Now, I like Jonah Hill as an actor, but, as I’m sure you’ve noticed from his work, or even if you’ve just seen previews, he is very, very fat. Neither movie mentions his weight, however. In Get Him to the Greek, he has a successful, high-powered career, despite being fairly young. Did I mention he also has a slim, beautiful girlfriend? And she’s a doctor.

His role in Cyrus is a little different. A twenty-one-years-old with a GED (having been homeschooled), Cyrus doesn’t have a job or go to school. His shares an uncomfortably close relationship with mom Molly leads him to do things like (minor spoiler alert) hiding John’s sneakers the first night he sleeps over. Cyrus doesn’t have a girlfriend or potential dates, or even have any friends — probably because he and Molly are reluctant to let anyone else into their little world. Still,  no one mentions his weight once throughout the movie, much less makes cheap fat jokes. The audience is supposed to dislike Jonah Hill’s character because of his dishonest and manipulative actions, not because of his appearance.

On TV, it’s the same story. Through the late 1990s-aughts, James Gadolfini’s Tony Soprano had slender Carmela (plus a myriad of mistresses). Even cartoons suck. “The Family Guy” features Lois, portrayed as the neighborhood hottie, who for some reason ended up with Peter, who is not only fat, but really, really, stupid.

“Glee” does a bit better. It does count a plus-sized African-American girl, Mercedes, among its cast (and she isn’t, thank God, forced to play the part of the sassy, fat black chick). But unlike the show’s slimmer actresses, she doesn’t have a love interest.

How many movies, or shows, can you think of, that feature fat actresses? Now how many can you think of where the actress isn’t playing a fat actress (as in, her weight isn’t the focus of the plot, she doesn’t constantly bemoan her weight and people aren’t making cracks about her size)? Now how many can you think of where the fat girl has a really hot boyfriend? Um… zero’s a number…

ABC Family has recently come out with a show called “Huge.” The poster features Nikki Blonsky standing awkwardly in a bathing suit, arms crossed her stomach. Clearly, “Fat Camp” will feature large actresses, but it will also be weight-focused.

It’s worth-noting that Sarah Silverman, a comedian for whom rape and Holocaust jokes are hardly taboo, and who once donned blackface in her now-canceled Comedy Central show, draws the line at fat jokes. As she says, “I don’t really care for like fat jokes about women, specifically… because I feel that we live in a society where fat men deserve love, and fat women do not deserve love — at least in white America. And so I feel like that’s an ugly thing, and it doesn’t make me laugh.”

Of course, outside Hollywood, large women often find love, have  relationships and achieve happiness. You’d just never know it from American entertainment.

As tempting as it is to want to block out the antics of the FOX cult nation, it’s terribly important that we all continue to keep an eye on them. Remember: tea baggers are like rabid chihuahuas. They may look too ridiculous to be dangerous with foam dripping from their tiny, yapping jaws, but don’t let appearances lull you into complacency. No matter how silly they may appear, large numbers of any kind of irrational, blood thirsty, dim witted animals are dangerous.

With this in mind I created Logical Fallacy Bingo! Monitoring coverage of our delusional and/or propaganda poisoned fellow ‘Mericans is scary and sad, to say the least. Logical Fallacy Bingo makes it into a lively game the whole delinquent intellectual family can enjoy. Now you can “know thy enemy,” brush up on your debate skillz and have fun all at the same time!

This link goes to the Google doc, but you should feel free to make your own cards so the entire gang can participate. I picked some of the most common fallacies for my example card, but there are plenty more to choose from. LogicalFallacies.info has a good list with clear examples, or a book that I really enjoy and reference regularly* is How to Win Every Argument: The Use and Abuse of Logic by logician and philosopher Dr. Madsen Pirie.

For prizes you could give out Aristotle t-shirts, mini busts,ball caps, etc..

* The only problem I have with this book is that many of the author is British and many of the examples are drawn from real incidents in England’s recent political history. Unless you’re a politically obsessed Anglophile you’ll have to look some things up.

But even in the midst of national and international tragedy, you surely noticed the passing of Rue McClanahan, “The Golden Girls” saucy Southern Belle, Blanche Devereaux. Although I don’t catch the show in syndication often now, it was a childhood favorite. I was a quirky kid, preferring the company of older children and adults to people my age, and “The Golden Girls,” “The Bob Newhart Show” and “Murder She Wrote” to cartoons. While other twentysomethings might rattle off the names of the characters on “Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles,” I can tell you all about Rose, Sophia, Dorothy and Blanche.

Long before the radically “feminist” “Sex and the City” gave us Samantha Jones, America watched “The Golden Girls” — a show about women who were friends rather than competitors or petty backstabbers. Most significantly, from 1985-1992, during the very conservative Reagan and Bush the First years, people watched a show about women who had full, rich lives — including active sex lives — after menopause and marriage. (The cultural relevance of all this likely eluded me at age eight.)

Things haven’t changed much in Hollywood and television. Leading men are paired with actresses twenty years their junior and, on TV, overweight guys are married to slim, conventionally attractive women.s

At least we’ll always have “The Golden Girls.” Rest in Peace, Rue, and thank you for being my friend.

Now, I didn’t see the first Sex and the City, and have no plans to see the second. But I did watch much of the series in college with an ex-boyfriend, who really liked the show (yes, he is straight). My reasons for loathing the franchise are personal and political. You see, my first name is Carrie, and, over the years,  some people have exclaimed upon my introducing myself,  “Like “Sex and the City!” This is a sign we will not become close friends.

I identify more with aspects of second-wave feminism than that of the third wave. Obviously, a stay-at-home mom can call herself a feminist just as much as a woman who pursues a high-powered career. However, in an effort to be inclusive, some third-wave feminists defend a woman’s choice to do pretty much anything. There’s not even the suggestion that perhaps one woman’s life choices may be better than another’s.

Do we really have to champion everything a woman does? For instance, are Michelle Duggar’s “achievements” just as laudable as Michelle Obama’s? Don’t forget the former inspired the internet poster “Vagina: It’s not a clown car.”

Some applaud “Sex and the City” for its depiction of close female friendships, and the fact that it showed unmarried women having guilt-free sex. That’s all well and good. My problem with the TV show was its depiction of conspicuous consumption, or what I would term “feminism through buying.” For six years, “Sex and the City” presented a lifestyle unobtainable to most women, even in a more robust economy. The economic inequalities in a city like New York are never examined. But more importantly, why is it a feminist statement to own hundreds of painful, impractical shoes? When did it become empowering to pay money for a stranger to pour hot wax on sensitive body parts and rip out the hair?

Perhaps most importantly, why are we so starved for female-centric entertainment that four very one-dimensional, shallow characters became so important?

I wasn’t interested in “Lost.” It looked to me like a (more) scripted version of the worst kind of reality TV. If it takes place on a beach, I concluded, there is no possibility the women will be portrayed as human beings. They will be shrewy and semi-nude at all times. Bitch Island. It will be about the fights they have over some bland, muscle-y dude. Swimsuits and face-slapping. Plus, how long can the conceit of surviving on an uninhabited island realistically play out? It won’t last a season.
I was flipping through channels. I didn’t have cable. It was bleak.

I’m not one of those “I hate television” people. I like television. Even network television. “Twin Peaks” was on network television. “Arrested Development” was on network television. Neither for very long, but still. I’ve always believed in it as a writers’ medium — the most immediate way to transmit strong narratives to a mass audience. But I was losing faith. Flipping through channels, finding nothing.

Then something caught my eye. A grey-haired man in a pristine suit in a jungle. Just an image. It was jarring and kind of creepy and lovingly shot, and nothing, nothing on a network drama at the time was ever startling or weird or artfully arranged. I had to know what the hell was going on.

I’ve now been in a dysfunctional relationship with this show for six years. We’re breaking up this Sunday. More accurately, ”Lost” is breaking up with me (me, and millions of other faithful suckers.)

As with any breakup, the psyche develops coping mechanisms to help you get over it: alternating between remembering only the good times, until the pain of loss becomes to much to bear; then recalling only the disappointments, the failures, the times you almost left for good, until you’re so angry, you’re kind of glad it’s over.

If you’ve ever watched this show, you know there’s plenty from both sides. Schlocky performances, dead-weight episodes (and, debatably, seasons), laughable special effects, annoying tropes, heavy-handed symbolism, clunky retcon, obnoxious musical cues, storylines written irreversibly into corners, narrative logic conveniently invented and quickly abandoned. But also: some really wonderful acting, gorgeous cinematography, challenging allusions, headspinning mysteries, intelligent, slow-burning storytelling, nuanced character growth, and, every once in a while, flashes of the sublime.

“Lost” is a show which rewards, and occasionally demands, loyalty and careful viewing. Despite its many sins and essential silliness, it often withstands repeat viewings, analysis, even research. You can’t say that about many shows on a major network. No matter how disappointing the series finale might be (and it will inevitably disappoint many fans), history will view it kindly. I believe it will be considered one of the best programs ever to air on television. Maybe the worst of the best, but among the best nonetheless.

So before “Lost” breaks up with us for good, let’s remember some of the flashes of brilliance that kept us faithful to one series for six years. Five favorite moments, after the jump. (Spoilers for already-aired episodes.) Add your picks in the comments.


Jack pursuing his deceased father through the jungle. This is the moment that hooked me. The scene that widened the scope of the story and told us: this is not simply ”Lord of the Flies” with hot thirty-somethings. It’s not just going to be about water and weapons and waiting for rescue. There’s something supernatural or psychological or both going on. And it’s creepy.

Characters in the alternate timeline flashing to their lives in island timeline. Do you ever get the feeling something is not quite right? As though you’re not in the right place or time; you quite literally belong somewhere else? And sometimes, you catch glimpses of where that might be? This season’s flashes, brought about by love and near-death, is the only new story component that intrigues me as much as anything in the early seasons.

To me, it’s a big, brilliant idea, and it plays on every sense of displacement you’ve experienced, every glancing deja vu, every time you wake from a dream and for a moment you can’t quite tell what’s real, every time you meet someone and you’d swear you’ve met before. Sci-fi often deals with unhinged time or alternate realities, but this season’s “Lost” takes a more mature, poignant approach to these themes: only love or death will set you right.

www.youtube.com/watch?v=XJIH2VmNWQI

Charlie’s death. This was when I reassured that, as far as the mythology of the island had spun out, “Lost” was still a show about people. True, the death of the washed-up junkie/Britrock semi-star was one of the strongest arguments for “the island is a kind of Karmic clearinghouse that redeems you and then kills you” theory kicking about at the time. But it was also heart-rending. I cried, okay? Real tears that I typically reserve for real people.

www.youtube.com/watch?v=E7gX8zzfM-s

“The Constant.” The whole thing.

www.youtube.com/watch?v=s96iG2lwam4

The very first shot in the series. This scene took its time. The peaceful bamboo canopy, then the bloodied man. The quiet, then the noise. It was clear from the first few seconds: this was something a little bit different.

I’m gonna miss you, “Lost.”

First of all, his name is fucking Rand. Like that intellectually poisonous witch Ayn Rand — perhaps the most corrosive “thinker” in modern times. Now, I’ve heard tell that Paul the Younger is actually named after Randy Travis. Which is slightly less unfortunate. But you can’t tell me that, given his father’s Libertarianism, Rand isn’t aware of what he’s telegraphing by dropping the “y.”

By now, All Good Progressives will have seen Rand’s appearance on Rachel Maddow where he says that businesses should be allowed to discriminate against minorities because it’s their First Amendment right to do so. Forget about those lunch counter protests — In Rand’s view, the Civil Rights Act is a classic case of government meddling in the private sector. In case you missed it:

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

This is a typically Libertarian/Objectivist line of thought — government out of everything. Unless it comes to armies and badges, that is, in which case our rights are secondary. OK, I’ll admit that this is a gross generalization about Libertarianism, of which there are many flavors. Sort of like Ben & Jerry’s but without the commie-pinko leanings.

Despite the breast-swelling pride that comes from Defending Liberty! and Trumpeting Individual Freedom! the tragedy of Libertariansim lies in the impossibility of its real-world application. We can all agree that unicorns are awesome, but have you ever seen one in real life?

But back to the real wingnuts.

The three-way between the Tea Party, the Republicans and Libertarians points to a troubling future for American conservatism, particularly on issues of race. By blindly adhering to discredited free market ideologies and fusing it with a xenophobic mistrust of the Other, today’s right wing is playing a dangerous game for short-term political gain. It’s a deal with the devil, essentially.

To outsiders, the Tea Party looks like a bunch of willfully ignorant white folks who, instead of debating the issues, abuse the English language (which they want everyone to speak) via colored-sharpie “protest” signs. Most insulting is that they pretend to understand the intent of our country’s founders. I’m pretty sure most of them couldn’t pass junior high civics. But if you’re a member, like Rand Paul, it’s a powerful movement to restore America’s greatness.

The glue that holds these factions together is a desire to return to an America that never actually existed. European fascism took root by exploiting a similar yearning. This desire, coupled with the general mistrust of anything alien, is a psychological affliction common to right-leaning groups and individuals throughout history. The Tea Party is just the latest manifestation.

The GOP, bereft of any credible policies of their own, have embraced this virulent ideology in order to win elections. Their strategy may pay short-term dividends, but looking at long-term demographic shifts in America, it’s a recipe for irrelevance.

The current administration missed several opportunities to close down the rhetoric currently being spouted by teabaggers and their ilk. One of Obama’s biggest mistakes since taking office was not exploiting the “fear vacuum” to his advantage. Conservatives of all stripes could have easily been cowed had he been willing to get his hands a little dirty. The Right, with their sadomasochistic tendencies, typically respond best to authority. By allowing an opposition to foment, the administration helped pave the way for Tea Partiers, Birthers and assorted morons who bleat and screech about issues they don’t even understand.

Where were these Freedom and Liberty loving Americans during the Bush years? You know, like when the NSA was listening to their phone calls? I don’t recall once hearing the words “tyranny” from their side. You cannot simultaneously decry the erosion of freedom when policymakers attempt to set limits on corporate abuses but lay down for serious and egregious offenses against our civil liberties.

Just like you can’t scream about small government and then support a national security/military industrial complex that literally eats up the majority of our budget. By the way, this sector is the biggest statist group there is. It’s all handouts and subcontracts. Sucking on Uncle Sam’s tit as the government’s core competencies and essential services are completely hollowed out.

Well, you could be outraged about one thing and not another. But then you’d be a big, dumb, smelly hypocrite.

Not too long ago (around four decades), conservatives were against the kind of government bloat I described above, because they saw it as contrary to our nation’s principles. After WWII, however, profiteering — war and otherwise — became normalized, even encouraged. Since then, the country has steadily moved from its roots as a Republic to a global Empire. And both parties have played a role in this shift.

I’d like to think that a credible third party could emerge, but it isn’t the Tea Party.

And it’s certainly not going to be led by anyone named Rand.

www.youtube.com/watch?v=n7eiOsxzjKc

…and then somehow Conway Twitty is singing with The Residents…

www.youtube.com/watch?v=PK5qKhPBnlA

And there’s some amazing Moroccan music, and fucking Sun Ra, then Bob Weir (?!), Screamin’ Jay Hawkins, and Bongwater, all at once. On TV! And then — this is fucked up — when the show is over, the channel I’m watching just gives up and goes off the air. Like, stops broadcasting. They show some old movie of the american flag, play the national anthem and then it was just static.

www.youtube.com/watch?v=nQsR_gZuYCc

How fucked up is that?

Anyone who was a child in the ’80s certainly remembers the fleet of shitty animated cartoons in the afternoons and Saturday mornings. This was around the time when the industry was deregulated and transformed (pun intended!) into a platform for advertising, targeting America’s youth as the great new frontier market. During the Reagan administration, legislation was passed which dramatically increased advertisers’ ability to market products to children, increasing the allotment of time per program in which they could run spots and include commercial content directly related to programming.

Before the industry was deregulated, advertising on children’s programs was limited to nine and-a-half minutes on weekends and twelve minutes per hour on weekdays. Since then, commercials have taken up as much as eleven minutes per hour on weekends, when viewing by children is heaviest, and up to fourteen minutes per hour on weekdays.

-Jeremy Gerard, New York Times

The Media Education Foundation has these facts to report:

In a nutshell: The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) had tried to ban all advertising aimed at children eight and under, but the toy and cereal industries fought back and eventually won, convincing Congress to pass the FTC Improvement Act of 1980.

The FTC Improvement Act actually did the opposite of banning advertising to kids: it mandated that the FTC would no longer have any authority whatsoever to regulate advertising and marketing to children, leaving marketers virtually free to target kids as they saw fit.

…One result of deregulation was that it became possible to create a television program for the sole purpose of selling a toy, essentially turning kid’s shows into program-length toy commercials. And sure enough, the year after deregulation, all ten of the best selling toys were based on media: Transformers, G.I. Joe, Carebears, Voltron, Mask, Cabbage Patch Kids, He-Man, Super Gobots, WWF Figures, and My Little Pony.

…Children now spend $40 billion dollars of their own money and influence another $700 billion in spending annually — roughly the equivalent of the combined economies of the world’s 115 poorest countries.

The shows were fucking terrible from an artistic standpoint, with serious continuity flaws and simply awful art and animation. Some of the associated toys were pretty bad too, but what the creators of these cartoons successfully provided was the relevant mythology around which children could structure their play.

A significant part of childhood cognitive development is participation in dramatic play (when kids act out scenarios with scale objects, such as a doll house or farm set, it is referred to as “miniature dramatic play”).

Dramatic play permits children to fit the reality of the world into their own interests and knowledge. One of the purest forms of symbolic thought available to young children, dramatic play contributes strongly to the intellectual development of children (Piaget, 1962). Symbolic play is a necessary part of a child’s language development (Edmonds, 1976).

-The Center, part of the College of Education and Human services at Western Illinois University

Recently, I got an urge to watch one of my favorites from the mid-’80s, a rock ‘n’ roll fantasy called “Jem,” later “Jem and the Holograms.” The show’s premise: Jerrica Benton, who had recently and suspiciously lost her father, inherits one half of Starlight Records and Starlight House, a home for foster girls. When Evil Record Executive Eric Raymond refuses to provide funding for the dilapidated Starlight House, while simultaneously presenting the obnoxious and sociopathic Misfits (sadly, no Danzig) as Starlight Records new flagship act, Jerrica is forced to take drastic action to preserve her family’s legacy (presumably Jerrica does not have access to a good entertainment lawyer). A pair of magical earrings are mysteriously delivered to her, which she soon finds are linked to a fabulous computer called Synergy, “designed to be the ultimate visual entertainment synthesizer.” Led to Synergy’s secret lair, housed in an abandoned drive-in movie theater, she and her friends find themselves outfitted with not only the magical hologram-generating supercomputer, but also glamorous fashions, musical instruments and a totally rad convertible roadster. Thus equipped, the friends form Jem and the Holograms, a pop group aimed to defeat the Misfits in a battle of the bands, which will win Jerrica total control of the record company as well as a feature film deal and a mansion.

The Holograms’ songs themselves were poorly written but well executed (Jem’s singing was performed by Britta Phillips, later of the band Luna and composer for The Squid and The Whale) — essentially music-video-style backdrops for fantastical montages of Jerrica and her boyfriend traveling over rainbows astride unicorns, etc. The show delivered exactly what it promised — all of the glamor, glitter, fashion and fame that any human mind could handle within 30 minutes.

“Jem” was a show and a line of Hasbro toys marketed towards girls, intended to edge in on the behemoth Barbie brand. However, the Jem dolls proved to be large and awkward, their clothes easily fitting onto the body of a Ken doll, transforming him into an ever-lovable drag queen (but certainly not the terrifying supreme she-male embodied by Barbie herself). Mattel simply offered it’s knock-off line, “Barbie and the Rockers,” and subsequent efforts to market a girls’ doll, such as merchandise spin-offs of Disney’s pathetic princess heroines, were licensed to Mattel under the mighty fashion doll standard of Queen Barbie and her sundry, innocuously ethnic friends.

The children who grew up in the era of cartoon commercials are now evidencing a backlash, particularly in terms of feminine gender roles. Politically conscious feminist parents are rejecting the model of pink and sparkles and princesses altogether. In the various educational and toy retail fields in which I have found myself employed, I’ve wondered, sometimes aloud, why a parent would discourage a child from aspiring to be the leader of a nation (or merely fabulous).

Recently, I have been watching the Bill Moyers/Joseph Campbell series “The Power of Myth,” in which Campbell outlines the psychological symbology of the collective unconscious through storytelling. In certain episodes, Campbell speaks about coming-of-age myths in which the protagonist enacts adventures to the end of maturity and self-realization, as well as experiencing a sense of spiritual wonder that creates a sense of connectedness to society and the universe.

I was surprised to recognize, in the storyline of the “Jem” series as well as the standard princess tale in general, this myth of the transition into adulthooed. Read any familiar Grimm’s fairy tale, such as “Cinderella,” “Snow White” and the like, and you will see similar content. A beautiful child falls from grace when she is suddenly bereft of parental guidance, often at the mercy of a hostile Id-like force (evil stepsisters, perhaps). In exile, the heroine takes on a typically mystical persona, often one in which she is secretly magical and glamourous, awaiting the opportunity in which she can be recognized as the proficient heir to a great kingdom. Often, the kingdom itself is the realm of magic and universal love, represented by a marriage and consecrated by humane acts such as the forgiveness of her former oppressors or benevolence towards the less fortunate. And that, my friends, is a fully-realized and mature adult.

This myth is not just a gender-specific coming-of-age tale, but one of a person realizing that their place in the world is bound to a sense of beauty grace and love. It is the magical, rock star aspect of a person, and our culture at its best encourages females to adorn the psychological environment with a sense of wonder and elemental power. The archaic use of the word glamor denotes magic and enchantment, and the urge to permeate the experience of maturity with these qualities is a noble urge indeed. This tale, told in the show “Jem” and in other forms via the Hasbro cartoon canon, was a story of this urge. Its appeal is therefore no mystery.

Perhaps the later realization that this story was told to us so we’d pester our parents to spend at Toys R Us put a sour taste in our mouths. The princess story was transformed into yet another tale of commodities, of a shrunken plastic body for sale, covered with rhinestones, yet not good enough to be Barbie. But if you believe this, you will believe that the major label’s current flagship act is the best music available, and Eric Raymond wins total control of Starlight Records forever.

You don’t have to buy the clunky man-doll and the mute plastic key-tar to believe in the power of sparkling, magical pop music and unicorn montages. You can still understand that it’s all just a hologram, an illusion. But every once in a while, if not often, we need someone to come along wearing a ton of rhinestones and glittery body paint, winning the day with their fabulousness and glamor and living happily ever after in the Starlight mansion.

That, for certain, is real. And truly, truly, truly outrageous.

This Monday (Feb. 8th) at 10pm, PBS will broadcast “Blueprint America: Beyond The Motor City,” a documentary about urban infrastructure that features music by Neil. Here’s what he has to say about the flick and its soundtrack:

“[The movie] focuses on the growth, decay and future of Detroit and looks to high-speed rail in Spain and California for inspiration, which gave me the opportunity to have fun with all sorts of Motown, Spanish and futuristic computer-y sounds. It’s the first thing of its kind I’ve done and I actually haven’t even seen a final cut myself, so tune in and see it with me for the first time!”

You don’t have to tell me twice. Here’s a link to the show’s site, which has a trailer and a handful of clips.

It always makes me happy to see our crew making things happen out there in the world. And if you want further confirmation of the talent ’round here, check out Susan Norton’s post from yesterday.

www.youtube.com/watch?v=0oiN8P4fmAE

The Baby Jesus loves high-fructose corn syrup!

[UPDATE: how is this video any less gay than the one that got banned from the Super Bowl?]