Wednesday, July 30, 2008


Did I ever mention how I'm friends with Moby?
We met at a Christmas party in New York a few years ago and talked about the gospel for a few hours. He gave me his phone number and sometimes he sends me random emails of pictures of dogs or people I don't know or of his roof garden.
I just heard he is playing a set at KCRW tomorrow night- you should listen. He is nice.

I emailed him this morning when I heard the news. Here's what he had to say in return:
yup, i'll be in l.a for...a day.
landing, playing the show, then leaving.
so, alas, no time for salad.
but i'll be back soon!

Tuesday, July 29, 2008

Mellow Drama.

It's no secret; I'm no romantic.
So what's an even-headed gal to do when faced with a man who is?

As I've mentioned, I write for a celebrity website. It's required that I extensively review and research their history. At one point, my (male) coworker leaned over and said, "That is SUCH a good movie." Shocked (and somewhat repulsed), I responded, "ugh. I never saw it because I heard how completely awful it was!" He recoiled and said, "Are you kidding?!? That's the most romantic movie I've ever seen!" (This is not an uncommon conversation for me to have.) I chortled. Genuinely curious, I asked, "So...What made it so romantic?" He leaned back and considered for a moment, "I think," he mused, "it is the most in love I have ever seen any actor play." Doing my best (not by much) to avoid wrinkling my nose in mistrust, I asked, "So- what made their relationship so romantic?" He responded, "He was just so in love. It was amazing how much he loved this woman. He would have done anything for her. But he couldn't have her. And when he couldn't have her, he just loved her even more and that just made him want her even more than before."
"Uhhh..." I asked, "Didn't they just meet randomly and he couldn't 'have her' because they were both in other relationships, right? Wasn't that the storyline?"
He paused, "Well...Yes. But, see- that just made him realize how much he loved her!"
At this point I'm gagging on my own horrified bile. Is this typical of romantic male reasoning? Wanting what you can't have? O. Now that's original. And even more- true passion and real love in Hollywood requires separation from the one you're currently committed in order to pursue the new woman who's just outside the title of "complete and total stranger." (See: The Wedding Planner, Serendipity, Runaway Bride, The Notebook, insert random chick-flick here- trust me- the formula works.)

Just the night before a friend (male) mentioned he was watching "The Holiday."
"ugh." I said. "I hated- hated- that movie! They should've just developed the Jack Black/Kate Winslet side of the story. At least that was based on an actual connection. Cameron Diaz and Jude Law- how on earth is that supposed to be romantic? They were both desperate and lonely and bored and drunk. They have sex and from that one-night stand with someone they have no obligations to, they fabricate a complicated and volatile relationship out of nothing!"
He said, "Okay. So I guess we like different movies."

Ever since I dated the guy who'd get teary-eyed whenever we had to say goodnight by 3am (as if parting were such sweet sorrow), I've been put off and slightly suspicious about these crocodile tears. How realistic is it that men are this sentimental, and what qualifies a relationship as 'romantic'? Isn't that usually just a formality to getting it on? When a man is so attached, so soon- how do you know when it's real or manufactured as a means to an end? Am I the only one to hesitate at the idea of falling into romance right away, or is this a realistic prospect? Do men really fall that hard that fast and actually mean it? Or are we all just brainwashed and conditioned to believe that irrational and wildly rushed are the essentials for real romance? This concept frightens me, as I cannot help but wonder- if it happens that quickly this time with me, how quickly will you fall into someone else when you're no longer engulfed in the drama of something new?

Monday, July 21, 2008

Newton's Law.

A girlfriend recently detailed her latest long-standing flirtation with someone from work. After a month of roadtrips and long talks and flirty texts, they finally went out. Over the last 2 weeks he has suddenly vacillated between either awkwardly ignoring her during or sending flirtatious text messages on the weekend. I don't know this guy and I don't know more than what she's told me about the situation, but it seems to me that a man who can't be bothered enough to pick up the phone after having an actual date doesn't seem to be man enough to expect any sort of response from her. Normally, I'd write the situation off as another case of "he's just not THAT into you" enough to behave like a normal human being- or even as someone remotely attentive. What gives me pause is the fact that she has confessed ignoring HIM and behaving just as awkwardly because now she really likes him. She responds to his flirtatious texts with (what she deems) "sassy, sarcastic" ones that some might find rather...deflating. She refuses to discuss their relationship with their other coworkers- particularly their mutual friends. It's made her even more insecure to know that he may or may not be talking about her- but she's stuck in the middle of not knowing what to do because, quite frankly, several weeks of flirting and a date or two does NOT a relationship make.

Newton's 3rd Law of Motion states that "for every action is an equal and opposite reaction." Is it giving him too much credit to say this guy is simply playing off of HER cool behaviour? Or is he, in fact, simply calling (ahem- texting) only when it's convenient for HIM? Does it even matter? I'm inclined to believe that if someone simply texts on a Friday night with no particular purpose that the only thing he's interested in is wasting time (at his convenience, mind you. Double bad). I'm also inclined to believe that the true message is in the meta verbals- if he's only calling when he knows you can't respond, but he continues to call and the tone is always inviting and friendly, perhaps that's as good as it will ever get. FRIENDLY. So far, that's as much credit as I'm willing to give this joker; they clearly like each other and have a good time, but it seems to me that his mind is made up to be nothing more than good friends.

So my remaining question is:
How much can we expect that men are reacting rather than acting out? I suspect that (when push comes to shove) men will pony up and make things happen with a woman they truly can't do without, and therefore any behaviour short of this means he's not really interested in pursuing anything beyond friendship- but maybe I'm giving too much credit (or my expectations for one to man-up is too high). You tell me. Is he wasting her time, or just waiting for when the timing is right?

Thursday, July 17, 2008

Janice Dickinson is Thin.

Janice Dickinson is insane.
This is not a shocking statement. What IS shocking is how she gets away with being cruel, humiliating and an all around harpie. She has her own tv show about models and she just yelled at a model for being "fat." "Fat," meaning she isn't starving herself anymore or living in the gym. The young model explained that she's more interested in being healthy this year, and that she wasn't happy making herself hungry. Janice flew into a rage (probably because SHE hasn't eaten anything since 1972) and forced her teen model to trade skirts. "If you can fit into my size 4 skirt, I'll eat my #&*$% words."
Dramatic Pause. (In this dramatic pause, I'd like to insert that I don't look terribly thin, and even I am a size 4. So I don't know what this woman is talking about. The girl was hardly fat. She simply looked HEALTHY.)
The model fit.
Janice, shocked, ate her words. Figuratively, of course. I don't think she'd be bothered to actually EAT anything (especially after that rant).
My question is, as I see these beautiful people clinging to their most personal parts, crying and mumbling, "I'm not fat, I'm not fat..." I'm wondering how- in this day and age- verbal harassment and physical abuse works in the professional world- or any world at all! Now, I'm not going to attack Ms Dickinson's physical appearance. That would be far too easy. But forcing a bunch of tweens to pose nude for a senior citizen's art class...somehow I doubt that has anything to do with booking them a shoot and more to do with the fact that Janice's ratings probably required showing blurred body parts of young, beautiful people squirming self-consciously before the geriatrics.
Further, the boasting and bravado Janice has for herself and her work is so inflated, it absolutely reeks of desperation. She continually touts the "well-known"ness of various magazine's she's booking for, even though no one has ever heard of it before. The shoot itself ended up looking more like dime-store soft-core porn rather than front cover fashion.
The artifice of fame, the mad clawing for attention, the pathetic wimper for recognition; it's all of the culture we've created to legitimize our existence without actually producing something from ourselves. This dependancy upon validation from external sources has got to stop. Or we may all end up looking like, or looking toward pleasing, someone like Janice.
I can live in Hollywood. But I'm so damn glad that I'm not of Hollywood.

Wednesday, July 9, 2008

True Life.

Is it ironic that now that I have all this time on my hands, I have no time to write?
I don't like writing so much about myself or my real life- I like to stick to the theoretics of life and (for the few people who actually read) most people seem to like when I dissect their relationship issues in my simplistic, smarmry way. So I try to do that.

Here's the bullet points. I'll fill in the blanks later.
* I am living in LA for July while my friend is out of town.
* My car was broken into, so I am already missing my bluetooth and GPS. Sadly, the deductable outweighs what was stolen. It figures I'd get robbed within 24 hours and that they'd take the TWO THINGS I really truly need to survive in LA. Ah well. I hear transients steal to hawk it on the streets for $50, so maybe I can find a transient who will sell back my GPS for $50.
* I need a job that doesn't make me want to cry. Something that is interesting and challenging and that will afford me an apartment in Los Angeles.
* If I don't get a kickass job in LA, I'm moving to Korea/Japan/Hong Kong to teach English in August/September. I figure in the year I'm gone, the economy may buck up a little and I'll be able to find something I actually want to do.
* The plan to get my Master's is still on the table because I would eventually like to teach at a Jr College. But I need to figure out where I'm living and how I'll pay for said education.

So. Master's and guitar lessons- they're still on the list, but I need a home first. And before the home, I guess I need a job.
In the meanwhile, I'm having a fabulous time.