today i read

it is the day where we talk about mental health, and i am not sure i want to talk about it, i am having a lot of thoughts about it, and i don't want to engage any of them right this minute. so. other people can talk. this is good, sad, helpful, true (sorry so tiny, click it, click it):

{sarah nicole pricket}

* snp tumblr ask january fifth

that is all.

blister, burn

holy god, catching fire is bleak. and fantastic. and devastating. and i loved it. and i want to see it again right this minute. i very much liked the first film, but there were a few punches i felt they pulled - the dogs being mutts, particularly, which is such a powerful terrible idea. which made sense cuz kids movie... but. this film doesn't pull punches. the old man in district 11. i love that the costumes and makeup look real - not polished high-def movie real. but. stagey. put on. the tributes dressed up. you see the texture, you see the fabric and the seams and the way things sit on or dig into skin. the sweat, spit, tears, hair, fire. flickerman's teeth. glass. where there is polish and where there is not. utility vs comfort vs costume. yes, this is a very well handled film. oh it is dark. 

johanna. jenna malone, who i have loved forever, is brilliant and sad. her anger is overwhelming and roiling. she is my favourite for a million miles.

catching fire was the best book in the series for me, and one of the more intoxicating books i've read. the movie does it proper justice. oh i am pleased, i am heartbroken. also, buy the soundtrack. it is really really really good. elastic heart. oh god.

also, i recommend you read this. the odds are never in our favour.

ff

hey other person! you're doing feminism wrong! let me tell you how you're doing it wrong. you're the worst. feminism is one woman winning at being feminist best and all other women suuucking at it, the end!

or so go the arguments lately. who is winning feminism and who is the worstest. can we work on that? can we work on an inclusive feminism? please? okay cool. thanks. i like your ideas! maybe they are better than mine! maybe they're not better, just different. maybe i can learn from them. and vice versa. whaddaya say?! fun, right?! cool. cooooool.

there have been a few 'this person is a good feminist and you can tell cause all these other feminists are actually terrible' pieces around. and the one i'mma link to is actually pretty gentle, and probably even has an okayish point in there. but. well:

* miley cyrus is 'one of the biggest feminists in the world'

yeah, that's a little laughable maybe... maybe miley's grasp of the feminist movement isn't totally spot on perfect. reductive and dismissive, maybe. probably. she's young or whatever. privileged. but know what i didn't hear in her quotes that the article seems to be picking at? that miley cyrus thinks she is the QUEEN feminist. 'one of' she says. not 'THE biggest feminist'... see the difference there?

miley's quote doesn't point to malala yousafzai moving over. they can BOTH be feminists! what?! i know, right? nutso. and guess what: malala yousafzai ain't a perfect feminist either. cause there is no such thing! malala is awesome. super awesome. and young, too. so she'll probably make mistakes as she grows into an awesome feminist woman. and you could argue that malala is better for the world than miley, but that's kinda unfair and dismissive, too. because a pop star who openly and happily calls herself a feminist is a GOOD THING. even if she doesn't always do it right. maybe pop-loving young ladies will hear that and wanna be a feminist too. maybe it will start them on a path to becoming awesome members of team feminism. that's not nothin'. (remember that time when a woman was given a big fancy high up position as ceo of yahoo and was all 'i'm not a feminist' cause feminism is a bad word, ewwww?) i fall victim to this me vs you mentality of feminism often, and i'm trying trying not to. i will be a better feminist for the trying, i hope, i think.

also. remember this? still love this:

* is __________ a feminist?

and while we're talking pop music and ladies, here's a little something extra for you that was released today, merry feminist friday:



happy friday, all you equals.

flowers

 

i am rather slowly working my way through this piece where snp & tao lin talk to eachother for a while, semi-curated by sheila heti. it is charming and lovely and also kind of hard to get through cause awkwardness. and flowers. as you know if you follow my instagram, i am all flowers all the time these days. flowers always flowers everywhere or i'd never survive this summer. but. anyway. snp said something about lydia davis (whom i will read soooooon, it's on my stack) that i laughed at a little as it is kinda sorta how i feel about snp.

i like that. quite. i've been underlining a lot in the things i've been reading lately. like maybe they'll help me fix this brain of mine. like maybe they'll help me know what to be doing. or comfort me in the things that i am not doing. (like. how should a person be? page one. haha.)

roommate-sarah recently explained my snp-feelings to someone who was trying to figure out what on earth i was talking about when i was talking about her. she called her my sorta-daemon. like in phillip pullman. dark materials. and i like that a lot. i should re-read that series. (also. me and sarahs, hey? i mean. i know it has to do with my generational-peers and whatever, but whoa. me and sarahs, sarahs and me.)

i wish i was better at reading. if i could be one thing, i think maybe that is what i would be. better at reading. faster. more capable of retention. (or i would be a singer in bjork's choir. alternatively. for my one thing. so maybe i could have two one things i could be?)

dust in the spotlight

{from my tumblr, but really from here}

 

i want so much to tell you not to die. i know it is a useless and mostly meaningless thing to say. but i'd like to say it all the same.

i am sure you have people who actually know you, who are there, who are telling you not to die. and i know that even those people can barely create a pull, really, when the sinking begins. and i am only a girl on the internet.

i do not understand suicide. but i do understand that my lack of understanding is largely luck. my moods have not got that far in. not yet. hopefully, maybe, they never will. but also one of the many medications i take or will take might maybe tick just so. and that side effect they tell you might maybe happen will happen. i understand that my not understanding is a fragile thing. i am susceptible to that side effect, of course, too. if the nauseous and the fatigue and the headaches and the reflux and the trouble swallowing and the fitful sleeping that leads to foggy, unfocused days... if those, then the others, too, are possible.

so i understand that telling you not to die is not helpful. asking that you not die is unkind. i can feel people wanting to ask me not to die, and i want so much to promise them forever and ever i won't. i want to laugh at the absurdity of the thought because it is, for me, so far, a completely absurd one. hopefully forever and ever.

(and now, in the weeks since i wrote this, you have seemed so good. so safe and so fine. in the way that you may never be entirely fine but you are fine for now fine. and it doesn't seem so pressing that i tell you not to die. but really i don't know a single thing.)

ff

over the last few weeks, as i spend hoards of time scrolling through images on tumblr, i have been thinking a lot about nudity. something i haven't engaged in much since i was in art school... the thinking. i essentially see nudity in two ways.

one where it is this totally whatever thing, such a regular and mundane thing. anatomy. part of learning colour and light and flesh as an artist. it becomes universal and boring, almost. i hated drawing and painting nudes by the end of my art school career because it was so booooring. i felt like i could only tell an interesting story when there were clothes involved. and otherwise they were just studies. technical. and so the naked body was very 'meh!'.

but then, too, there is the politicalized/objectified/sexualized/empowered/inhibited body. (hey look! it s almost only ever the female body that ends up in this second category...) where body politics are so real and so polarizing... and of course such a huge part of feminism. bodily autonomy  is such a massive goal for women. how we handle our bodies. whether we have the freedom to choose both internally and externally how our bodies go through the world. when we are still slut-shaming and putting in women's hand the responsibility to not be sexual victims rather than attempting to progress the idea that maybe men should be responsible for whether or not they objectify and victimize. nakedness, then, is a very big thing. a short skirt is dangerous. is an act of rebellion.

so it is very conveniently timed that the following piece came my way this week:

*topless jihad day

and i thought YAY but also hmmmmm... how do i feel about women getting their tits out for a cause? the part of me that thinks of bodies as kind of silly things and nudity and really not a big deal thinks 'yeah! shake it up, ladies. ra ra! show the absurdity of women's breast being such a scandalizing thing when they are JUST BREASTS! just flesh. haha. wooo!' but the part of me that worries about the 'male gaze' and what bodies we deem appropriate to look at (aka skinny, conventionally pretty, young) and the degree to which these women are becoming, always, again, objects.

and then, YAY OH YAY! a really aces conversation on a facebook wall in response to the response to the above piece. allow me to quote some of the cool folks on the facebook machine. (THANKS JENN DUNCAN AND PALS!)

jenn said:
'As a woman, my main issue is with this persistent idea that by turning our bodies into objects -- even if we're the ones choosing to do so -- women will somehow break through age-old cultural taboos, customs, and laws that keep us socially and legally constricted.
... 
What remains interesting to be is what it means when women use their bodies as part of a subversive tactic. Is this an attempt to desexualise the body or are women using this to shock and sexualise the debate? What are the implications of these tactics?'

to which the replies ran as follows:
adele wessell:
'I'm really torn on this. For the first time in ages I haven't known how I felt about a protest action. Aren't they saying ths is my body and don't they get such a huge media response that might contribute to highlighting different issues than are normally reported...? At the same time I also find it hard to imagine people taking the bare breast seriously and it also not attracting a whole lot of creeps who like the femen Facebook pages for very different reasons. Is the measure of a good protest strategy the outcome or the debate. I've struggled... Not sure.'
jess duncan:
'I fully share your perspective. Women should own their bodies and attempts to de-sexualise the female body are fundamental to feminism, so long as they also respect sexuality, but I don't really think this is about that. I just get stuck on using the feminine body as a tool in political protest seems to reinforce so many of the challenges they are fighting. It's a tension inherent to late capitalism taken to a corporeal level. It's not their bodies on the line, it's their boobs and they don't control how the images are used which is where it gets more messy for me.'
emma hooper:
'I agree with Jess Duncan here, especially as all the footage I've seen (and since I notice this, I've been looking up lots) is of, well, hot girls. Where are are the women over 40's breasts? Is this, in some way, reinforcing the idea that a woman's body should be free and her own... so long as she's young and hot: aka not her own at all? I understand that there is a certain demographic drawn to protest, and that's fine, of course. But there's one striking picture of a cute 20-something topless girl protester next to a fully clothed 60-something woman protester. What's the message there?'
desmond leo:
'Societal change is quite often dictated by the extremes because those extremes set the boundaries for which to gauge the appropriate middle (so to speak). I absolutely applaud the case of the Fems using nudity as protest because it redefines the playing field. When one side of the argument is literally threatening death because a woman is improperly dressed (not even because they're naked), what else can you do but challenge that control with complete defiance? As for why there are not many older women who are naked and protesting in the same way - it is not because young women tend to sexualize their bodies - it's because the younger generations are still bold and ideological enough to challenge such ingrained institutions. Sure, in a perfect world, mature discourse would be the way to go. However, many of the freedoms we currently take for granted were at one point "extreme" and we only have those freedoms now because at one point a group of men/women decided to challenge that standard by "dressing naked" (figuratively speaking).'
cathleen kneen:
'Jess, I wouldn't go tops-off for the same reason that I quit smoking pot: If I am going to make a political statement, I want it to be clear and difficult to misinterpret. It is certainly true that media pick up on such actions, but I have never been able to trust the media to adequately communicate my message.' 

and there was more, too, said. but those are the ones that sum up nicely and ask the questions i like to see asked. i am very glad that this kind of discourse is happening in my world.

and now i will direct you off on a slight tangent, but one that has been a relevant backdrop to my thinking. snp wrote about nudity vs nakedness, and the conventions of beauty. (i love what she says about how she is never as happy being complimented on her 'natural' self rather than on her made-up dressed-up self. about the biased and very much rammed home idea of conventional beauty... 'natural' beauty... what we deem 'worth' looking at.) 

*no body is too nude for a billboard 

AND THAT'S IT FOR THIS WEEK! hahaha. that's all. did you make it all the way down here? my money is on mom, dad, and chris having dropped out way back around the first link... but if you did make it here. CONGRATULATIONS! YAY! i will give you a cookie next time we hang out. how's THAT! ha HA! 

happy friday, every bodies! 

unicorns III

aaaaaaaaaaaaannnnnnnd, you know what's coming: third thing i've read on spring breakers! oh my god, yes, surface. yip yip. fyi i am planning on seeing it again. soon.

"Harmony Korine revels in surfaces. Lubed girl flesh, bong glass, iridescent shades. The custom paint jobs on sick cars. Nail polish. Breakers shines so hard you could snort lines off it, and there’s plenty of coke in it, too.

True to form, Korine eschews plot in favour of an ocean-chewing performance by one of the most irritating men of our generation, and a great actor, James Franco. Skrillex scores, so Breakers is edited like a 92-minute cave rave. Phrases (“Spring break forever!”), lines (“It feels as if the world is perfect, like it’s never gonna end …”), and sometimes whole paragraphs morph into mordant refrains. There are not 10 consecutive seconds of silence. Gunshots pop like Bubblicious. Whoops become cries."

{sarah nicole prickett chez the globe & mail}

how does your body know to stop breathing?

 

it is the last one... girls on girls. and i will miss it so much.

and if anyone is wondering what i think (haha hi!) about the finale. well. i think the girls-on-girls crew missed something key in the epic rom-com finale.

they missed that we KNOW. we know how wrong all of it is. i don't think it is supposed to be beautiful or romantic, but sad and sadder-still. because most definitely marni and charlie will not survive. (or if they do they'll wither beside each other in a hateful, hurtful, blue-valentine kind of existence.) and adam and hannah are not good for each other. they're completely toxic. they are abusive and cruel and clumsy. and, sure, adam runs to save her and will always run to save her, but he also gave up his sobriety because of her. and she will always ask him to come running and - like snp notes - will never be the one to run to him. that ending wasn't triumphant. it was the sick cycle of dysfunction. only shoshanna is maybe okay. realizing who she is. i think she will be the one to survive. to become a whole human thing

(and, too, as snp says. so many of us want this. despite knowing what a lie it is. the montage. the music. we want the rescue and the grand gesture, while at the same time despising the rescue and the grand gesture. because of course we only want it when and how and with whom we want it and the chances of it coming our way in some other combination reeks of all the rom-com-non-consent-gender-essentialist bullshit we have pushed in our faces constantly. and it is a frustrating, awful, sad thing to both want and know.)

i hated that episode. but i'm pretty sure that was the point. just like we are not really supposed to like the characters very much very often... i don't think we were meant to actually enjoy that finale. because finales don't exist in real life and having everything wrap up nicely when you know there is a tomorrow to deal with... that is scary. the finale can't hold. and so i loved it.

saved my life

two things this week. both being the internets. one being words-on-the-internets...

{oh shosh...}

 

girls on girls is always always my favourite written-thing-on-the-internets these weeks. i love all of the girls. all. i love them even though i often don't agree. hooray and thank everything for these girls and their words (and, of course, for the girls-on-tv who inspire the words.)

and then. pictures. all of the pictures that go ping in my insides, and i collect them all together and there they are. or.

{a bit of the world i'm making}

 

 tumblr. fine, okay, fine, i love it. i didn't understand it for forever, but now i get it, at least i do as a tool for me and the pictures. endless and scrolling and looking and instant and easy.

internet friends

oh, hi, no big deal. i'm just feeling like the coolest ever because you remember snpsnpsnp who i love so much and talk about all of the times? yeah well. 

this is me at mel's wedding this past summer, yeah, you know. with my long skirt from joe fresh and my bustier top. bein' a champagne fairy princess or whatever.

{borrowed from marc&mel's most lovely wedding blorg}

and here is snpsnpsnp at a party somewhere sometime last week or something wearing the dark-princess samesies-version. 

{borrowed from here, obviously, duh}

yaaaayyyy hahahahahahaha yaaaaaaaaaay! and not to be the creepiest of creeps or whatever, but member how i dyed my hair dark a few months back? member? well. you'll notice. her hair too. dark. recently. if only i had all the tattoos i dream of having. a-sigh. 

they are as we are

there's been some heavy black and white happening. and i have to say i am looooving all the white. alexander wang, for example, did many of his pieces in both black and white versions and pretty much every time the white ones made me gasp and grin. snp wrote a piece on the white t-shirt recently, and about how it is dangerous and simple, begging to be made dirty. daring you to try and keep it clean. there is something in that that i really enjoy. (also, friend of the blorg nurse jake is in the accompanying video. so that's fun!)

{bcbg max azria, photos by yannis vlamos at gorunway.com by way of style.com} 

{alexander wang spring 2013, photos by monica feudi at feudiguaineri.com by way of style.com}

atop this head

the fall is coming! there is some time yet. sure. but... before long it will be october. and there will be important decisions to decide. i would like your help with these decisions. or. at least one of them.

the hair decision.

i am growing my hair out just a bit. here's about what i'm aiming for. give or take. long-bob.

{katie nescher}

and here's the thing. i'm so hair-happy these days. i love all of the hairs! whatever do i do? a while back i was going to do my roots and keep on with this lightish blonde, but then a friend said the magic words ('you are looking awfully snp with those roots...') and i decided not to touch. a little dirty-messy for summer. great. but. i'd like to do a good ol' dye job come the fall and i can't choose. so. help! here's what the choices are:

{the white-ish hairs option} 

{the mixed hairs option}

{the darkest hairs option} 

{the red hairs option}

so please vote! and feel free to tell me your thoughts by way of comments-town. okay cool thanks.

Create your free online surveys with SurveyMonkey, the world's leading questionnaire tool.

ff

 oooooooooo! celebrity drams or whatever!

time to jump on the bandwagon and start a discussion of aaron sorkin's newest vehicle, 'the newsroom'. hoooray and hooorah! i love tv!

i'll say it once more. i love tv. really and truly. and i'm really enjoying 'the newsroom'. i look forward to sunday nights. but that doesn't mean it is a gooood show - i love a lot of bad tv. backstory:

i've never seen 'west wing'. but i have every intention of watching the whole thing basically in one sitting one day. (mono? can i have you again?) everyone smart and funny and great iknow loves west wing. so. i bet it is pretty amazeballs.

i loooooved 'sports night'. which wasn't around nearly long enough if you ask me. heartbreak.

and i was suuuper excited for 'the newsroom'. until this happened...

* aaron sorkin is rude to one of my favourites and internet girls everywhere furrow their brows

so i thought 'shoot. that doesn't seem very cool beans. sorkin seems to be a bit of an asshat... poop.' but, you know. separate the art from the artist *to a point* and go on living.

and after the pilot episode, sarah-roommate and i had a great chat about how haha, the women were actually pretty freaking great and the super-powerful-white-men-with-their-ideals were pretty reliant on the women who were competent and smart and got shit done. blah blah. not bad. okay!

but. as the show has gone on a few more episodes, the female characters are getting weaker... flakier. manipulate-able. really good at one thing or another, but then pretty crappy at, you know, being well-rounded living things. and ooooh how sad i was when jim 'rescued' maggie from her panic attack. damn it! damn! ugh. i was so hopeful for their relationship and then he went and tooook caaare of her.

anyway. what it comes down to is that i like the show. but also, maybe, aaron sorkin's not-so-developped idea of women is showing. and that's a real shame. or...

* the newsroom is incredibly hostile towards women

poop.

but here's a fun thing! i sure do love a meme.

* hey internet girl...

(also. one more thing. quickly. i'm glad that this trend of scrutinizing shows has emerged. you know. like it did with 'girls' and 'bunheads', both of which i love. too. and obviously this sort of conversation could be happening around a TON of shows, and maybe maybe maybe it will start to spread, and, omg, things will improve!!!??? it could happen. so. i'm glad.)

ff

i am feeling overwhelmed by words these last few days. so i haven't been reading much. instead. all pictures. pictures and pictures. because let's be truthful. emma is the one of us who is best at words. and i am the one of us who lives in a visual world. (good thing i write such a wooorrrdddddy blog, huh?)



so today. not much for words. just some girl-crushes. because having girl-crushes is, i think, so so so so important. respecting and loving other women. when we are taught to not trust... to compete... to be catty and callous. here are some of the girls (and women, shhhh) i'm mad crazy in love with, which you probably already know, but, yes.

{sarah nicole prickett; chloe sevigny; grace coddington; jennifer nichols; robyn; cat deeley; joanna newsom; kristen wiig}

 

 

plus there is the girl in the office across the hall who is soooo classy-beautiful and has the loveliest smile and seems to take up space in this commanding way that i can't understand.