holy moses, it’s been awhile.
mostly because the hubbub over this english lord nonsense was so nonsensical that it was exhausting, so i just did a big eye-roll and lived my life. a sloooooow big eye-roll mind you because the story of these letters has been like a dripping faucet, where you know it’s dripping and there’s nothing you can do about it but people keep coming into the room to say, OMG, IT’S DRIPPING!!! as though this is a revelation.
while the existence of letters is exciting and the existence of actual words is indeed a legit news story, the enthusiasm with which these particular letters and these actual words have been met- in particular, the GUSH of ink- seems a bit out of proportion with the letters and words themselves.
but then mayhaps you are like, OLINE, WHAT IS THIS OF WHICH YOU SPEAK??! let’s take this double-quick… Continue reading
watch this, then let’s chat…
so i have been putting this off for daaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaays because, HOLY MOSES… i don’t even know.
i mean, that has captured your attention, non? you are RIVETED, right?
let’s dive in.
(via the daily mail)
in the first of what may or may not become a recurring series…
FACT TIME WITH OLINE!!!
oh hey, ya’ll. i’m a legit doctor now so please note the new, highly over-educated gravitas of my lit crit here.
good timing too because with the release of jackie, lo! a kennedy season is upon us.
translation: prepare yoself for some really ridiculously counter-factual daily mail reports.
we need, carolyn heilbrun wrote in her 1988 masterpiece writing a woman’s life, stories wherein women deviate from what is expected, and stray from the standard script. we need this, she suggested, because these stories reveal what is possible. they give us- women, men, people!- courage and they are the stories upon which we build our own lives.
it’s easy to forget (or simply to never know) how slow the script has been to change and how limited the range of stories has historically been.
“i desire you would remember the ladies,” abigail adams wrote her husband in march 1776, as he and the continental congress drafted america’s constitution. alas, american women were excluded from full citizenship.
two hundred years later, at the height of the women’s liberation movement, the biographer willi frischauer wrote of jackie kennedy in january 1960:
“the future was closing in on her and kept her keyed up as she approached the climax in any american woman’s life, the inauguration of her husband as president of the united states.”
setting politics aside, let us take a moment to appreciate that, forty years after frischauer wrote it, that statement looks even more stupid after last night.
in the 22 years i have been actively thinking about jackie onassis, she has only ever appeared in my dreams twice. in one of those dreams, she wore this:
the daily mail would have us believe this dress is the same as this:
and perhaps this is a failure of imagination on my part, but um… NO. Continue reading
now we know: if i hadn’t been doing a dissertation all this time, i apparently could have been producing ground-breaking albeit random celebrity/gossip/history/culture content every freaking day.
(via US Weekly)
in things i made a huge, big deal about and then never followed-up on, my boyfriend adrien brody debuted his Art at art basel a few weeks ago.
© Copyright CBS Broadcasting Inc.; Credit: CBS Photo Archive
so there’s been a natalie portman jackie movie in the works for awhile, scheduled for release in 2017, and they’ve doled out a promo image to excite us all and prove they’re in production.
so much of life, or our experience of the world around us, is what i’mma call THINGS IN THE AIR.
(feel free to credit me with that incredibly precise phraseology when discussing this later with all yo friends.)