David Sedaris at the Oscars, being very David Sedaris with his famous* tiny notebook and his modest interest in celebrity.

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by The New Yorker (@newyorkermag)

_________________

* Famous to anyone who's read the published diaries of David Sedaris. He has a method to his writing, and it begins with carrying a little notebook everywhere and writing down observations to be expanded upon, the next day, as a diary entry.

"Trump is 47 and Woods is 49, making this a surprisingly age-appropriate celebrity pairing."

I'm reading "Tiger Woods and Vanessa Trump: MAGA Dating Drama, Explained" (Intelligencer).

I wonder what else they're not doing wrong.

"Now, it’s easier to become a 'who.' Everyone has at least a thousand hard-core fans. You don’t even have to be that famous to have a dedicated audience."

Said the podcaster Lindsey Weber, quoted in "Who Even Knows What Famous Means These Days? They Do. As viral stars cross into the mainstream, the hosts of the 'Who? Weekly' podcast consider: Is Addison Rae an actual celebrity? Yes. Brittany Broski? Definitely not" (NYT).

The podcast, which started in 2016, is a roundup of developments for notable “whos” — and for teasing out who is a “who.” Recent episodes have weighed the celebrity of the actor Jason Isaacs, who entered the zeitgeist for his awkward commentary on his nudity in “The White Lotus,” and that of the former “America’s Next Top Model” contestant Yaya DaCosta, who addressed modern viewers’ criticism of that reality show. Both are interesting, but nowhere near front-page news....

Fame isn't what it used to be. Fame is a has been. Who's who? Who cares? When I think of a "who," I think of Cindy-Lou Who, and, in that light, and considering present-day fame, here's something I saw on TikTok yesterday:

"Is it a big deal that Blake Lively said 'tranny' over ten years ago?"

Asks Out Magazine, in "Blake Lively is catching heat for using a transphobic slur multiple times in past interviews":

Lively is at the center of a lot of controversy right now after a chaotic press tour for her movie It Ends With Us and an alleged feud she had with her director and co-star Justin Baldoni. Now, people are digging into her past to find more reasons not to like her.... 

In the late 2000s the word "tranny" was thrown around with wild abandon, and even became a part of the catchphrase 'hot tranny mess' thanks to beloved designer Christian Siriano coining the phrase on Project Runway.... But does it mean that a celebrity saying it ten to fifteen years ago has little impact on who that celebrity is now as a person? Probably."

Here are the old quotes, which all sound like a young person's light-hearted, self-centered banter:

"Hard to imagine a dumber story than this"/"Was thinking this may be the most useless piece of time wasting drivel I've seen on WaPo. And very long to boot"/"I agree can’t imagine a dumber story than this."

Top-rated comments at "Hollywood ‘nepo babies’ know what you think of them. They have some thoughts. Nepotism and Hollywood have gone together since the industry’s beginnings. But a younger generation of fans more attuned to inequality and privilege have put a different kind of spotlight on the kids of famous parents" (WaPo).

I agree with the comments. I thought the thing had potential, based on that headline, because of the young people "attuned to inequality and privilege." Are they going to get principled and staunch against nepotism? There wasn't much about that. In fact, it was a bit pro-nepotism regarding black celebrities:

"I think that there was a time where you couldn’t ‘nepo’ your baby if you were a person of color.... We haven’t even seen Rihanna’s baby yet … but this baby is already a superstar. Is that nepotism? Sure. But when you layer on the inequity from past years in history and you think about nepotism through the lens of race and privilege, I think it’s kind of exciting and cool that Blue Ivy and Rihanna’s baby are celebrities from birth.”  

This was another one of those articles that gets my tag "MSM reports what's in social media." It's trying to spin a mainstream article out of a successful Tiktok hashtag —  #nepobaby. Now that I'm googling that hashtag, I see the New York Times did its own report back in May: "What Is a ‘Nepotism Baby’? Gen Zers have turned a term of derision into one of admiration. That doesn’t mean they’re not jealous, though." Not much going on in that article either, but it's at least short.

Sentence of the Day.

Get you diagramming pencil sharpened!

This is from "Ron Galella’s Relentless Gaze/The photographer’s work provides a stark illustration of the hold that celebrity has on our culture" by Naomi Fry in The New Yorker (Note: Galella died recently. Lots of Galella photos of celebs at the link):

The photographer sought to catch celebrities with their masks lowered and their auras punctured, but the paradox that animates his best photos is that, whether camera-ready or not, the stars he shot couldn’t help but magnetize—whether thanks to the ineffable glow of fame or, simply, because Galella captured them, a circumstance that created its own kind of intimate halo.

 Here, I'll get you started:

 

"Last year, Tropicana introduced a marketing campaign called 'Take a Mimoment,' which showcased hidden mini-fridges around the house where parents could sneak a mimosa made with Tropicana juice."

Sobriety advocates quickly called the brand on it — after all, hiding drinks generally signals a drinking problem. Tropicana apologized, and celebrities including Molly Sims and Gabrielle Union took down their Instagram posts promoting the Tropicana mimosa. But it seems that we are still struggling with drinking..."

From "Women, Do We Need an Intervention?" by Ericka Andersen (NYT).

Ugh! Can you imagine thinking it's a good move to pass along that Tropicana promotion? It's easier to get that some "celebrities" were dumb than it is to understand how Tropicana saw fit to portray hiding liquor around the house as cute.

You can see the Tropicana promotion here, discussed at AdAge:

A new video on the occasion of the 50th anniversary of the release of "My Sweet Lord."

 

 

AND: I put the video up before watching it. Now, I've seen it, and what did it mean? The lyrics of the song are clearly about looking for God. So we see a pair of investigators with scanning devices in a library/bookstore, searching, and then in a crowded movie theater, searching. 

I had to presume they were looking for God. But it turned into looking at celebrities, and this was kind of a mystery too, not the profound mystery of the search for God, but a mystery nonetheless, because all the celebrities I have a shot at recognizing are old and radically changed from the version I know, and all the ones appearing in their famous form, the young ones, are not famous to me. 

But perhaps that's the message: If you were looking at God, would you see Him? I really wanna see you, Lord... 

In the end, the investigators tell each other that they didn't even hear what song was playing. That is, they didn't hear the lyrics about searching for God. But they turn on the car radio — streaming device? — and "My Sweet Lord" is playing there too. The song is everywhere. God is everywhere. It takes so long... it won't take long.

"He said, 'It's your fault for encouraging these videos."

I got there via Know Your Meme, where Nikocado Avocado is a "Top Entry This Week." 

I was at Know Your Meme for something completely unrelated, the meme "Chad" — because that New Yorker humor piece (blogged in the previous post) used the name Chad, repeatedly, but possibly not within the well-known meme. There was the idea that "Dating a Chad (a man named Chad or a man with Chad energy)" should require you to overcome a filibuster in your chat group. There were 5 more iterations of the name Chad in that piece. 

Do the famous New Yorker fact-checkers check to ensure that nothing in an article is a meme or, if it is, that it's used intentionally and correctly? Or are they shaking their fist at the internet and yelling "It's your fault!"

"China announced further steps to control celebrity fan culture, which regulators say has become 'chaotic.'..."

"The Cyberspace Administration of China on Friday... said that it would take punitive action against the spread of harmful information in celebrity fan groups. Discussion channels may be shut down.... It wants to halt algorithms that encourage users to spend large amounts of money or spend money in a way that 'may disrupt public order.'...  Celebrities have been especially targeted by the crackdown. Superstar singer-actor Kris Wu has been arrested following rape allegations, and, as a consequence, his internet presence has been largely deleted. Another star, Zhang Zhehan who is accused of hurting Chinese feelings after posing for photos at Tokyo’s notorious Yasukuni Shrine recently saw his films and TV series deleted by broadcasters and streaming platforms.... Streaming platform iQiyi this week said that it had has cancelled plans for talent contest shows, which create celebrities. The company’s CEO Gong Yu said that the shows are 'unhealthy.'... The Communist Party of China may be eliminating all other sources of power and influence in civil society – wealth, technology, media and fame – other than its own."

From "Celebrities Disappear From Internet as China Moves Against Fan Culture" (Variety).

What is the Yasukuni Shrine?

Yasukuni Shrine (靖国神社 or 靖國神社, Yasukuni Jinja, lit. Peaceful Country) is a Shinto shrine located in Chiyoda, Tokyo. It was founded by Emperor Meiji in June 1869 and commemorates those who died in service of Japan from the Boshin War of 1868–1869 through the First Indochina War of 1946–1954. The shrine's purpose has been expanded over the years to include those who died in the wars involving Japan spanning from the entire Meiji and Taishō periods, and the earlier part of the Shōwa period. 

The shrine lists the names, origins, birthdates, and places of death of 2,466,532 men, women, children, and various pet animals. Among those are 1,068 convicted war criminals, 14 of whom are A-Class (convicted of having been involved in the planning, preparation, initiation, or waging of the war).... 

1945 — 

August 15: Emperor Hirohito gave a recorded radio address across the Empire on August 15. In the radio address, called the Gyokuon-hōsō ("Jewel Voice Broadcast"), he announced the surrender of Japan to the Allies. 

October: The General Headquarters (GHQ)[the US-led Occupation Authorities] planned to burn down the Yasukuni Shrine and build a dog race course in its place. However, Father Bruno Bitter of the Roman Curia and Father Patrick Byrne of Maryknoll insisted to GHQ that honoring their war dead is the right and duty of citizens everywhere, and GHQ decided not to destroy the Yasukuni shrine.

The urge to burn down the shrine is not unlike the desire to eliminate pop-culture celebrities. One can understand how government might prefer to monopolize the people's idolatry. But wasn't it the better idea to leave the shrine in place and preserve individual worship? The Chinese government is afraid of that, but even many Americans answer that question "no." Here's a photograph I took not far from where I live:

Explained here.

Influencers strive to explain their decision to euthanize Bowser after he bit their 1-year-old child.

 

It's all very influencer-style — not the sort of thing I'd ordinarily watch — but I'd read "Family Vloggers Euthanize Their Dog, Prompting Collective ‘Why?’" at New York Magazine... 

Several influencers, including Jaclyn Hill, Jeffree Star, and Tana Mongeau, have commented on the situation. YouTuber LaurDIY, who also owns a bull terrier, posted an entire reaction video, in which she says, “They failed to set boundaries for their child and their dog, who has obvious past, unaddressed trauma that was their responsibility to correct and rehab.”

... and I just wanted to say that this couple did the right thing in putting the dog down. Whether they should have made this long video reenacting their angst is another matter.

"The fashion pendulum inevitably swung away from giant sunglasses into almost comically tiny territory, which means it's just about time for that bug-eyed look to return."

Fashionista explains fashion succinctly. 

Everything that goes out of style is just waiting around in exile until its badness has ripened into oblivion and somebody cool can then wear it and make it sing again. In this case, with the giant bug-eye sunglasses, we've got the Olsen twins looking just perfect and making you think you can wear those things again. 

Meanwhile, what's been in style becomes seeable as ridiculous, which it always was, and the least cool people are the last to notice, which sends these things off into exile where they can wait until they're forgotten again. So save your "comically tiny" sunglasses — if you were ever in fashion enough to have acquired them — because you'll get the cue some day that they're snazzy again.

"Is there anybody in America not high — sorry, 'blissed out' — on CBD?..."

"I am perhaps overreacting to the news that domesticity diva Martha Stewart pops about 20 CBD-laced treats a day. CBD stands for cannabidiol, a cannabis byproduct. America’s most fabulous felon reports that 'it’s not a high like a marijuana high. It’s a CBD high, like, relaxed.'... Tom Hanks, Jennifer Aniston, Megan Rapinoe, Morgan Freeman, and Whoopi Goldberg have all boarded the CBD train. Kim Kardashian is said to be 'addicted' to CBD salves. 'Anyone that knows me knows I am obsessed with CBD everything,' quoth the lifestyle goddess. 'Let’s zen out for a Saturday.' Let’s! Good grief, why wouldn’t you want to take the edge off? How can you face 'reality'... without a crutch?... If you are willing to face this world straight up and sober, you have more psychic fortitude than most of us...."

From "Blissed out on CBD/Good grief, why wouldn’t you want to take the edge off?" (Boston Globe).

Are people actually getting "high" on CBD? Quite aside from the stupidity of fawning over yourself for getting high, I don't believe these people are getting high at all. They're just selling products, including the product that is their celebrity persona. That is, I think they're lying about getting high, though it's possible they're getting a placebo effect.

And I don't think Zen is about using drugs to relax on weekends. If you're going to water down a religion, you ought to go for  your own religion.

"She talks about life and how we should live. That’s the way in America. In Britain, people look at that and go, 'Who do you think you are?'"

Said a former senior courtier, talking about Meghan Markle and quoted in "The British Monarchy Is a Game. Harry and Meghan Didn’t Want to Play" (NYT). The article is by British reporter Tanya Gold, who says:

The royal family is a sacrifice at the center of Britain’s national life, fuel for the creation of a national soul because we can’t think of anything better. Sometimes it works. Often — and increasingly — it doesn’t. We dress them up in coronets. We play with them like toys. It has nothing to do with admiration or love. They submit to us, not we to them.

And if they are to survive this monstrous game? They do what is required.... They allow the nation to project what it wants on them. The Sussexes did not understand this. Harry confused sacrifice with service. Meghan confused it with fame.

I always thought Harry chose a woman, however subconsciously, who would free him... “‘Fundamentally, Harry wanted out,’ a source close to the couple said. ‘Deep down, he was always struggling within that world. She’s opened the door for him on that.’”

"The Best Celebrity Couple Has Broken Up."

At teaser on the front page of New York Magazine.

You know they're not really "the best celebrity couple" or we'd be seeing their names. I won't be conned in to clicking through to see who is supposedly the best.

Or... okay, I will do it for you, so you don't have to: "Cara Delevingne and Ashley Benson Broke Up?" The only reason given for their being the best is that they, at first, "hid" their relationships "from the paparazzi," and that they call each other "squish."

If that's the best, why can't we have better celebrities?

"Now celebrities think: 'The general public needs to see my face. They can’t get to the cinema — I need to do something.'"

"And it’s when you look into their eyes, you know that, even if they’re doing something good, they’re sort of thinking, 'I could weep at what a good person I am.' Oh dear."

Said Ricky Gervais, quoted in the NYT.

"Influencers have been a source of ire long before the pandemic, rightly or wrongly."

"These people are usually women, usually young, and have usually built their business on their own persona, which requires a sort of self-aggrandizement to work. But it’s the last bit that doesn’t sit well at a time when survival depends on a group effort... As even some A-list celebrities have shown, this may just be a time for quiet reflection on the part of those we usually love to watch. But unlike A-listers, who tend to have an infrastructure of resources to fall back on, if influencers go quiet, their livelihoods could collapse around them.... Influencing is a massive industry, one that almost feels too big, too ingrained as an advertising mechanism to just go away. But like so many industries right now, it’s hard to tell how much and how permanently this pause will effect [sic] business as usual...."

From "Is This the End of Influencing as We Knew It?/Social media celebrities came under fire for bad pandemic behavior this week" (Vanity Fair).

Is there much of a chance that after this thing is over, we'll be more serious, more aware of what really matters in life, and we'll be done with the "influencers"?

It's a nice distraction to try to think of some of the good things that could come of this. We were just talking yesterday about whether the Coronavirus Era will spell the end of "wokeism." I said, I thought wokeism would survive, but maybe snowflakeism would succumb.

"She attended college at Brown, and spent a summer in Los Angeles trying to become an actress and a model, and going to clubs with Leonardo DiCaprio."

"('It was the summer before Romeo and Juliet came out,' she said. 'It was right after Gilbert Grape.') When Hollywood didn’t pan out, she graduated and moved to New York to pursue a career in fashion media, landing writing jobs... 'I was like, drowning in makeup and cigarettes and booze and cool people'.... In 2005, she took a break from the work force to get an M.F.A. in creative writing. She ended up selling a novel to Grove Atlantic, but 'it sort of turned into a disaster,' she said. She returned the advance and the book was never published.... After her wedding in 2011, she landed on the idea for Stone Fox Bride... [Instagram] became a place where Ms. Guy would share photos of her daughters and her husband. 'In hindsight, I wouldn’t have done any of that,' she said. By 2016, her marriage was coming to an end, and selling wedding dresses, in person and online, stopped being so fun. Ms. Guy closed her studio 'the day Trump got elected,' she said, and started selling her inventory out of her Williamsburg apartment, while her estranged husband lived in an Airstream around the corner.... Now, Ms. Guy said she is working on a memoir... Her brand, she said, has evolved to represent 'women in transition.'... [She teaches a] 'crash course writing workshop' for 'foxes in flux.'"

From "What Happens When a Weddings Influencer Gets Divorced?/Stone Fox Bride made Molly Rosen Guy the face of bohemian weddings. Then her marriage ended" (NYT).

Apparently, it's Trump's fault.

IN THE COMMENTS: Sally327 said:

I can't read the article so I don't know if it addresses this or not but I wonder if this business was profitable. I mean, enough to live on. Possibly not having a husband around to pay the bills made a difference?

I responded:

"I'm afraid I'm still not quite following what happened or who she is or why this is news"/"I think you are a member of an ever-expanding club"/"Count me in too"/"And me. I have now read three articles in WaPo..."

"... about this person. And although this was the better written of the lot, I'm still struggling with why anyone above middle school would care about Mason jar gardens and flower crowns"/"After reading this article I feel like I'm a dog chasing it's own tail. Why, why, why, for the love of humanity?!?!?"/"This is the second article I've seen in the last few days of Caroline Calloway, and I've never heard of her. I can't seem to glean from either this or the other article who she is or why I should care."

Comments on the WaPo article by Monica Hesse, "The messiness and meaning of Caroline Calloway." I keep seeing these articles about Caroline Calloway and half skimming them. It's like some kind of joke about the meaninglessness of everything.

We're told the story is "like boiling six seasons of HBO’s 'Girls' into a teaspoon, and injecting it into your veins." Yeah, okay, I'm going to just say no to that drug.

When does social media star of the nonhuman kind get a mainstream media obituary?

Grumpy Cat.

Though her real name is Tardar Sauce, she earned the notorious moniker in 2012 when a photo of her scowl was posted to Reddit. (Her small size and frown were likely due to feline dwarfism, her family later revealed.)

Endless memes—and success—followed. In addition to nabbing MSNBC's Most Influential Cat Award, she also scored campaigns with Purina and Cheerios. She had guest spots on Today, Good Morning America, American Idol, Sesame Street and even The Bachelorette.... And in 2014, she starred in Lifetime's Grumpy Cat's Worst Christmas Ever.

Grumpy Cat was 7.