My, that's offensive. She did use a ouija board herself, but, um, this must be a spoof, surely? I'm sure the estate would come down like a tonne of fucking bricks.
Is this from the makers of the Twin Towers Jenga game? It reminds me of the Titanic-themed slot machine I saw not long ago at the casino. Do the manufacturers not realize that they're basing "games" on real people who died tragically? Yes, it's still "too soon." And it always will be.
This absolutely sucks. Not because her poetry is incredible (which it is), but because LOL it's hilarious to make fun of suicide!1! Graphically. Particularly when her son committed suicide not even a year ago.
Good thing the overweight and impoverished white folks are still chock full of funny, too.
@Penny: It's called a planchette (I would not have known this had it not been for Shirley Jackson's The Haunting of Hill House, which prominently features automatic writing.) I hadn't noticed it until you pointed it out. Ugh.
At least her son didn't live to see this. Hey, maybe they can make a Ouija board for Nicholas Hughes, too. I mean, why not? Fun fun funny!
What a profoundly unpleasant article (the Guardian piece that is). Liz Jones may indeed be odd to put it mildly but this is considerably nastier than anything of hers I've ever read.
@greatsheelephant: Really? Every piece of hers I've read has her describing her "friends" as stupid, ugly, flabby, hideous, disgusting, idiotic, etc.
This piece seems pretty mild by comparison. In fact, there was really nothing negative that she doesn't already reveal in her own writing, and there were even some sympathetic elements (like the parts about her rescuing animals, even if she seems to project her own high-needs personality on them).
Speaking of Irene Dunne comedies, I highly recommend The Awful Truth, about a small-town girl who writes a scandalous bestseller under a pen name, has her life turned upside-down by the big-city cover artist/suitor who follows her home, then chases the boy back to town and proceeds to give him merry hell.
Sadie, you are a master of understatement. Anyone who can throw in
(she vacuumed her lawn)
as an aside deserves that title. In brackets! Fucking genius.
Also, WTF Jezebel? Pages take like 20 minutes to load, and there are hardly any comments, so I assume everyone is having the same problems. It was like this yesterday, but it was back to normal last night - what happened?
The whole attitude on confessional writing is colored by your view of journalism as a whole. Is it centered about the timely and relevant delivery of important events in the world? Is it a profession designed to build common experience with a readership through interesting storytelling? Is it an exercise in brevity and hard news, or an exploration of more meandering features? But under all this...who are journalists? Are they fact-finders, news gatherers, real reporters, focused on the story, or are they more fleshed-out people, with thoughts and experiences coloring their world view and the articles they write?
In my opinion, the issue isn't with women being confessional. It's with the 4th estate breaking down the 4th wall. Columns are generally a place for reporters and editors to exercise some more literary writing, to reflect on some personal experience...but when does it become "I'm a name you know, so let me tell you more about myself, and let this inform you every time you see my byline"?
As a journalist, I'd have a problem with trying to maintain an appropriate professional "distance" between my work and my personal self, if the personal side is so viscerally exposed in the professional realm, in the same spot. Now if one retired or quit the job, and then wrote a book, that'd be a different story.
i have a problem with the suggestion that women are so intellectually and emotionally vulnerable that any pathetic self-confessional has that much coercion power over her. speaking for myself, i haven't the slightest intention of taking seriously Zoe Lewis' "advice." i don't even know this woman. she has nothing to do with me. and this is my reaction to all such "confessional" writing. in fact it's a bit insulting to assume that most women are so easily leached of their own good opinion.
I'm confused- is this about journalism, or is this about poetry/literature?? Because there is a difference that should be recognized. Much of Plath's work is "confessional," not the least of which being The Bell Jar. The interesting thing about comparing biography with literature is that it gives the reader a chance to look through a writer's window, to see how truth is invariably translated into fantasm by vehicle of distance and memory. It makes me think of Jean Rhys, whose work, aside from Wide Sargasso Sea, is almost inarguably "confessional." Does her recognition of her own misery and "doormat" status negate the value of her work? I personally don't think so- her work is art of the highest order. There are certain readers of both genders in the world who like crap. I don't want to read about someone's Bad Mommy anxiety in the newspaper, but I also don't want to read Brigette Jones' Diary...
Confessional journalism certainly isn't great for women. I think Fortini isn't quite right when she makes it seem that these pieces are individual women making individual choices (see: I say, if some women want to write about their miseries, let them.). Not to harp on about coercion too much, but there is definitely a financial incentive to exploit one's own miseries in public. Self-flagellation for being a bad mommy (for instance) doesn't make other readers feel like it's OK to care about themselves more than their children (for instance), it reinforces the idea that there is a "good mommy" and the idea that "bad mommy"ness is a sin that must be atoned for. Editors know this sort of thing sells, so they offer a high price for it.
Also, I think poetry and novels and memoirs are meaningfully different from the sort of thing that appears in the Daily Mail. I'm not sure it's fair to lump poetry in with confessional journalism.
Well, does all female-oriented journalism have to meet some sort of standard of seriousness and self-betterment, and/or Expressly For The Betterment Of Some Sort Of Cause?
I mean, off the top of my head, I can think of a lot of "confessional" type pieces that weren't meant to be particularly incisive, or artistic, or even, I dunno, "serious." Like Moe's tampon piece.
At the same time, there's a difference between that sort of writing, and the "OMG BAW POOR ME" stuff that seems to be the filling in the shit sandwich that is the Daily Mail. All, "I USED LIP GLOSS AND IT WENT ALL WRONG! A heartbreaking expose of one woman's torment!" and "MY LACOSTE POLO LEFT ME FOR A MORE PRETENTIOUS PREPPY! A story of my sadness and VERY VERY SERIOUS NAVEL-GAZING!!!11"
@tscheese: Oops, I forgot to add - I was gonna say, Moe's tampon piece was obviously a little bit self-effacing, and it was definitely about something uncomfortable and a bit scary, but it was good journalism because it was absolutely DEAD-ON for her targeted audience, it was informative, and a lot of people could relate to it. A little sensational? Well, sure, it was definitely squicky, but sensational doesn't HAVE to mean "exploitative", right?
@tscheese: When I get hand-wringy about this kind of thing, it's because I don't think the forum is appropriate. I don't especially like the existence of the Modern Love column in the NYT, for example, because of my antiquated and unrealistic notions of the way print media Used To Be, in some era (which I realize is almost entirely a figment of my nostalgic imagination) when confessional journalism wasn't mixed up in the same publications as Real News. The conflation of blogging with "serious journalism" leads to this sort of thing. Of course, I'm well aware that overshares have always been a part of newspaper journalism. I just wish it wasn't this way, because I like to compartmentalize my life as much as possible.
I suppose that's why it doesn't bother me on jezebel (Moe's tampon piece is a great example); jezebel is "Celebrity, Sex, Fashion for Women." It's not the new york times. I like it this way.
09/10/09
09/10/09
09/09/09
09/09/09
09/09/09
09/09/09
Good thing the overweight and impoverished white folks are still chock full of funny, too.
09/09/09
09/09/09
09/09/09
09/09/09
09/09/09
09/09/09
09/09/09
At least her son didn't live to see this. Hey, maybe they can make a Ouija board for Nicholas Hughes, too. I mean, why not? Fun fun funny!
08/04/09
08/04/09
This piece seems pretty mild by comparison. In fact, there was really nothing negative that she doesn't already reveal in her own writing, and there were even some sympathetic elements (like the parts about her rescuing animals, even if she seems to project her own high-needs personality on them).
08/03/09
08/03/09
08/03/09
(she vacuumed her lawn)
as an aside deserves that title. In brackets! Fucking genius.
Also, WTF Jezebel? Pages take like 20 minutes to load, and there are hardly any comments, so I assume everyone is having the same problems. It was like this yesterday, but it was back to normal last night - what happened?
07/06/09
In my opinion, the issue isn't with women being confessional. It's with the 4th estate breaking down the 4th wall. Columns are generally a place for reporters and editors to exercise some more literary writing, to reflect on some personal experience...but when does it become "I'm a name you know, so let me tell you more about myself, and let this inform you every time you see my byline"?
As a journalist, I'd have a problem with trying to maintain an appropriate professional "distance" between my work and my personal self, if the personal side is so viscerally exposed in the professional realm, in the same spot. Now if one retired or quit the job, and then wrote a book, that'd be a different story.
07/06/09
07/06/09
07/06/09
Also, I think poetry and novels and memoirs are meaningfully different from the sort of thing that appears in the Daily Mail. I'm not sure it's fair to lump poetry in with confessional journalism.
07/06/09
*tap tap*
Editors' demands? Deja vu?
More female-on-female snarking, as opposed to possibly confronting what the real problem(s) might be?
And having been possibly pressured by your own editor to feed the argument, for pageviews?
Or having come up with that bright idea yourself?
*headdesk*
07/06/09
I mean, off the top of my head, I can think of a lot of "confessional" type pieces that weren't meant to be particularly incisive, or artistic, or even, I dunno, "serious." Like Moe's tampon piece.
At the same time, there's a difference between that sort of writing, and the "OMG BAW POOR ME" stuff that seems to be the filling in the shit sandwich that is the Daily Mail. All, "I USED LIP GLOSS AND IT WENT ALL WRONG! A heartbreaking expose of one woman's torment!" and "MY LACOSTE POLO LEFT ME FOR A MORE PRETENTIOUS PREPPY! A story of my sadness and VERY VERY SERIOUS NAVEL-GAZING!!!11"
07/06/09
07/06/09
I suppose that's why it doesn't bother me on jezebel (Moe's tampon piece is a great example); jezebel is "Celebrity, Sex, Fashion for Women." It's not the new york times. I like it this way.