Skip to main content

Things I Hated This Summer

(5) Roxane Gay's piece in the NY Times. I haven't read a good deal of Gay's writing, though what I have seen has sometimes seemed facile and lazy. (I'm thinking of her puff piece about Nicki Minaj, in the NYT: https://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/16/t-magazine/nicki-minaj.html).

Gay may be right about "Why To Kill a Mockingbird Matters," the book she reviewed in the NYT this summer. I'm not sure. But here's why I think the piece is secretly a bit mean-spirited and questionable. She goes after the writer, Santopietro, for quoting Sondheim in reference to Harper Lee. She calls these quotations "jarring and bewildering."

I was surprised that Gay would find it bewildering for a theater producer to quote Sondheim, a theater writer and major American cultural touchstone, in reference to Harper Lee, another major American cultural touchstone. (People sometimes allude to a literary work to explain a facet of another literary work. Ms. Gay might have encountered this phenomenon at Yale.)

Maybe Santopietro made his allusions in a clumsy way? This was my thought. So I went to a bookstore and looked up both allusions. One: Lee's characters provoke a feeling of ambivalence in the reader, like the feeling described in Sondheim's song "Sorry/Grateful." Two: Lee's child characters absorb lessons from watching adult behavior, not from listening to adult sermons, a phenomenon described in Sondheim's song "Children Will Listen." Not so bewildering! I could explain each allusion in one sentence.

What really annoys me is the knee-jerk tendency to canonize Gay and worship Gay's thinking; I see this over and over in reader posts on-line. That's not Gay's fault. It's also not a service to Gay's writing. It needs to stop.

(4) Lily James in "Mamma Mia 2." I hated, hated, hated this performance. I also thought critics were far too kind to the performance. She's cute and she's really trying! Viewers who approve of James in this movie are mistaking effort for excellence. It's the Amy Schumer Strategy: If I whoop a great deal and make a point of exerting big bucket-loads of energy, people will think I am acting.

None of the characters in "Mamma Mia 2" showed a plausible human reaction to Ms. James's irritating, incessant whoops and shrieks, which would be to smile kindly and walk away. And the entire movie suffered for this.

(3) A Coke commercial. There's a commercial that runs before movies now, and it's a smirky, Isla Fisher-esque young woman offering us unsolicited advice. She has just purchased her Coke. "Life is short," she informs us, sagely. "If you want to live in a yurt, yurt it up. If you want to run a marathon, I mean, that seems super-hard, but, you know, you do you. And if you want a Coke? Drink a Coke. Coke! Because I can."

Every time I see this ad, I feel enraged that this presumptuous twenty-one-year-old is lecturing me. Who invited her?

Also, I can't help but note that she is selling poison, and her rationale is: "Heroin! Because I can."

(3a) Starbucks. Everything about Starbucks infuriates me, always. The pretentious language. The "butter croissant." "The cinnamon spice latte." The "double chocolate frappuccino." All that excess verbiage.

"Flavor like no other." "Keeps you going." "Blended drinks." Recently, a slight change to various frappuccino recipes was attempted, and it was billed as such: "A stunning new take on beloved classics."

Really? "Stunning"? "Beloved"? "Classic"? I hate, hate, hate this language. And Americans simply eat it up.

By contrast, I walked into a Dunkin Donuts the other day, and the CEOs had taken some light blue sprinkles and scattered them across a vanilla donut. And they called that donut "The Shark Bite." Simple and delightful. I'll take DD over Starbucks any day.

(2) The ad copy for "Jell-O Girls." This is a new memoir, and the ad writers take great pains to inform us it's a "feminist work." But shouldn't the assumption be that all writers worth their salt in 2018 are feminists? If so, why use the adjective? It's half-assed and it doesn't accomplish anything, while seeming to accomplish something. I'd rather hear about the quality of the writing.

(1) Debra Granik's "Leave No Trace." I continue to hate this movie--along with all of the critical buzz surrounding it. There's a trend in our culture where we assume something is of value if it's brutal to watch. Then no one is willing to say, "I was bored to tears," because no one wants to seem like a philistine. ("Seinfeld" spoofed this, memorably, in the "English Patient" episode.)

Let me say something here: "Leave No Trace" is a leaden, lifeless movie. The pacing is on-par with something you would submit as an undergrad. The character development is shallow. The script has less wit than a late-career Tom Wolfe novel. You are free to say the same. I have liberated you. If you wish. Skip this movie.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

How to Host a Baby

-You have assumed responsibility for a mewling, puking ball of life, a yellow-lab pup. He will spit his half-digested kibble all over your shoes, all over your hard-cover edition of Jennifer Haigh's novel  Faith . He will eat your tables, your chairs, your "I {Heart] Montessori" magnet, placed too low on the fridge. When you try to watch Bette Davis in  Hush Hush Sweet Charlotte , on your TV, your dog will bark through the murder-prologue, for no apparent reason. He will whimper through Lena Dunham's  Girls , such that you have to rewind several times to catch every nuance of Andrew Rannells's ad-libbing--and, still, you'll have a nagging suspicion you've missed something. Your dog will poop on the kitchen floor, in the hallway, between the tiny bars of his crate. He'll announce his wakefulness at 5 AM, 2 AM, or while you and another human are mid-coitus. All this, and you get outside, and it's: "Don't let him pee on my tulips!" When...

Joshie

  When I was growing up, a class birthday involved Hostess cupcakes. Often, the cupcakes would come in a shoebox, so you could taste a leathery residue (during the party). Times change. You can't bring a treat into a public school, in 2024, because heaven knows what kind of allergies might lurk, in unseen corners, in the classroom. But Joshua's teacher will allow: a dance party, a pajama day, or a guest reader. I chose to bring a story for Joshua's birthday (observed), but I didn't think through the role that anxiety might play in this interaction. We talk, in this house, quite a bit about anxiety; one game-changer, for J, has been a daily list of activities, so that he knows exactly what to expect. He gets a look of profound satisfaction when he sees the agenda; it doesn't really matter what the specific events happen to be. It's just about knowing, "I can anticipate X, Y, and Z." Joshua struggled with his celebration. He wore his nervousness on his f...

Josh at Five

 Joshie's project is "flexibility"; the goal is to see that a plan is just an idea, not a gospel, not a guarantee. This is difficult. Yesterday, we went to a restaurant--billed as "open," with unlocked doors--and the owner informed us of an "error in advertising." But Joshie couldn't accept the word "closed." He threw himself on the floor, then climbed on the furniture. I felt for the owner, until he nervously made a reference to "the glass windows." He imagined that my child might toss himself through a sealed window, like Mary Katherine Gallagher, or like Bruce Willis, in "Die Hard." Then--thank the Lord!--I was able to laugh. The thing that really has therapeutic value for Joshie is: a firetruck. If we are out in public, and he spots a parked truck, he wants to climb on each surface. He breathlessly alludes to the wheels, the door, the windows. If an actual fire station ("fire ocean," in Joshie's parla...