convincingly in the first half of the book — doesn't match the script's characterization of her. Put differently, the First-Half Film Amy isn't, well, cool.



Affleck and Pike in Gone Girl


Merrick Morton / Twentieth Century Fox and Regency Enterprises


She's smart, of course, and beautiful and maybe even likable, but the only time you see a hint of the Cool Girl charisma is during her and Nick's "meet-cute" at a friend's party. There, she comes off as a match to Nick's quick-talking seduction; a tit to his tat, a well-timed raised eyebrow to his well-honed yet seemingly unpracticed pickup line. Her hair is up in a thoughtless ponytail, tendrils haphazardly hanging down in that sexy way that seems totally without artifice. It's the first time we meet Amy, and it sets the tone for the Cool Girl to come.


Only that Amy goes away, replaced by an Amy that's almost annoyingly passive-aggressive (the tone as she "narrates" Amazing Amy at the wedding party) or blandly supportive (her we'll-make-it-through-this recession speech). That's not Cool; that's just an amalgam of various female characters from the last 10 years of bad rom-coms and harping wives in Judd Apatow movies.


Amy needs to be Cool. She needs to be that unbelievable mix of charisma and chill, and to give zero fucks and be all the hotter for it. It's Kate (Olivia Wilde) in Drinking Buddies meets Jamie (Mila Kunis) in Friends With Benefits to the every-public-appearance-of-Jennifer Lawrence power. And while First-Half Amy might have that body and that beauty, she doesn't have that ineffable something, that irresistible gravity. That indelible sense of Cool Girl.


Now, I get that the Cool Girl is a performance. She's a projection of the impossible contradiction of contemporary femininity, which Flynn, ventriloquizing through Amy, describes with such skill in the second half of the book. But in order for us to see Amy's skill and insight — the clear-eyed way that she saw what was expected of her and performed it, immaculately — she has to actually be Cool. She can't just be beautiful, or fairly likable. She has to be transcendent — and then, when the twist turns, and she becomes her "real" self, it illuminates the Cool Girl not as a natural state, but a performance calculated to attract, please, and sate a man's desires.


Without that contrast — and, by extension, the understanding that Amy was motivated by her frustration with the impossible expectations of "perfect" femininity — Amy comes off as a one-dimensional sociopath. The woman with the box cutter and the bloody body of a man who loved her. A caricature. A piece of high camp. A "crazy fucking bitch." And so, the sublimated ideological critique of the book disappears, replaced by the pat narrative logic of the film noir, with a fumbling, rather stupid, yet ultimately victimized male at its core.


Don't get me wrong: Amy is a femme fatale. But the best noirs always showed that the women who provided their narrative combustion weren't born evil; society, and the way it forced women to maneuver within it, made them that way.


The Amy of Fincher's Gone Girl isn't Cool, or complicated, or sympathetic. She's the "crazy fucking bitch" that Nick calls her, yet another example for the eternal argument for women's unhingeability and hysteria.


And the film's avoidance of an engaged interrogation of Cool Girl ideal is what makes it just as hollow, dismissible, and superficial as the version of Amy that inhabits it. It's the major failing of the movie — and what downgrades a transgressive meditation on the politics of gender performance into a run-of-the-mill, if entertaining, thriller.




View Entire List ›


Lena Dunham Will Promote EMILY's List Candidates On Her Book Tour

The “Girls” star wanted to use the timing of her book tour to help with Democratic get-out-the-vote efforts.



Courtesy of EMILY's List


WASHINGTON — "Girls" star Lena Dunham will be using her book tour in part to promote candidates endorsed by EMILY's List, BuzzFeed News has learned.


EMILY's List — a group that works for female Democratic candidates supportive of abortion rights — has partnered with Dunham for the tour of her book, Not that Kind of Girl.


Dunham had reached out to EMILY's List prior to her book tour, aides familiar with the conversations said, and wanted to use the tour to help the group with get-out-the-vote efforts for Democrats in the midterms. The group has provided her with the number of women voters who drop-off in a midterm elections specific to whichever area she is on the tour, and she'll use them the numbers when encouraging the audience to vote in November. They also gave her names and details of candidates to talk about on the tour.


She'll also promote the group on her Instagram and Twitter accounts.


According to New York Magazine Dunham told a New York audience that she viewed both writing and voting as "a way to get empowered."


"So let's vote and write our way to a better future," she said.


In 2012, Dunham cut an ad for the Obama campaign comparing the first time voting to losing one's virginity.


23 Incredible Quotes From Your Favorite Books That Hit The Big Screen

According to Amazon Kindle, these are the most highlighted passages from your favorite books turned movies.


The Fault in Our Stars


The Fault in Our Stars


20th Century Fox / Via amazon.com


Divergent


Divergent


Lionsgate / Via amazon.com


Insurgent


Insurgent


Lionsgate / Via amazon.com


Allegiant


Allegiant


Lionsgate / Via amazon.com




View Entire List ›


Which “Harry Potter” Witch Should You Dress Up As For Halloween?

Which witch are you?



Warner Bros.


Thursday, October 2, 2014

Why We Need To Fight Online Trolls, Not Just Ignore Them

People say to “just ignore” men like Ed Champion who attack women like me on the internet. Why that’s not OK.



Jenny Chang / BuzzFeed


"Develop a thicker skin." It's a phrase I've heard a lot over the years (as recently as a few days ago), and for a long time I took it to heart and hoped I would develop the kind of calluses that these people were talking about. I'm a woman who's had an internet presence for a little more than a decade now. Which means that for the last 10 years I've been told that I'm a stupid cunt and that I should do the world a favor and kill myself fairly often, mostly by anonymous strangers. If you're shocked, you're likely not a woman. Or maybe you're not online much, or you've never had a controversial opinion in your life; maybe your "corgis eating ice cream cones" Pinterest board is the extent of your ventures into social media, and if so, god bless. Personally, I've come to expect online attacks and threats; I've dealt with them for so long that they hardly register. I accept them in the same way that I've come to accept that smelling piss and garbage is an inescapable part of living in New York, which I also do.


But as it keeps happening, I start to wonder whether the problem is really mine.


This summer, the week that my first novel, Friendship, was being published, a longtime "lit blogger" named Ed Champion published an 11,000-word attack that crossed every kind of line, including imagery of sexualized violence, several photographs of me, and a reference to my "slimy passage."


I was about to embark on a book tour, and concerned friends and coworkers in publishing quickly informed me that Champion had a reputation for showing up at authors' events and creating disturbances. I tweeted about how upset I was, but this just seemed to fan the flames, and once I realized what was happening, I stopped. At a time when I'd had most cause to hope that the conversation about me might finally shift to my writing itself, it was instead, once again, about my internet presence, me as "lightning rod" for criticism and the question of whether or not I deserved or even courted that kind of attention. Being silent didn't make me feel better, though; I lasted about a day off Twitter, then started participating in the conversation again.


Many people, it turned out, had read those 11,000 words and didn't understand what the fuss was. This was "just a book review." A very bad review, but still. I should learn to take criticism more gracefully. I should develop a thicker skin.



Or better yet: just ignore it! (As Salon senior writer Laura Miller advised the other day.) This is, of course, what you're supposed to do with actual book reviews. Authors are supposed to say "Oh, I don't read reviews" in the same tone of voice that people use to describe having given up TV or refined carbohydrates. But I always read reviews; I can't help it, and I don't feel guilty about it, either. I've never seen writing as something that takes place in a hermetic aerie far above the world; I like to have a conversation about my own writing and other people's, and most of that conversation takes place online. I'm interested in general in how people write about books, and of course I'm even more interested when those books are mine.


And one thing I've noticed, reading reviews not just of my own books but of the books I sell via Emily Books, is that a lot of female authors are subject to the same treatment I've gotten. These authors are reviewed personally alongside their books, in a way that rarely happens to men. The author Jennifer Weiner tweeted several examples the other day, including "reviews" of herself, Fifty Shades of Grey author E.L. James, and one of my own book: In the New York Times, lead book critic Michiko Kakutani took three paragraphs even to get around to mentioning my book, and on the way there, she quoted — somewhat extensively! — from anonymous comments left on a 2010 essay that I wrote. In a review of, supposedly, my novel.


In a climate where no one — no editor, no reader, no publicist — steps in and says to the lead book critic of the New York Times, "Wait a minute, isn't that enormously and obviously fucked up?" it's not surprising that people can't tell the difference between Champion's unhinged ramblings and a "book review." I'm offended on my own behalf, of course. (Duh!) But I'm also worried about girls and women reading this kind of thing and mistaking it for a fixed condition of a literary culture they're trying to find a place in.


Even if Champion's rant had been a "book review," which it wasn't, it's not my job to ignore it. I'd go so far as to say that the people who tell women to "just ignore" gendered criticism, bullying, and harassment — which I'm fine with lumping together, because they're all components of a system that works together to repress women's work — are asking women to collaborate in their own silencing. I'm not going to ignore it; I'm not even going to try. If "feeding the trolls" provokes or encourages them in the short term, I don't really give a fuck. In the long term, with sustained resistance, it's the only way to create the impression that something has to change. If there's anything the last 10 years have taught me, it's that telling the truth isn't always fun, but it's the only way to change anything.




View Entire List ›


Tao Lin Responds To Abuse Allegations On Facebook

Last week, E.R. Kennedy, also known as Ellen Kennedy, took to Twitter to accuse the author Tao Lin of plagiarism and said that he was abusive when Kennedy dated him in 2005, when she was 16. Lin responded to the allegations in emails and on Facebook.



Flickr: taolin / Via en.wikipedia.org


In emails to BuzzFeed news and a Facebook post that appears to have since been deleted, the author Tao Lin responded to accusations that he committed statutory rape when he was in a relationship with a 16-year-old in 2005.


E.R. Kennedy, also known as Ellen Kennedy, posted a 20-tweet-long account of their relationship when Kennedy was 16 and Lin was 22.


In the tweets, Kennedy claims that Lin was physically and emotionally abusive. Kennedy used the hashtag #TaoLinIsARapist. Kennedy also says Lin plagiarized her work.


"Tao Lin literally copied and pasted my emails into his 'novel'. He took credit for my words, for my painful memories, for my story," Kennedy tweeted.


The tweets were collected and posted on Tumblr, where they went viral.


In an email exchange with BuzzFeed News on Wednesday, Lin acknowledged a relationship with Kennedy but said it wasn't statutory rape, citing Pennsylvania's age of consent.


"In the relationship, in 2006, I was, I know, a shitty person (but I only had consensual sex with someone who, in PA, was not a minor), which I documented in the novel Richard Yates," Lin said in an email.


Lin said that Kennedy read the novel Richard Yates — which Lin said details a fictionalized version of their relationship — and Kennedy approved of it being published.


"I, and my publisher, had made sure she was okay with it, and that it was fictionalized sufficiently," Lin said.


Users began questioning Lin about the allegations in the comments of a post on his Facebook and he responded with a statement in a post set to friends-only privacy settings:



Yes, I had consensual sex with Ellen in her parents' house in Pennsylvania in her parents' bed, as she tweeted, when I was 22 and she was 16. No, that is not statutory rape, let alone rape. So, no, I did not rape and steal from her. We were in a relationship that had problems. About using her emails for my book: I talked to her about it during and after the writing of "Richard Yates" (book she is referencing) from 2006-2008 and she read it something like a year before it was released in 2010. I made sure (and my publisher made sure I made sure) she was okay with what I was writing about, and I said I wouldn't write anything she didn't want me to write about. (She has also written about our experiences, and I have often felt very close to her in our views on life/fiction.) We continued communicating regularly from the time I met her in 2006 to 2014, though our romantic relationship (which I think I valued more than anything else at the time) ended sometime in 2007. I published her poetry book, we co-wrote things together, talked as friends in emails. A few months ago Muumuu House funded her trip to a poetry reading in Boston, and before that we emailed about the eBook edition of her book, for examples of things we email about. Sometimes she has "lashed out" against me, then afterwards apologized saying she didn't remember lashing out. I understand this behavior from someone who has experienced my shitty (but not, in terms of Ellen, illegal—shoplifting batteries is illegal, I know) behavior as a shitty person in a relationship. I try to be open about my negatives as a person, and examined these negatives for example in "Richard Yates" and in my other writing. Because Ellen (now, but not in the past) seems very affected by the fact that I wrote about our experience (and to be in need financially, and to suspect I am profiting off her, based on her tweets), I offered her (in an email today) all the royalties to RY, or to never mention it and ask Melville House to stop printing/selling it if that's possible at all, saying I care more about her, a person, than a book. I hoped not to involve everyone reading this in this, and to not reveal all this stuff to strangers in this context (partly because I think it's unproductive for everyone involved and the world generally), but since you asked, and reporters have emailed me about it, and it seems like it's going to be written about and create a massive shitstorm forever linking me with the term "rapist" probably in the minds of most people who skim any articles about this or have seen or heard about that Tumblr post, I felt it was appropriate to type this paragraph here.



Kennedy did not immediately respond to requests for comment. "I just needed to get some things of my chest leave the accusations to me this will be solved in due time," Kennedy tweeted on Thursday.


Melville House, the publisher of Richard Yates, did not immediately respond to requests for comment on the allegations that Lin used Kennedy's writing without permission.


Believe in yourself

Believe in yourself. Luck is nothing but Labour Under Correct Knowledge.

Tuesday, September 16, 2014

Life

VHealthy citizens are the greatest asset any country can have.Never take today for granted, tomorrow might never come if Your First wealth is not health.

"Insaan,
Ghar badalata hai ....
Libaas badalata hai .....
Rishte badalata hai ...
Dost badalata hai ....

Phir bhi pareshaan kyon rehta hai .... Kyon ki wo khud ko nahi badalta " ....

isiliye to Mirza Galib ne kaha tha:"

"Umar bhar Galib yahi Bhool Karta raha, Dhool Chehre pe thi, aur Aina saaf karta  raha"..

Saturday, September 13, 2014

Time for you

कल्पना कीजिय⏰े

एक बैंक अकाउंट की

जिसमे रोज सुबह

आपके लिए कोई

86,400 रुपये

जमा कर देता है ।

लेकिन शर्त ये है की

इस अकाउंट का बैलेंस

कैरी फॉरवर्ड नहीं होगा,

यानि दिन के अंत में

बचे पैसे आपके लिए

अगले दिन उपलब्ध नहीं रहेंगे ।

और

हर शाम इस अकाउंट में

बचे हुए पैसे आपसे

वापस ले लिए जाते हैं।

ऐसे सिचुएशन में

आप क्या करेंगे ?

जाहिर है आप

एक-एक पैसा निकल लेंगे।

है ना ?

हम सब के पास

एक ऐसा ही बैंक है,

इस बैंक का नाम है

" समय".

हर सुबह समय हमको

86,400 सेकण्ड्स देता है।

और हर रात्रि ये

उन सारे बचे हुए सेकण्ड्स

जिनको आपने

किसी बहतरीन मकसद के लिए

इस्तेमाल नहीं किया है,

हमसे छीन लेती है।

ये कुछ भी बकाया समय

आगे नहीं ले जाती है।

हर सुबह आपके लिए

एक नया अकाउंट खुलता है,

और

अगर आप हर दिन के

जमा किये गए सेकण्ड्स को

ठीक से इस्तेमाल करने में

असफल होते हैं

तो ये हमेशा के लिए

आपसे छीन लिया जाता है।

अब निर्णय आपको करना है

की दिए गए 86,400 सेकण्ड्स

का आप उपयोग करना चाहते हैं

या फिर

इन्हें गंवाना चाहते हैं,

क्यूंकि एक बार खोने पर

ये समय

आपको कभी वापस नहीं मिलेगा।

आप हर दिन

दिए गए 86,400 सेकण्ड्स का

बेहतरीन इस्तेमाल

कैसे करना चाहेंगे??

एक प्यारी सी कविता

वक़्त पर ...

" वक़्त नहीं "

हर ख़ुशी है लोंगों के दामन में ,

पर एक हंसी के लिये वक़्त नहीं .

दिन रात दौड़ती दुनिया में ,

ज़िन्दगी के लिये ही वक़्त नहीं .

सारे रिश्तों को तो हम मार चुके,

अब उन्हें दफ़नाने का भी वक़्त नहीं ..

सारे नाम मोबाइल में हैं ,

पर दोस्ती के लिये वक़्त नहीं .

गैरों की क्या बात करें ,

जब अपनों के लिये ही वक़्त नहीं .

आखों में है नींद भरी ,

पर सोने का वक़्त नहीं .

दिल है ग़मो से भरा हुआ ,

पर रोने का भी वक़्त नहीं .

पैसों की दौड़ में ऐसे दौड़े,

कि थकने का भी वक़्त नहीं .

पराये एहसानों की क्या कद्र करें ,

जब अपने सपनों के लिये ही वक़्त नहीं

तू ही बता ऐ ज़िन्दगी ,

इस ज़िन्दगी का क्या होगा,

कि हर पल मरने वालों को ,

जीने के लिये भी वक़्त नहीं ..

HAVE A MEANINGFUL LIFE...

           बिंदास मुस्कुराओ क्या ग़म हे,..
         ज़िन्दगी में टेंशन किसको कम हे..
          अच्छा या बुरा तो केवल भ्रम हे..
   जिन्दगी का नाम ही कभी ख़ुशी कभी गम हैं।

LOVELY MSG…

lovely msg..!!!!

"Insaan,
Ghar badalata hai ....
Libaas badalata hai .....
Rishte badalata hai ...
Dost badalata hai ....

Phir bhi pareshaan kyon rehta hai .... Kyon ki wo khud ko nahi badalta " ....

isiliye to Mirza Galib ne kaha tha:"

"Umar bhar Galib yahi Bhool Karta raha, Dhool Chehre pe thi, aur Aina saaf karta  raha"..