The L Word, Jerry, Dean & Me (A re-statement of purpose)

I promised posts on both The L Word and Martin & Lewis in recent days. This one is meant to fufill both those promises. It's not as much of a stretch as it seems. Lewis' new book about his partner helped me organize a few thoughts about what I think are the weaknesses of Showtime's lesbian soap opera. He writes:

Pathos was, to Dean Martin, the worst kind of flag-waving. Just keep em laughing, was his philosophy. Keep it cool...

Flag-waving, in this instance, means the kind of performance that is excessive, or even fanatical, in begging for an audience's love. In other words, the kind Lewis gave 95% of the time and from which Martin distanced himself.

I said I was going to try to post about what style of show business I think each man represents; well, Lewis is the side that makes me feel ashamed of even wanting to be in show business. There's undeniable talent, but there's no charm, there's no coaxing, there's no, for lack of a better word...seduction. Martin, on the other hand, was all about seduction. There's little charm or seduction (not speaking only sexually) on The L Word, either

As a writer, if I have to lay something out (no play on words intended) for an audience, I'd rather not do it. And yes, this is another thing I hate about The L Word: They flag-wave their pathos, and the characters speak in billboards.

One woman tells her mother her shrink "doesn't have a problem with my sexuality." Another stands and makes a big speech to her father insisting that he recognize her love for her then-estranged partner as just as gosh-darned real as his for her late mother. A third...well, this is my favorite. A character on the show is, in the first season, gay but not comfortable being physically affectionate with women in public. She has a speech that begins...it actually begins..."I'm gay, and when I deny that, I deny the best part of myself..."

Cut to Ben shouting "Oh, shut up!" at the screen.

I suppose I can see how some people might see scenes like these as breaths of fresh air or even that these women are insisting upon their dignity, but to me they're doing just the opposite...and they're about as subtle as Jerry Lewis.

And that's saying nothing about last season's "male gaze" subplot with the male housemate hiding cameras to spy on a few of the women having sex. Get it, get it, huh, cause straight guys only think of the lesbians as sex objects...get it, get it, huh? Clever.

Dignity of characters is of increasing importance to me, and one thing I think you'll never (or rarely) see mine do is beg for someone's esteem or respect. I'm not just talking about my gay characters, but yeah, Keitha would die first.

I like characters who know they're deserving of estreem and respect, and if you don't, they have no time for you. I like brave characters, which I think Keitha is (for that matter so is Nancy-for those one or two of you who know my first play). And one of the rules of bravery, at least for me, is that you don't talk about it.

It's not exactly a new observation, but one of the reasons Martin & Lewis hit so big is because they balanced each other. Martin had in spades the dignity that Lewis simply never wore comfortably, even on those rare occasions when he tried.

If Lewis represents the shameful side of show business then Martin, oddly, represents the side to which I aspire. He pleased, but was not eager to please.

The L Word is not exactly a guilty pleasure for me (it's not like, say, the Blue Collar Comedy Tour movies...). It's more like...you know when you have a sore tooth and you can't stop touching it with your tongue? That's the feeling I have when I look in on an episode; how long can I watch this before having to zap away or mute?

Why do I keep trying? I dunno. Maybe because it seems like I should like it (which, of course, is a dumb reason to do absolutely anything). Maybe I'm just trying to figure out why it's successful enough in the ratings and with the critics not to be cancelled. Certainly I think I know something about the eagerness of lesbians to see themselves represented on television, even if it's not on a great, or even good show.

Maybe I'm just looking for a window into a world that I can use when returning to "my girls." Maybe because on a show that prides itself on offering six-or-so different lesbian or bisexual women characters, I can't believe I can't find one to identify with...given my writing proclivities.

Of course not, stupid, you don't identify with "lesbians" you identify with us. Face it, it's a commitment.

Shut up, Keitha.

Smile, though your heart is aching

Last night's Masters of Horror (spoilers)

Sigh..."the cliche" rears its ugly head...

Lesbian woman is posessed by bug and becomes a killer, then is revealed to have harbored a crazy, obsessive love for her lover even before they met (prior to the "infestation"). She metamorphises into a bug-creature and kills her lovers straight male friend. Her lover is then also bitten and possessed by bug. In last scene we see that both are pregnant and expecting a brood, or swarm, call it what you will.

I don't know whether to start bashing it for what seems to me obvious and overwhelming homophobia, or just throw up my hands, roll my eyes and say "whatever."

Books I read about writing

Here's 10 books (approximately) that I've read and re-read:

Writing Down the Bones and Wild Mind by Natalie Goldberg. These are pretty well known in creative writing circles. I have to admit I used them a lot more before I heard Goldberg reading an excerpt from her own novel and thought it was terrible. Those who can do...

Harlan Ellison's Watching. For me just about any book by Ellison is a lesson in writing; I chose this collection of film reviews to represent them all.

The Art & Craft of Playwriting, by Jeffrey Hatcher. I doubt I could have written my first play without this book, and that play did get produced. Sure it was in Tennessee, and I ain't too happy with some of the things they did to it, but it got produced, goddamn it.

The Screenwriter's Bible, by David Trottier. Early last year when I started trying to turn a play of mine into a screenplay, I got every book I could on it from the library. This is the only one I felt compelled to get my own copy of.

Laughing Matters, by Larry Gelbart. I get a lot of inspiration from other writer's memoirs. Like the Ellison, this one by a hero of mine is meant to represent a host of others.

Which Lie Did I Tell? By William Goldman. My favorite of Goldman's nonfiction, for me it is superior to the classic Adventures In The Screen Trade to which it is a sequel.

On Writing, by Stephen King. And late last year when I started trying to turn that play turned screenplay plus a prequel screenplay into a novel, this is the book I wanted to have on hand.

The DC Comics Guide To Writing Comics, by Dennis O'Neil. I don't write comics, I have no expectations of writing comics, but this has been useful for things like structure and subplots.

Oscar-Winning Screenwriters On Screenwriting, by Joel Engel. Maybe the best thing about this book is screenwriters talking about knowing what their gifts are.

And the two West Wing Shooting Scripts books by Aaron Sorkin. Hey, if you don't know I think Sorkin pretty much walks on the water as a writer by now...

A rare and vulnerable spark

Back in November I blogged about Judith Belushi Pisano's new book about her first husband, John Belushi. If you're interested, I have now read the book, and my review is up at Amazon.com.

Feel free to vote for me if you find the review helpful...

They could have just asked him

Yesterday on The Daily Show, Jon Stewart's guest was a man who's written a book on The Supreme Court and thought, as most people seem to do, that Alito was going to be confirmed. That the Democrats had been hoping to "trick" him into making some gaffe in his testimony.

A gaffe that would have revealed his Bush-worshipping, anti-women's rights, anti-civil rights, way-the-fuck-out-of-the-mainstream, homophobic, Reagan-loving ass for what it is. But, said Jon's guest (whose name I don't remember) that was never going to happen; Alito had been too well prepared to be tricked into showing those cards.

But here's the thing. Put aside everything we've learned about his record in the past few months. Everything that, if this was a country with any sense of reality, would have resulted in his being laughed out of the senate. But put that aside.

The democrats didn't have to finesse and finagle and try to artfully steer him into giving himself away. They could have just asked him.

On Anderson's Cooper's show (via Pandagon), Alan Dershowitz said this:

...if I were a senator, I’d ask [Supreme Court nominees] the following question. I would say, “You have said that your personal views are utterly irrelevant to how you will decide cases. We don’t agree with you on that. But since you’ve said that, let’s ask you some really hard questions about your personal views.”

“Is your mother right when she says that you personally strongly oppose a woman’s right to choose abortion? What do you personally think of gay rights? What do you personally think of affirmative action?”

He couldn’t say, “Well, I can’t give you those answers because it will come before me.” No, no, no, no. You’ve told us that your personal views are irrelevant. We think they’re relevant, so give us the answers. I think it’s a very, very hard question for him to duck.

[Or ask him] Bush vs. Gore. Where were you on the night that Bush vs. Gore was announced? What did you say to your friends when the decision came down? What did you actually say? Did you write e-mails to anybody? Did you agree with the decision, not what would you do in the future?

They could have just asked him.

Sometimes I think democrats and republicans aren't donkeys and elephants anymore. They're frogs and scorpions. Yeah, the scorpion will sting you. It's in their nature; you don't expect anything more from them. But the frog was stupid enough to give the scorpion a ride across the water on their back.

The problem with this anaology is that, in the tale, at least the frog and the scorpion both die. And in this version, the frog may drown, but the scorpion is going to be appointed to one of the most powerful benches in the land.

And he can't be removed except by retirement or death.

They could have just asked him.

Days like this I wish I drank more.

And that's not all

John has a good post about "why Republicans don't get bigotry."

They think bigots hang out in white hoods with burning crosses in their front yards. Some do, but most don't. And to suggest that it's only guilt by association when you choose to join a group whose main purpose is to embrace and promote bigotry, then you render the definition of bigotry meaningless.

He's probably right, but the thing is, that's not all: Bigots don't get bigotry. That's one of the reasons statements by people who feel compelled to start out with "I'm not a bigot, but-" are so meaningless. Maybe two times out of a thousand you'll find an exception, but for the most part, nobody cares to cop to their true face.

So of course Republicans don't get bigotry...they're bigots.

Darkness makes me fumble for a key (UPDATED)

Update: And Mark has a good idea.

Years ago in a bout of the same masochism that once caused me to eat at a Norm's Restaurant, I watched most of the Clarence Thomas hearings. I don't know why I did it...just hoping for a moment of honest candor that never came. Didn't hear it from the Senators of either party, didn't hear it from the nominee. I still don't know about Anita Hill but she wasn't aspiring to a lofty position in our government so she didn't matter as much. What I think I was waiting for was for some Democrat to say, when it was his time to speak, "Judge Thomas, all this crap about what you said to someone about privacy rights in a law lecture twelve years ago is irrelevant. The president nominated you for this position because he thinks you'll advance his Conservative agenda. I intend to vote against you for precisely that reason. Thank you. I'm done." Ted Kennedy, Joe Biden and all the rest could say that today to Alito but it wouldn't get them as much camera time.

An AP article on Yahoo! says Alito appears headed for confirmation. Enjoy control over your uterus while you can, ladies. And boy, what a loser Kanye West was with his "George Bush doesn't care about black people." If that were true, would he have nominated somebody who belonged to a bigoted, sexist. homophobic organization to the highest court in the land?

I believe, 30 years from now, the issue that most Democratic Senators of today will have trouble looking people in the eyes about is, of course, the Iraq war. As they have to accept more and more responsibility for allowing themselves to be deceived into a quagmire, they will find themselves unable to justify the loss of thousands of lives and millions of dollars.

But the second is going to be that they allowed the re-ordering of the Supreme Court, leaving the door open for the reversal of Roe v. Wade, and ensuring a deaf ear is turned to civil and human rights.

After a war, a Supreme Court justice is a president's most lasting legacy.

As usual, the best blogging on the hearings is to be found in Firedoglake.

ETA: Oh, boy. Bob Geiger picked up on something that I'd missed prior to this.

Ted Kennedy (D-MA) went after Alito primarily on his membership in the ultra-conservative Concerned Alumni of Princeton (CAP) including reading a startling clipping from a 1984 edition of the organization's magazine that commented on AIDS research being done at that time on monkeys and said "Now that the scientists must find humans, or rather homosexuals, to submit themselves to experimental treatment. Perhaps Princeton's Gay Alliance may want to hold an election."

"Humans, or rather homosexuals." In a weird way, I admire them for just coming out and saying it. None of this "loving the sinner but hating the sin" crap. Just: "Humans, or rather homosexuals."

I find myself wanting to test Godwin's Law.

ETA, again: But you can also find some good reporting in Hullabaloo, where Digby wrote:

I think it's time for Ted Kennedy to haul some little girls who were strip searched in to testify. You wanna play? Bring it.

If you don't know to what he's referring, it's about one of Alito's more indefensible votes.

More fun with anti-feminism

Writer and entertainer George Carlin once commented to an interviewer that while philosophers had been wondering for thousands of years "why we are here...I know why I'm here. I'm here for the entertainment."

(Quote is approximate)

In that spirit, here's a couple of more responses to Kate O'Beirne's reportedly anti-feminist tome. A blogger called B Muse judges a book by its cover. And Amanda of Pandagon (which has added a really ugly new logo) shows why she's a better man than I am, Gunga Din.

See, though I know Jonah Goldberg as the poster child for armchair warriors that he is, I've instinctively shied away from reading much of his prose. Some might call it cowardice, I call it self-preservation.

Tom Stoppard got a big "me, too!" from me when he said:

I have an enjoyment of language...Reverence? Well, I probably do, because I go into a kind of pain when it's used loosely and inaccurately.

Anyone who had the misfortune to be sitting near me during Star Wars Ep. Three, or my next-door neighbors when I make my masochistic attemps to watch The L Word, can attest to that. But Amanda walked 20 miles into the jungle with gun and camera, and returned with souvinier snapshots of a man whose writing style is ennobled by the word "fatuous."

Initially writing in support of his friend O’Beirne's book, Goldberg devolves...not that he has that far to go, hee hee...into writing about What Feminists Believe. Apparently:

Feminists honestly believe they are speaking for all women; I think this way, I am a woman, I must represent all women.

As you may imagine, Amanda has some thoughtful things to say about that, and a few more of Mr. Goldberg's joyful observations. Those of you who appreciate seeing a bright girl bloody the nose of a pampered rich kid are recommended there post-haste.

O'Reilly casts his mind back...oh, those were the days

With the Alito hearings still going on, gross-out king Bill O'Reilly apparently is coming over all nostalgic about early 2003, just before the war started. He's picking on the Dixie Chicks again, claiming they "have not recovered to this day" from lead singer Natalie Maines' controversial comment.

Of course, that was a lie. Here's the thing, though, and it's something we should remember. "Dixie Chicked" has become a verb meaning to suffer a negative impact on your career as retribution for making an unpopular political statement.

As you'll recall something very similar happened to Bill Maher, and IIRC Madonna pulled a video so it wouldn't happen to her. If it was having a chilling effect on people with the kind of money and power behind her that Madonna has, what do you think it did to younger, less-secure entertainers?

Which I'm convinced was the reason behind Clear Channel pulling the Chicks from radio playlists; they wanted a head (or three) on a pike that they could point to and say "See? This is what you get!"

But what we should remember is that it didn't work.

As Media Matters tells us,

In March 2003, group member Natalie Maines incited controversy after telling a London audience, "Just so you know, we're ashamed the president of the United States is from Texas." Initial anger over the statements and a limited radio boycott did reportedly have an impact on the group's album sales. However, the Dixie Chicks' 2003 North American tour proved that any backlash was short-lived. In May, a mere two months after the controversy first erupted, the tour opened in Greenville, South Carolina, to a sold-out crowd. The tour then spent the summer crisscrossing North America and grossed $61 million, making the Dixie Chicks tour the top-grossing country tour of 2003. By the end of the year, their album, Home, ranked fourth on 2003's Billboard Top 200 Album chart, with the group itself finishing the year as the top-selling country group/duo and the third-highest-selling pop group/duo.

The trio's music has also consistently won major awards. Since the anti-Bush comments, it won the Best Country Vocal Performance by a Duo or Group Grammy in 2005. The group's song "I Hope," whose proceeds will go to victims of Hurricane Katrina, has been nominated in that category and in the Best Country Song category for the 2006 Grammys, which will be awarded February 8.

In other words...please, please, Dixie Chick me. I can stand not recovering from having top-five sellers and winning major awards. Media Matters doesn't get into this but I'd imagine the group also gained a lot of new listeners from the controversy, people like me who began paying special attention and found we truly enjoyed the music.

But seriously: I hope this information is out there where younger artists can see it. The first, greatest example in recent years of how dissent can harm your career, and it isn't true. It's not real.

You'll recollect Bill Maher is doing pretty okay these days too.

More remakes that don't need to be made

Matt and Ben Reunite On Screen
The famous friends are supposedly planning to remake Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid. According to OK Magazine:

The actors will take on the roles made famous by Paul Newman and Robert Redford in the 1969 classic.

Damon will reportedly play the Sundance Kid, while Affleck will recreate Newman’s role as Butch Cassidy, according to America’s OK! magazine.

Via OhNoTheyDidn't.

This idea, if true, is indefensible. When are Hollywood people going to realize that the trick is you remake movies that aren't very good (think Ocean's 11) in their original form, not the ones that are?

Now that's funny

Bob Geiger corrects his own Abramoff post:

I guess this shows that I really did make an effort to honestly root out any Democrats who personally got money from Jack Abramoff – either directly or through a Political Action Committee (PAC) – because it looks like one of the few Democrats I cited as getting money from an Abramoff-linked PAC is actually a Republican!

Reader Marilynn Murray, of Rockwall, Texas, wrote to let me know that Congressman John Hall, who actually was a Democrat when he got money from the conservative Arena PAC in the 1990s, is actually part of the GOP.

"Please correct that information. That old fool used to be a sort of Democrat. Thank God he decided he is really a Republican," wrote Marilynn.

"Gay-adjacent?"

Sony Music on Tuesday said it was launching the first major music label dedicated to nurturing lesbian, gay, bisexual and trans-gendered artists.

The label also comes as Wilderness Media plans this weekend to launch a syndicated national radio show called Twist targeting the gay and "gay-adjacent" communities, debuting on FM stations and the Web. The weekly two-hour radio show will feature music, celebrity interviews, entertainment reports and relationship and lifestyle advice and news in a "morning show" format.

"Gay-adjacent?" I think we've finally found the genre I write in; not gay...but "gay-adjacent."

Pam has put together a collection of reactions from pro-Bush GOP website The Free Republic. It seems they're rather irritated by this. I can only assume on the premise that if we let too many gays into show business, the blacks will be next, and after them, the Jews...

They've responded with the wit that is the province of the pro-Bush GOP, who are well known to be funnier than any bunch of fags you might care to name, like that bitter, ugly Nathan Lane.

"The first CD release will be "Songs Inspired By Bareback Mountain", including the hits, "Homo On The Range," and "Bathhouses of Laredo.""

"Yeah, like the gays don't already have gay or gay-friendly artists like Judy Garland, Barbra Streisand, Liza Minelli, Bette Midler, Cher, the Village People, George Michael, Elton John..."

I resent this person for leaving out Frankie Goes To Hollywood and Lea DeLaria.

"Gangsta artists shoot each other Country Artists may cuss at each other Gay/Lesbian artists simply kick, pull hair and scratch each other's eyes out."

Oh, the comedy.

In a semi-related story, this is why I don't want to publish my Keitha stories under a female pseudonym: I'd get killed.

Read it in the books, in the crannies and the nooks, there are books to read

A woman named Kate O'Beirne has a new book out called: Women Who Make the World Worse : and How Their Radical Feminist Assault Is Ruining Our Schools, Families, Military, and Sports. And yes, she's serious (evidently).

The lovely and lethal lady Jane of firedoglake has said she's sharpening her knives, but she hasn't had a chance to get to it, what with the Alito hearings and all. But in the meantime, you can enjoy Jesus' General's Amazon review, excerpted herewith:

But I think it's her frequent attacks against the television show, "Sex in the City," that I value most about this book. By promoting the myth that women should enjoy sex, that show has done more to destroy the institution of marriage than even homosexual unions. I think most men will agree with me when I say that there isn't a woman alive who isn't thoroughly repulsed by sex. Telling them that it should be a pleasant experience rather than a vomit-inducing one only serves to cause them to resent their husbands when the impossible isn't delivered. Hopefully, this book will help destroy that myth.

As much as I enjoyed this book, I can't give it more than a single star because it has a fatal flaw. It promotes the most destructive myth of all, the existence of lesbianism. Mrs. O'Beirne discusses it throughout the book as if it is something that is real. She doesn't seem to be able to understand that women can't have sex with each other. They don't have little soldiers.

PS: Jane also reminds us that Mrs. O'Beirne is the author of this remark:

I have long thought that if high-school boys had invited homely girls to the prom we might have been spared the feminist movement.

Oh, I like her...

Caption this photo

"I cut down trees, I wear high heels, suspenders and a bra..."

I'll accept that

You Are Sex On the Beach!

When comes to drinking, you like it to go down smooth. You really don't like the taste of alcohol - just its effect on you. So, you're proud to get drunk on fruity, girly drinks. Because once you're liquored up, the fun begins!

What alcoholic drink are you?

Stupid short-memoried public

Little Steven Van Zandt of the E Street Band made a cameo appearance on The Colbert Report last night. Appearing, in true Daily Show style "from" South Africa. Where, he announced, he had been playing the Sun City resort.

Judging from the audiences (lack of) reaction, no one remembered that in the '80s Van Zandt was the driving force behind the anti-Apartheid Sun City single with its chant "I ain't gonna play Sun City."

I suppose I just remember because the album put together around it remains one of the rare examples of a "charity" record that can still be listened to for pleasure. Rather than a sense of resigned duty.

But still: Stupid, short-memoried public.

Madonna, really, it's getting embarassing

Or, "and you thought Reese Witherspoon had a lot of airbrushing done." This is sad. She's coming off like a desperate housewife, you should pardon the expression. Woman, you're 47. Grow into it.

...and yes, there are 47-year-old women I find attractive (Sharon Stone, Holly Hunter, Jane Wiedlin, Annette Bening, Angela Bassett, Belinda Carlisle, Jennifer Tilly, Bebe Neuwirth...) You know what they have in common? They spend very little time dressing like they're hoping to lure the pizza boy in for a quickie.

Letterman doesn't get on board Love Train with O'Reilly

You may have heard tell of an incident that occured on The Late Show With David Letterman last week. Gross-out king Bill O'Reilly had a little of his bad karma thrown back in his face when Letterman dissented with him.

I haven't said anything about it here because I didn't see it. Mark had some thoughts, though, about why he doesn't think it was the rout some people think it was, or certainly not a fair fight. Meanwhile, Bob Geiger's posted some excerpts that are well worth reading, including:

O'Reilly: .... Cindy Sheehan called the insurgents 'freedom fighters,' we don't like that. It is a vitally important time in American history. And we should all take it very seriously. Be very careful with what we say.

Letterman: Well, and you should be very careful with what you say also.

[audience applause]

O'Reilly: Give me an example.

Letterman: How can you possibly take exception with the motivation and the position of someone like Cindy Sheehan?

O'Reilly: Because I think she's run by far-left elements in this country. I feel bad for the woman.

Letterman: Have you lost family members in armed conflict?

O'Reilly: No, I have not.

Letterman: Well, then you can hardly speak for her, can you?...See, I'm very concerned about people like yourself who don't have nothing but endless sympathy for a woman like Cindy Sheehan. Honest to Christ.

Not bad, huh? Who would have thought the old dog had it in him? Although, I must admit I was not completely surprised when I heard about this, because I remember when Rush Limbaugh was on the program a few years back. Letterman asked him:

"Do you ever wake up in the middle of the night and just think to yourself, I'm just full of hot gas?"

Not K9 units!

A very silly joke about something that isn't very silly at all:

According to a headline in The Raw Story,

Unsealed docs reveal massive NSA spy op on
Quaker anti-war group; WMD team at protest

Documents: Spying on balloons; K9 units, more

Dear god. They'll stop at nothing.

Thank you.