(I totally chose this picture because I like her hair. See? I'm not totally hateful.)
So it's Wednesday before I get around to writing here. Sorry. I just didn't have anything to say. It must have been a slow news week all around because yesterday there were SIX articles about the Lena Dunham show Girls on Jezebel and another two on Salon.
Don't get me wrong: I'm not mistaking Jezebel for a hard-hitting news source (this is where I learned that Lindsay Lohan was glitter-bombed on her way to court yesterday!). I also appreciate the well-written TV episode critique, especially because I believe TV is just as important as books and movies to our cultural landscape. If not more so.
And this has nothing to do with Lena herself. Heck, I even defended her when one of my idols was a bit dismissive and snobby about all the attention she's been getting. I am all for more women making art in the world and having their voices heard, even if they are young, white, and privileged.
That said, who the hell is watching this show? I have read the profiles and criticism, and even the occasional episode summary when bored at work. I realize that even though I'm 32, I am not the target demographic of this show. Reading about Sheryl Sanberg and breast pumping at work seems to be more or where I'm at right now. I assume that the people who are into this show are other twenty-somethings because who else can possibly be interested? But do people in their twenties get HBO? Are they just stealing and streaming the episodes? Or are twenty-somethings too busy working crappy jobs/fucking people to care about a show where the characters are working better crappy jobs/fucking people?
Anyway, I wish Jezebel/Slate/Salon/Huff Po, etc wouldn't write about it so much. Not because I think Lena Dunham is undeserving, but because it just seems to be the same shit over and over again. Yes, she gets naked and portrays sex without shame (or thought--depending on your POV). Yes, she has a "regular" body, whatever the fuck that is supposed to mean. But at this point it's like, so? I'm not sure if this show is really contributing much more than this, which kind of makes it an inflated, artsy version of those Dove commercials. Yes, it warrants a season finale write up, but not six separate articles. Even if Jezebel tried pulling this shit on Mad Men, I would find that excessive.
What I want to know is, when will Jezebel start writing about the shows I really care about? You know, the series that have been canceled for twenty years, but because of Netflix I'm watch-bingeing like crazy. Where is the article about what the hell happened to Mulder's sister? Because that's something I'd be way into reading.
I think we'll have to start a book club, for Netflix shows. That way we can all sync up and start watching Cheers together (or what have you) and then I can write scathing critiques about Diane and all of you will care.
Never seen Girls, though I've wanted to try it. I do think most of the criticism I've read tends to pretend like it's not possibly a self-aware ridicule of rich-white-girl problems, if it's not whining about the fact it's a show about young women.
ReplyDeleteThat said, I think a friend said it best where she thought the show didn't deserve half of the praise nor the criticism that it gets. Six separate articles sounds likes link bait to me.
Oh, Diane. I watch GIRLS. I can admit it. And last season was good. I read an article about how shows about 4 women are essentially protraying the same archetypes (Golden Girls, Sex and the City, etc.) but that unlike SATC, GIRLS was doing what made the Golden Girls so awesome, in that it was portraying believable people. Because nobody who is a "writer" can afford Manolos and to lunch at 5-star restaurants everyday. Particularly not if you write for a fucking newspaper. But this season was pretty shakey, I thought, though it redeemed itself (sort of) in the finale.
ReplyDeleteBut is it worth 8 different critiques? I'm not sure. I feel like its target group is small, even though its audience is larger. Carter watches it and likes it, but he likes the fact that it's character-driven, not because it portrays anything that he (or I, for that matter) can really relate to on any level deeper than, "One time, in kindergarten, my ear drum burst, too. Of course, I didn't burst it myself with an errant qtip."
I'm binge-watching Frasier right now. Daphne just got engaged. Dear lord.
Oh Donny! I never got that because it's so obvious that Daphne is settling. Maybe he's there to make Niles seem more manly? SPOILER ALERT (circa 1998): There is a later episode, after Niles and Daphne get together, where Daphne goes on and on to Roz about how Niles is an animal in the sack. Huh. On an unrelated note, gotta go google image search some David Hyde Pierce.
Deleteuse a torrent, steal that shit, feel relevant
ReplyDelete