Read More......
Thursday, March 5, 2009
What Happened to Worst Dressed?
A slight hiccup in our best/worst dressed pool. There was no worst dressed list this year. Stars and starlet's alike played it safe. In fact, rather than a worst dressed list People magazine ran a page of "Mistake?" dresses, not sure themselves if any blunders were made. So I leave it to you. Mistake?
Read More......
Read More......
Book Review: Flannery: A Life of Flannery O'Conner by Brad Gooch
From square one, my interactions with this biography of Miss Mary Flannery O'Connor were fraught with drama. I walked into my local Borders with the intent, nay the need, to pick a memoir that would define my own self. I had to know my mentor or else I felt surely that I had lost myself. What would be my ambitions? Who's footsteps would I tread in, like a child hopping through boot tracks left in heavy snow. I felt, oddly, as if this choice would map all subsequent choices, as if this decision would reveal "the figure in the carpet" of my life as I began to weave it.
Well, anyways, after a bought with horrific doubt as I decided that Susan Sontag was not the woman I aimed to be (she was all intellect without the grounding forces of faith and hope) I considered Edith Wharton but felt my own upbringing was too unlike hers (and I ached at the thought of reading 700 pages of life story, no matter who the writer was behind the words)so I nearly walked out. And then I spied it... the wall of new biographies standing along a far wall. And there it was" "Flannery: A Life of Flannery O'Connor" by Brad Gooch.
I chose O'Connor to serve as my mentor figure simply because she was so glaringly unlike the other female figures I considered. She seemed to be the only woman in the room who matched success with simplicity, and a depth of mind with a depth of character that did not require illicit love affairs and bouts of alcoholism and madness to add spice to her life and her work. That, and I felt a warm and happy resolve at picking a fellow, humble Georgia native (not to mention I was drawn to those darn peacock feathers on the cover, as I was--you all know--Mrs. Peacock for Halloween). In short, our meeting seemed predestined. The figure in the carpet was becoming clear.
Now, there are three things that y'all ought to know about this book, and this woman. First, Flannery's best work appeared after she was forced to go back home following her Lupus diagnosis. This should be a message to us all that we will thrive when we stay true to our selves and do not try to replicate the incidences in the lives of others (i.e. we don't all have to live in NYC to be artists). A strange lesson indeed when considering this month to be wrapped up so completely in our attempt to find a mentor to emulate.
Second, she worked her whole life toward coming closer to her sense of the spiritual world. I never expected to take this lesson away from the book but she displayed a humility and patience in her study of theology that reminds me of images of Buddhist monks, and acetic hermits. There is a poise to her spirituality that I'm drawn to, wanting to harbor a similar meditation in my own life. I can't help but believe that we all have a spiritual self that needs nurtured in order to maintain our grasp on those things that truly matter in this world. This seemed to be a sense of inner power for her. I can only hope to grasp something of that for myself, a church of thought and being far removed from the material and trivial.
And finally, Gooch's book was by no means a perfect one. It played out too chronologically, and seemed so hands-off as if he was somewhat afraid to grasp the fabric of this life too tightly. But all is forgiven, as Flannery herself is left to emerge from the words. Again, that figure in the carpet is sought after and seen without the magnifying glass of our biographer. No wonder he titled the book "A" biography instead of "the" biography of Flannery O'Connor.
So, in short, I quite enjoyed reading this book, and feel so sure that I have made the right choice of mentor in the end. My life can now unfurl without regret. Mmm-mmm. :)
Read More......
Well, anyways, after a bought with horrific doubt as I decided that Susan Sontag was not the woman I aimed to be (she was all intellect without the grounding forces of faith and hope) I considered Edith Wharton but felt my own upbringing was too unlike hers (and I ached at the thought of reading 700 pages of life story, no matter who the writer was behind the words)so I nearly walked out. And then I spied it... the wall of new biographies standing along a far wall. And there it was" "Flannery: A Life of Flannery O'Connor" by Brad Gooch.
I chose O'Connor to serve as my mentor figure simply because she was so glaringly unlike the other female figures I considered. She seemed to be the only woman in the room who matched success with simplicity, and a depth of mind with a depth of character that did not require illicit love affairs and bouts of alcoholism and madness to add spice to her life and her work. That, and I felt a warm and happy resolve at picking a fellow, humble Georgia native (not to mention I was drawn to those darn peacock feathers on the cover, as I was--you all know--Mrs. Peacock for Halloween). In short, our meeting seemed predestined. The figure in the carpet was becoming clear.
Now, there are three things that y'all ought to know about this book, and this woman. First, Flannery's best work appeared after she was forced to go back home following her Lupus diagnosis. This should be a message to us all that we will thrive when we stay true to our selves and do not try to replicate the incidences in the lives of others (i.e. we don't all have to live in NYC to be artists). A strange lesson indeed when considering this month to be wrapped up so completely in our attempt to find a mentor to emulate.
Second, she worked her whole life toward coming closer to her sense of the spiritual world. I never expected to take this lesson away from the book but she displayed a humility and patience in her study of theology that reminds me of images of Buddhist monks, and acetic hermits. There is a poise to her spirituality that I'm drawn to, wanting to harbor a similar meditation in my own life. I can't help but believe that we all have a spiritual self that needs nurtured in order to maintain our grasp on those things that truly matter in this world. This seemed to be a sense of inner power for her. I can only hope to grasp something of that for myself, a church of thought and being far removed from the material and trivial.
And finally, Gooch's book was by no means a perfect one. It played out too chronologically, and seemed so hands-off as if he was somewhat afraid to grasp the fabric of this life too tightly. But all is forgiven, as Flannery herself is left to emerge from the words. Again, that figure in the carpet is sought after and seen without the magnifying glass of our biographer. No wonder he titled the book "A" biography instead of "the" biography of Flannery O'Connor.
So, in short, I quite enjoyed reading this book, and feel so sure that I have made the right choice of mentor in the end. My life can now unfurl without regret. Mmm-mmm. :)
Read More......
Tuesday, March 3, 2009
Book Review: Personal Icon Month
The month of March was "Personal Icon" month for the book club portion of the salon. Pretty self-explanatory but both Casey and I chose a memoir or biography about a person we admired. So far this has turned out to be an extremely fulfilling month and I encourage everyone to participate with their own personal icon! It's not too late to find an icon/book! So I chose the book "Me: Stories of my Life" by Katharine Hepburn.
Honestly I chose to read about Katharine Hepburn because I really admire her sense of style. Also, she has a strong but sensitive spirit in all of her movies that I've always admired, so that was another reason I wanted to read about her. But really, it was mostly because of her sense of style :). I am so pleased to say that after reading this book I have so much more to admire about her. I won't go into specifics about her life so you will still feel compelled to read the book, but I will just say that her joie de vivre, strong spirit, and honesty all inspired and touched me. I can only hope to lead a life half as interesting as hers was. But even if that doesn't pan out, I hope that I can capture her amazing spirit and lead my life with the style, grace, and strength that she did. She was truly a force to be reckoned with and she never let anything or anyone change who she was. So inspiring.
And besides how admirable Katharine was, this book was so interesting in the glance that it gave into Hollywood during it's most glamorous days. Katharine spoke openly and honestly about everything and this held true for her discussion about the movies she was in, how the film industry worked, and the people she met on her films. This was a great little slice of the fascinating world of 1930's and 40's Hollywood.
Well Katharine - here's to you. You'll always be an inspiration to me. You were one classy lady.
Read More......
Honestly I chose to read about Katharine Hepburn because I really admire her sense of style. Also, she has a strong but sensitive spirit in all of her movies that I've always admired, so that was another reason I wanted to read about her. But really, it was mostly because of her sense of style :). I am so pleased to say that after reading this book I have so much more to admire about her. I won't go into specifics about her life so you will still feel compelled to read the book, but I will just say that her joie de vivre, strong spirit, and honesty all inspired and touched me. I can only hope to lead a life half as interesting as hers was. But even if that doesn't pan out, I hope that I can capture her amazing spirit and lead my life with the style, grace, and strength that she did. She was truly a force to be reckoned with and she never let anything or anyone change who she was. So inspiring.
And besides how admirable Katharine was, this book was so interesting in the glance that it gave into Hollywood during it's most glamorous days. Katharine spoke openly and honestly about everything and this held true for her discussion about the movies she was in, how the film industry worked, and the people she met on her films. This was a great little slice of the fascinating world of 1930's and 40's Hollywood.
Well Katharine - here's to you. You'll always be an inspiration to me. You were one classy lady.
Read More......
Thursday, February 26, 2009
Book Review: Women's Historical Lit. Month
At the Salon meeting we held to decide which books to read this year, Casey and I decided that we wanted to read a book that was fictional, written by a woman, and written more than a century ago - and thus was born Historical Women's Lit month. We settled on a book by Elizabeth Gaskell, (on my part) due to the great success of the BBC "Cranford" series which they showed on PBS. Cranford is pretty short, and one of her other books Wives and Daughters was way too long for the short month of February - so there was North and South, just right in length (if maybe leaning towards the too long side), with a lot of literary value, and an equally good BBC special. I'll admit, I had already seen the BBC version of North and South, and Mr. Thornton is really hot. So I was pretty excited about reading this book. So was it as good as I had hoped? Find out after the cut!
Ok. So while the movie version that I saw stays very true to the book, it was another bird altogether trying to read this thing. For the first 150 pages I had to FORCE myself to sit down and read. The words seemed inordinately tiny on the page and it was a chore to get through a chapter. It was one of those affairs where it's a pretty long book already, but it seems even longer by how long it takes you to read it. In fact, I had to take a break like 60 pages in and read a romance novel in hopes of getting my reading juice regenerated. I mean, what was weird though was that it's not like it was bad or unenjoyable, it was more just bleh.
However, everything turned completely around for me when Margaret moved to Milton and was starting to get settled into her new environment. After page 150 I went into a reading frenzy and read the rest of the book (all the way to page 425) in one day. Maybe it's just that I got used to the narration style, or maybe it's that the book actually got interesting at this point. I think probably a little bit of both.
Mostly what made the book more interesting once Margaret moved to Milton was the introduction of Mr. Thornton, the proud Mill owner. Of COURSE Margaret hates him when she meets him, but Mr. Thornton is totally beguiled by Margaret and thus follows a series of charged debates between the two. Honestly, the interactions that Margaret had with Mr. Thornton were pretty great. So great, and so sparse that I really wish there had been more. But the scarcity of their interactions and how charged they were aided in spurring me on to read more so that I could get to the next time they faced off. I will admit though - reading about their interactions through Margaret's eyes wasn't HALF as interesting as when we saw them through Mr. Thornton's eyes. Mr. Thornton was a much stronger character than Margaret in my opinion. Yeah - Margaret was courageous and had spunk and a virtuous sense of justice - a veritable modern woman, which was great. But Mr. Thornton. A self-made man, with strong ideas of what "manliness" is, and surprisingly sensitive! It was amazing! I honestly felt like, and this is a good thing, that he is one of the models for what romance novel heros are today. It was actually odd to me how much he fulfilled my modern views of what a good leading man should be. To illustrate - here is a screenstill from the BBC movie version that perfectly describes to me how badass Mr. Thornton is.
Heck yes.
But back to Margaret. She was well developed, had all of the right elements there (independence, spunk, courage, confidence) to make her relatable and someone who we want to see succeed, but something just seemed to be missing. I liked her a lot, but I often found myself wondering - "now what is it that Mr. Thornton loves her so much for?" What Margaret really did for me is underline how great Jane Austen is. That seems like a non sequitor, but I swear it isn't totally. All of Jane Asuten's heroines are so relatable and we just fall in love with them. We want to BE them. If Lizzy Bennett and Margaret Hale had a catfight, Lizzy would just straight up rip Margaret a new one. I don't know, I guess we can't expect everyone to be as awesome as Lizzy, but it just seemed like she was trying to be that awesome, but fell just short of it.
Besides just Margaret and Mr. Thornton, there were some really great (and annoying) secondary characters. I loved Nicholas Higgins, her brother Frederick, Sir John, and her Dad (he SO got shafted by being called feminine all the time). And I loved to be annoyed with her cousin Edith and Mr. Thornton's sister. But there were a couple characters who kind of annoyed me when they weren't supposed to - namely Bessy Higgins and her mom. At least I don't THINK we were supposed to be annoyed by her mom. Either way - they were both big complainers, and yeah, sure, they were dying. But do we have to TALK about it all the time? What a Debbie Downer.
Well that basically concludes my review of this book. I'm interested to hear what the rest of you (Casey) think :). And ALL of us - wether you read the book or not (Allison) - need to watch this movie in celebration of our Women's Historical Lit. month.
Read More......
Ok. So while the movie version that I saw stays very true to the book, it was another bird altogether trying to read this thing. For the first 150 pages I had to FORCE myself to sit down and read. The words seemed inordinately tiny on the page and it was a chore to get through a chapter. It was one of those affairs where it's a pretty long book already, but it seems even longer by how long it takes you to read it. In fact, I had to take a break like 60 pages in and read a romance novel in hopes of getting my reading juice regenerated. I mean, what was weird though was that it's not like it was bad or unenjoyable, it was more just bleh.
However, everything turned completely around for me when Margaret moved to Milton and was starting to get settled into her new environment. After page 150 I went into a reading frenzy and read the rest of the book (all the way to page 425) in one day. Maybe it's just that I got used to the narration style, or maybe it's that the book actually got interesting at this point. I think probably a little bit of both.
Mostly what made the book more interesting once Margaret moved to Milton was the introduction of Mr. Thornton, the proud Mill owner. Of COURSE Margaret hates him when she meets him, but Mr. Thornton is totally beguiled by Margaret and thus follows a series of charged debates between the two. Honestly, the interactions that Margaret had with Mr. Thornton were pretty great. So great, and so sparse that I really wish there had been more. But the scarcity of their interactions and how charged they were aided in spurring me on to read more so that I could get to the next time they faced off. I will admit though - reading about their interactions through Margaret's eyes wasn't HALF as interesting as when we saw them through Mr. Thornton's eyes. Mr. Thornton was a much stronger character than Margaret in my opinion. Yeah - Margaret was courageous and had spunk and a virtuous sense of justice - a veritable modern woman, which was great. But Mr. Thornton. A self-made man, with strong ideas of what "manliness" is, and surprisingly sensitive! It was amazing! I honestly felt like, and this is a good thing, that he is one of the models for what romance novel heros are today. It was actually odd to me how much he fulfilled my modern views of what a good leading man should be. To illustrate - here is a screenstill from the BBC movie version that perfectly describes to me how badass Mr. Thornton is.
Heck yes.
But back to Margaret. She was well developed, had all of the right elements there (independence, spunk, courage, confidence) to make her relatable and someone who we want to see succeed, but something just seemed to be missing. I liked her a lot, but I often found myself wondering - "now what is it that Mr. Thornton loves her so much for?" What Margaret really did for me is underline how great Jane Austen is. That seems like a non sequitor, but I swear it isn't totally. All of Jane Asuten's heroines are so relatable and we just fall in love with them. We want to BE them. If Lizzy Bennett and Margaret Hale had a catfight, Lizzy would just straight up rip Margaret a new one. I don't know, I guess we can't expect everyone to be as awesome as Lizzy, but it just seemed like she was trying to be that awesome, but fell just short of it.
Besides just Margaret and Mr. Thornton, there were some really great (and annoying) secondary characters. I loved Nicholas Higgins, her brother Frederick, Sir John, and her Dad (he SO got shafted by being called feminine all the time). And I loved to be annoyed with her cousin Edith and Mr. Thornton's sister. But there were a couple characters who kind of annoyed me when they weren't supposed to - namely Bessy Higgins and her mom. At least I don't THINK we were supposed to be annoyed by her mom. Either way - they were both big complainers, and yeah, sure, they were dying. But do we have to TALK about it all the time? What a Debbie Downer.
Well that basically concludes my review of this book. I'm interested to hear what the rest of you (Casey) think :). And ALL of us - wether you read the book or not (Allison) - need to watch this movie in celebration of our Women's Historical Lit. month.
Read More......
Tuesday, February 24, 2009
It's Going to Be a Thing / Educate Yoself!
I'm so excited about this next it's going to be a thing! I am 100% endorsing/going to wear this once I get my grimy mitts (shoutout guitar hero world tour!) on one.
Turban headbands! And maybe just turbans in general for those very daring people. Turbans have such an interesting history, so I'm going to look into that a little bit for you all. Because I know you're interested. Or I will force you to be.
Generally speaking, a turban is a single piece of cloth that is wrapped around someone's head to serve as a head covering. Humans have practiced this form of habillement since fabric was invented - but we won't get into that subject! That's a WHOLE other post!
Generally turbans are worn in Asia, Africa, and the Middle East. It seems to me that the reason turbans are more prevalent here is due to environmental elements. Heat, little coverage from the sun, dust, and other harsh environmental challenges all make turbans a practical choice for fending off the specific elements that are common to these areas. Religion is also a large factor in the use of turbans (although I would still argue that even the religious rules regarding turbans stem back to environmental causes - but again, that is a TOTALLY different post altogether). In particular, the Sikh faith requires that men cover their un-cut hair. It's probably a good bet that most of the people who wear turbans in the western world are of the Sikh faith.
Turbans didn't really become popular in the European world until the late 17th century. But at that time they were solely worn by men who would wear them while relaxing in lieu of their wigs. Oh those were the days. Women didn't pick up on this trend until about a century later. In fact, the first recorded use of the English word "turban" for a Western female headdress is in 1776 (thanks Wikipedia).
In the west, Turbans had two particular points of popularity. The first era that saw a rise in the popularity of the turban was that most beloved of eras - Regency! I'm assuming that they were so popular at this time because of exoticism, orientalism - you know how that went. They were generally worn with formal outfits at this point in fashion history. You can bet that if I lived in regency - I SO would have rocked this look. In fact - in the Kiera Knightly 'Pride and Prejudice', in the scene at Bingley's Ball (all white dresses - so glorious) there is one girl wearing a magnificent turban-esque head piece and I always say that she is me and I am her (besides me being Lizzy. Obviously.).
The other time that saw a great popularity in turbans in womens wear was the 1940's and 50's. This time around they seemed to have much more flexibility of use and could be worn casually (cover up those curlers gurl!) or still formally (I'm thinking Joan Crawford - she must have worn one at some point, or just should have, because that image is inexplicably in my head.)
So chic! I just really dig this look and I think it's rarin' for a come back. The milinary art deserves more respect!
And if you doubt that this trend has legs - Exhibit A: My favorite contemporary style icon of all time. Blair Waldorf.
She is one glorious bitch and I will follow her just abouts where ever she leads me.
Read More......
Turban headbands! And maybe just turbans in general for those very daring people. Turbans have such an interesting history, so I'm going to look into that a little bit for you all. Because I know you're interested. Or I will force you to be.
Generally speaking, a turban is a single piece of cloth that is wrapped around someone's head to serve as a head covering. Humans have practiced this form of habillement since fabric was invented - but we won't get into that subject! That's a WHOLE other post!
Generally turbans are worn in Asia, Africa, and the Middle East. It seems to me that the reason turbans are more prevalent here is due to environmental elements. Heat, little coverage from the sun, dust, and other harsh environmental challenges all make turbans a practical choice for fending off the specific elements that are common to these areas. Religion is also a large factor in the use of turbans (although I would still argue that even the religious rules regarding turbans stem back to environmental causes - but again, that is a TOTALLY different post altogether). In particular, the Sikh faith requires that men cover their un-cut hair. It's probably a good bet that most of the people who wear turbans in the western world are of the Sikh faith.
Turbans didn't really become popular in the European world until the late 17th century. But at that time they were solely worn by men who would wear them while relaxing in lieu of their wigs. Oh those were the days. Women didn't pick up on this trend until about a century later. In fact, the first recorded use of the English word "turban" for a Western female headdress is in 1776 (thanks Wikipedia).
In the west, Turbans had two particular points of popularity. The first era that saw a rise in the popularity of the turban was that most beloved of eras - Regency! I'm assuming that they were so popular at this time because of exoticism, orientalism - you know how that went. They were generally worn with formal outfits at this point in fashion history. You can bet that if I lived in regency - I SO would have rocked this look. In fact - in the Kiera Knightly 'Pride and Prejudice', in the scene at Bingley's Ball (all white dresses - so glorious) there is one girl wearing a magnificent turban-esque head piece and I always say that she is me and I am her (besides me being Lizzy. Obviously.).
The other time that saw a great popularity in turbans in womens wear was the 1940's and 50's. This time around they seemed to have much more flexibility of use and could be worn casually (cover up those curlers gurl!) or still formally (I'm thinking Joan Crawford - she must have worn one at some point, or just should have, because that image is inexplicably in my head.)
So chic! I just really dig this look and I think it's rarin' for a come back. The milinary art deserves more respect!
And if you doubt that this trend has legs - Exhibit A: My favorite contemporary style icon of all time. Blair Waldorf.
She is one glorious bitch and I will follow her just abouts where ever she leads me.
Read More......
Monday, February 23, 2009
Oscars Review
Hello Saloners and Academy Awards viewers,
What a fun and exciting night of oscars action it was yesterday. I for one think it was the most humorous Academy Awards we've seen in years. The broadway curveball was simply delightful. I am eternally thankful to God for creating a man as hot as Hugh Jackman who also likes to sing and dance his cute little patooty off. Amen. Other highlights include the red sequined get-up that Beyonce wore for her number which I wish could wear every friday night I don't have plans just around my apartment. Would anyone truly mind? Also there was the excitement of pretend gambling which Casey's ballots imbued with our little get-together. There was memorable highs, like how high Ben Stiller seemed as he expertly mimicked Joaquin Pheonix, and lowest of lows like Penelope Cruise's win for best supporting actress, what up?, or Milk taking home the best original screenplay, though the man did make a very touching speech. Many lessons learned like that if you make a short film about the Holocaust you will win, or if you die before the ceremony take place you will win, or that going full gay works much better than going full retard (Sean Penn). Altogether it was a truly magical eveining full of laughs (Jack Black's Pixar comment, congrats on tripling your yearly income in one night), tears (the Paul Newman commemoration, enough said), jeers (Sean Penn's politically charged speech), and Indians (everyone with Slumdog please come to the stage to automatcally recieve your award). I can only hope for as much fun next year.
P.S. -my money's on Marisa Tomei for best dressed and Jessica Biel for worst. Read More......
What a fun and exciting night of oscars action it was yesterday. I for one think it was the most humorous Academy Awards we've seen in years. The broadway curveball was simply delightful. I am eternally thankful to God for creating a man as hot as Hugh Jackman who also likes to sing and dance his cute little patooty off. Amen. Other highlights include the red sequined get-up that Beyonce wore for her number which I wish could wear every friday night I don't have plans just around my apartment. Would anyone truly mind? Also there was the excitement of pretend gambling which Casey's ballots imbued with our little get-together. There was memorable highs, like how high Ben Stiller seemed as he expertly mimicked Joaquin Pheonix, and lowest of lows like Penelope Cruise's win for best supporting actress, what up?, or Milk taking home the best original screenplay, though the man did make a very touching speech. Many lessons learned like that if you make a short film about the Holocaust you will win, or if you die before the ceremony take place you will win, or that going full gay works much better than going full retard (Sean Penn). Altogether it was a truly magical eveining full of laughs (Jack Black's Pixar comment, congrats on tripling your yearly income in one night), tears (the Paul Newman commemoration, enough said), jeers (Sean Penn's politically charged speech), and Indians (everyone with Slumdog please come to the stage to automatcally recieve your award). I can only hope for as much fun next year.
P.S. -my money's on Marisa Tomei for best dressed and Jessica Biel for worst. Read More......
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
