I love my Sex and the City, don’t get me wrong. I own every season and the first movie on DVD, I have the entire trivial pursuit SATC edition memorized, emulate the fashions (when I can afford it), but there is something that keeps holding me back that makes me refuse to go see the new SATC 2 in theatres. I just can’t bring myself to condone it, especially after the first movie really pushed my buttons.
I can see it relating a lot to what Jenkins addresses in “How Texts Become Real” as far as my attachment and immersion within the show’s storylines and plots go. I have watched every episode to death and feel that I know the ins and the outs of each character so well, that I can fill in gaps or make pretty accurate assumptions to move ahead in the story. I feel that I know how characters will react or would react in given situations and I’m starting to think that maybe it is for that reason alone, that I was not thrilled when I heard there would be a movie made and then downright unhappy when the announcement came along about the sequel.
I have always hated the character of “Big” and when the final season came to a close and Carrie ended up with him AGAIN, I felt relief that the show was at an end because I did not want to see them crash and burn once more, as they always and inevitably do. But of course, the movie comes out and what happens to Carrie and Big? A big, fiery, pile-up-on-the-side-of-the-freeway type crash.He left her waiting at the altar. Obviously I wasn’t shocked that it happened and then even less so when they ended the movie with them getting back together (aahh love). Well, at least that’s over…..wrong. The previews for the sequel that I have seen, show Carrie and the girls running around India and somewhere/ somehow along the line, Carrie is now ringless and running into former flames. Gee, wonder where this plot will go.

Stressin' Like a Bridezilla

As each quarter (or semester) comes to a close, I inevitably reach that peak of ultimate stress where it seems as though school is never going to end, members of group projects are driving me up a wall, I’ll never get a job, and my constant yet unattainable ideals of coursework perfection begin to appear as nothing more than some blue-sky idea, a mere fantasy that once could have been a reality. If only, if only….if only I hadn’t procrastinated. Work habits aside, I tend to bottle up this stress when in public but have lately noticed an interesting trend in my TV viewing habits as the anxiety levels skyrocket.

Case in point: I found myself over Memorial Day weekend watching a day-long marathon of Bridezilla (yes, feel bad for my boyfriend who was forced to endure this). This show is a horrible depiction of what someone’s “happiest day of my life!” moment looks like. It unleashes the uglies, the stresses, and the neuroses of each bride-to-be, almost always resulting in some sort of dramatic meltdown or demotion of members within the wedding party *gasp*. It’s over the top no doubt. It’s unnecessarily dramatic, catty, and usually pretty tacky, BUT I feel so much BETTER after watching it! I find that watching someone on screen who is having the emotional outburst brought on by stress that I so often wish I could have during these times, is a cathartic experience that in some ways allows me to purge my own personal frustrations just by watching these monsters-in-white act out.

I’d never really been aware until now of how my media habits really do seem to reflect my mood or present circumstances but by analyzing it now, I could definitely correspond to someone the mood I’m in just by listing a TV show or Movie that I would be watching at that moment.

So here’s hoping to tomorrow being more of a Pixar type day!

The Language of Subjectivity

My mom and I are very close. In fact, my brothers claim from time to time that she and I have our own secret language only we can understand that excludes all verbal utterances whatsoever and relies solely on the fact that her and I tend to see the world through the same scope or lens. We can spend an afternoon of shopping and without saying a word, I can tell; which clothes she likes, doesn’t like, LIKES but doesn’t think she could pull off, items that she thinks are overpriced (but still wants), if a salesperson rubs her the wrong way and she wants me to step in and distract, if she’s tired, if she spots a person in a weird outfit, and I know that face that accompanies her famous line that always annoys me so much….”Katie, you could just MAKE that yourself!”.
For all this connection between us and similarities with how we view, judge, or interpret places and events in our lives, I am sometimes baffled by how differently we often interpret the media. I never really thought about this until we began discussing the idea of subjectivity in class and how everyone views things differently based on what they’ve experienced in their own lives and certain things that interpellate me or that are obvious to MY eye, may go unnoticed by others because they haven’t had the same experiences.
This past year I took on the task of introducing myself to the show Gossip Girl and proceeded to watch every season. I was hooked and I was sure that it was a show my mom would enjoy as well. I waited until she was a good chunk of the way through the first season to ask her if she had noticed anything in particular about the character of Blair….to me there was a glaring issue that I was sure my mom would also pick up on and I was surprised when she didn’t see it too. There is something about Blair, something that is never addressed blatantly on the show but is every now and then alluded to in a very subtle way. I don’t know if most people would even pick up on it but I see this issue and I know it, I know it right away because I have lived it and I can see the signs from a mile. I fill in the blanks differently than someone who has not dealt with the same disorders and I am time and again amazed at some of the things I see or pick up on that others do not. There are however, the moments or ideas that go unnoticed by me that my mom, with the subjectivity of a divorcee, will interpret in a way that never crossed my mind. I think the fact that she utterly cannot STAND Titanic speaks for itself (like literally, banned from the house). So I find it interesting that two people, who can almost read each other’s minds, can’t read the same storyline.

The Office, Bananas, B-A-N-A-N-A-S!

The Office never ceases to entertain me with its ingenuity and humor that ranges from the wacky, to the ever-so-subtle. Although the majority of the storylines seem to revolve around the fab four (Michael, Jim, Pam, Dwight), the supporting cast also provides an extensive amount of laughs and prove to be equally as talented as the main stars. However, I noticed a certain trend with these, “Second Bananas”…..(my new favorite phrase, thanks Dr. Kessler). Jim and Pam have always had their struggles with their love life whether it was them actually getting together, getting married, being pregnant before the marriage, or now as they welcome a baby into their life and adjust to being working parents. Somehow everything works out for them, they get through it, they fall deeper in love, and they grow. Michael and Dwight, well, I don’t even really know what to say about their debacles and dilemmas but they always seems to be based on pure idiocy or some weird love connection (whether it’s a girl or Dwight’s mancrush on Michael) but again, everything always seems to work out just peachy.
Now, look at the rest of the characters; you have Stanley, who mostly gets the laughs as a result of Michael making jokes or comments on him being black and lazy, but then there was the whole issue of him cheating on his wife. That’s a serious issue, yet it never really develops or develops him as a character. Then you have Meredith the alcoholic, Creed the psychopath, Ryan the ex-convict/drug addict, and Oscar who was outed at work by Michael for being gay and was given three months leave by the company for fear of being sued. All of these characters (and some of the others I didn’t even get to) have serious issues and yet, they never progress or change the person, these people are left stagnate as the fab four have clearly developed different facets and levels of depth over the seasons. It’s odd.
I love the show so I hate to analyze it….BUT, sometimes I wonder if they bring these issues to the show and let the “Second Bananas” deal with them so that it can be brought up, laughed at, and then pushed back into the corner for another season. Is this good that the issues are given attention, or ultimately damaging when portrayed in such a comic light?

X-Tina, Is That You?

I very rarely tune in to VH1 or MTV for music videos anymore because they seem so irrelevant, BUT on a whim the other morning I just happened upon Christina Aguilera's new music video entitled, "Not Myself Tonight". To begin with, I could barely tell the difference between Miss (or is it Mrs. now?) X-Tina and that of Lady GaGa and the mid-nineties version of Madonna...I remember having such an affinity for Aguilera because of her obvious talent but also because of her distinctive style that differentiated her from everyone else (Britney Spears). Apparently this distinctiveness is no more.

The generic-ness aside, I noticed a lot of different things within this video that were relating exactly to what we have been studying during class in relation to scopiophilia and sadistic voyeurism. The music video touches more than once or twice on the notion of sadism and masochism and also her portrayals of sexuality in a way that appeals strongly still to the heterosexual viewers all the while showing interactions between her and that of the same (and still opposite) sex. Men are turned on an intrigued by her sexual escapades with other women in the video and have the opportunity to narcissistically envision themselves in the male’s position as she sensually interacts with them as well.

I understand the appeal this may bring to viewers but at the same time, I have always been disappointed in how Aguilera distracts from her pure talent by using over-the-top sexual antics to get noticed. Her “Dirty” video back in the day certainly garnered attention for its overtly sexual tone, but I wonder sometimes about how her children will feel as they grow up and see their mother in these necessarily-censored videos. Why is it that someone with so much talent feels that they need to “hyper-sex” their image to get noticed when it has been clear over the years that their talent speaks for itself?

Oronic Advertising Capaign

I am a serious stickler for proper spelling, grammar, the works, and even though I may misstep on occasion or fail to remember when it's appropriate to use the term further as opposed to farther, or lie as to lay....I still have some common sense as to what sounds right and what sounds, well, god awful. Case in point; McDonald's new advertising campaign that features common sayings missing the letter (and symbol of the company) "M", in every tag line. Apparently this is supposed to convey to me that I need to put the "M" back in my mornings.....blegh (that is the typed interpretation of me gagging).
My walk down Dearborn every morning to class is bombarded by these ads and begins to read as an ongoing dialogue of someone who clearly did not participate in their school's spelling bee. It annoys me based on elementary levels of spelling but also because the concept doesn't make sense to me. I mean, do I really want to associate my "Orning Gru blings" or "Orning Co ute" with McDonalds? No, I don't. It's annoying and looks like vandalism. To express an aspect of my annoyance to you, please try and survive the next paragraph.

Dear cDonald's-

Your new advertising ca paign is i possibly annoying and akes y orning co ute that uch ore unbearable. I ust say that your creativity is uber la e and should be ter inated. uch appreciation in advance for your cancellation of this atte pt,

- iss Katie Lynn Stewart

Not MY drama

After months upon months of eagerly anticipating The Hills final season premiere, it has come and as always, I am so disappointed in myself for how excited I get about it. It is a horrible horrible show and continues to progressively sink lower with its morals every season (if it had any to begin with), yet somehow I can't stop watching and can't stop caring. I grew up glued to Laguna Beach from its very beginnings and felt a weird sort of connection with these kids that I had absolutely nothing in common with except for the fact that I was of the same age (LC's class). This one detail forged a strange sense of belonging as I watched them deal with the high school drama, walk at their graduations, and start new lives in new cities (spinoffs galore). I however, was homeschooled, had only the drama of the skating world (people over 40), and still have yet to walk at a graduation of any sort. I experienced through them, the things I thought I was missing out on by not being a typical teenager.
Characters came and went as the show basically moved to the Hills (I don't think anyone cared about season 3 of Laguna Beach with the annoying little siblings left behind) and the world watched as the high school drama was blown up into tabloid fodder and shocking Enewsworthy scandal. I still watched. Hey, it wasn't MY drama and watching it reminded me how grateful I was that it WASN'T. This season though, the show just makes me sad. Heidi looks like Spencer's Frankenstein creation (it's frightening), Kristin is accused of being a crackhead, Brody is as dumb as ever, and even Lo, who I used to love because she tried to stay slightly in the background, looks like she's getting a kick out of the drama and even creating it intentionally. It still isn't my drama but this stuff, in my opinion, shouldn't be ANYONE'S drama. I know that it's supposed to be "reality" tv and that most people argue that it's fake and staged, but real or not, I think it's sad that these people willingingly make their lives resemble that of a circus sideshow.

I...I really, I just don't know.

As I walked back to my apartment from my always traumatic experience of grocery shopping at Jewel, I immediately took note of this ginormous billboard advertisement featured prominently on the side of a building directly off the red line stop at Grand and State. This picture obviously does not do the ad justice (thanks iPhone), so for clarification purposes; it is a picture of a bottle of POM's pomegranate juice with a noose around the "neck" of it featuring the slogan, "Cheat death". I had to take a moment to process this advertisement. Literally, I stopped in the middle of the sidewalk (and consequently took a picture with my phone). I was interpellated by it but it bothered me for two days (plus) as to WHY I was so affected by this image. So I did as I always tend to do whenever attempting to work through any psychologically rooted dilemma...I made a checklist.
-I wasn't shocked by the image. Check that off the list.
-I wasn't outright offended. Check.
-I wasn't opposed to its placement. Check.

The list went on and on...until that always welcomed, "aha" moment finally appeared. I can see WHY people would be offended and I can see HOW people might be shocked by its audacity, but for me, it's just a matter of innaccurate and dumb advertising aimed only at gaining attention. You probably can't see it, but at the bottom of the ad it states, "The Antioxidant Superpower". This ad was intended to highlight the potential health benefits of drinking this POM juice, ultimately being able to "cheat death" by staying physically fit. Well, a noose to me represents two different reasons for death (i'm pretty sure i'm not alone in this): 1.) Self-infliction
2.) Racial discrimination

So POM, unless you're trying to tell me through your advertising that you can either cure me of my mental illness or rid the world of discrimination based on ethnicity, nix the ad. I have never heard of a "Superhero" that saves the world from depression or discrimination so it just doesn't make sense and it creates confusion around real issues that deserve real consideration.

Look Who's Talking Finances

Talking babies? Ok, I’ll admit that this isn’t the most novel concept the world of media has yet to explore, but what it IS, is an ingenious branding strategy that employs the face of an infant as the voice of a not so child-friendly commodity. I adore the sarcasm of these commercials and the babies are so G-darn cute, that I can’t help but shush everyone around me when one of these commercials pops up on the TV. But the clever wit and “aww” inducing factors aside, these ads have a powerful effect on their viewers yet remain subtle in their delivery.

First off, we all know that the country’s economy is far from peachy keen and that there are a lot of people out there who are extremely worried and in many cases, downright scared about their financial statuses. We don’t necessarily LIKE talking about money, 401(k)s, investments, stocks, blah blah blah…..it can be scary and overwhelming and things that make us uneasy aren’t typically what we want to address. Yet, here is this smartass baby on the TV telling us to stop being such a “Shankapotamus” and get ourselves on ETrade. It’s funny. I know you laughed too. It sheds a humorous light on the dark situation and disarms us, allowing us to be more receptive to trying their service.

Secondly, it forces us (even if only subconsciously) to take a step back and analyze the accuracy of a Marxist vision of the world. This is an infant on the TV controlling the money, not some fat cat or power suit sitting at the control panel of our fate laughing maniacally. Even further, this baby is demonstrating that by using their service, you are no longer just an irrelevant piece of the nation’s “superstructure” or a product of someone else’s base. You yourself are put in the power seat and are given the means to control your own base.

So ETrade, bring on the Milk-a-holics (Milk-a-whaa?) and the babies that mistake the pilot’s voice for that of their father’s (Daaad?!), because I have my DVR geared up and ready to go.

Gee, thanks TLC! How would I have ever gotten dressed without you?

As a guest on TLC's What Not to Wear, Rita Mitchell claimed that she liked to dress in accordance with "how she feels". More power to ya Rita because so do I. Sometimes if the mood strikes me and I feel it necessary to satisy the strange urgings of my inner fashionista, heck, i'll wear a cocktail dress and heels to class if I think it'll make me feel comfortable and more centered that day. Yes, people may look at me weird and one can't easily ignore that stinging laser beam stare of judgement but hey, i'm not judging you because you chose to wear sweatpants and UGGs to class....its all about what makes someone happy.

So why is it that Rita Mitchell, a seemingly well-adjusted, working professional with a quirky style and "accepting" husband was nominated for this pointless show? The worst part (in my opinion), was that it was her husband that nominated her to appear on this program and ultimately entailed her being ridiculed for an hour on everything pertaining to her wardrobe, hair, body, makeup, and sadly, her dance moves (relevant? I think not) all so that, at the urgings of her husband once again, she could "look more feminine". Why is a tv program allowed to tell us how we should dress and more importantly, why do we listen to them? I mean yes, Rita's extensive selection of fleece isn't exactly what I would pick as most flattering but then again, the female host of the show's clown-like blush and botox-happy look isn't exactly what I would consider attractive (not to mention her co-host's plaid astro-turf blazer). I personally wouldn't want her telling me what to do with my face.

If a person is happy and surrounded by people that truly appreciate them for who they are as a human being, why would a show like this even be relevant? Media today focuses far too much on telling us how we're supposed to look, act, dress on the outside, so much in fact that the public as a whole is forgetting that it is more important to be evaluating how we feel and how comfortable we are with ourselves on the inside.