Mon

22

Feb

2010

A Bad Year For Beauty
Written by Pat Fortunato   

I've been called an aesthete. I've been called a lot worse, but let's not go there.

Since an aesthete is a person who loves beauty, you'd think that was a good thing. No way. Loving beauty is SO last century.

And it's not just this year. From the first time we were told to "let it all hang out," we have been on a slippery slope, slip-sliding away from beauty and moving towards a very unattractive world —  although not without contradictions. At the moment, we are breathtakingly ambivalent about beauty, both chasing it and chasing it away.

brangelinablog.jpgSure, we love Angelina Jolie as the genetic wonder she is, and worship at her lips, if not her feet. As a couple, Brangelina wins first place in the Hubba Hubba Couples Olympics. We also forgive a lot if a person is good looking. Two words: Sarah Palin.

On the other hand, we're really into the ugly, the edgy, the uncomfortable. Take the movie, Precious. Critics loved it, warning that it's a difficult movie to watch. They say this as if you get extra points for looking at something disturbing.

You do get many politically correct points if you don't mention that its star is not merely overweight, but dangerously fat. Extra poundage isn't necessarily ugly; it can be attractive or at least comforting. Think of your favorite, always-struggling-with-her-weight, Aunt Sadie. We used to call it "pleasingly plump," and full-bodied women have been worshipped from prehistoric times to Christina Hendricks on current cover of New York Magazine. Talk about Hubba Hubba  . . .

                                                                                                 GO TO READ MORE

But at a certain point, extra pounds are bad for the health. And hard on the eyes. Not aesthetic, to say the least.

Am I living in the past by actually thinking that looking nice is well, nice? That it makes you feel good? Makes other people feel good? Or do we all want to feel edgy, off balanced, but politically correct at all times?

Did you hear about the wildly popular song in Russia, "I Want A Man Like Putin." No kiddin'. But while he's not quite The Pits (a little facial scarring not withstanding), Putin is no Brad Pitt. So why are they swooning over him back in the "USSR?"

I totally got it when I saw the guy who wrote the song: overweight, with long wispy scruffy hair, belly hanging out, slouched in a chair. According to him, his countrymen are not just unkempt (ahem), but are drunkards and ne'er-do-wells who will break your heart. Nyet for me. At least Putin looks clean. Weasly, yeah sure, but well-scrubbed. And he has a job and a relationship. Russian women, it appears, have abandoned beauty for anyone who is not a beast. 

And then there was Borat. There are images from that sometimes very funny movie that I wish I didn't have in my I-Wanna-See-Pretty-little head. The nude wrestling scene. With the fat guy. I could have lived a full life without that, thank you very much.

Let's face it, most movies — and many things in life itself — confront you with ugliness. It's so aggressive, it can't be accidental. And while beauty may be in the eye of the beholder,  it seems to me that people are going out of their way to look weird and/or tasteless and/or like this . . .

guidoguidette.jpgSome say that people like me have lived in a dream world. But wait! What's wrong with that? Were the songs of Cole Porter and the movies of Fred Astaire and Ginger Rodgers so wrong? Are The Housewives From Hell and those winners on The Jersey Shore so right?

The hipper-than-thou people who seem to run the world say so. They think that pleasant escapism is a bad, bad thing because we're not facing "reality." It is therefore necessary for us to face ugliness on a constant basis to make us better human beings. Or to become as miserable as they are: consider the number of creative people involved with edgy movies, books, or fashion who commit suicide.

They foist this ugliness on us constantly: not just on movies and TV (The violence! The torture! The bad hair!), but with all those hideous concrete underground garages, miles of urban blight, and harshly lit fast food restaurants that make everyone look grotesque, even if they didn't have all that straggly facial hair. Thank Zeus for our personal spaces, which we can make as beautiful as we like.

But how about the bad images for good causes that invade our space (how dare they!): public service commercials to get you to stop smoking that show diseased lungs and amputated limbs in not-quite living color, and pleas for animal rights that feature tortured dogs. I'm afraid that smokers will ignore the ads, and the sadists who abuse animals may actually enjoy the horrible images. But some of us are upset by these pictures. Everyday in every way (or at least more and more) it feels like ugliness is in, beauty is out.

How's that working for you?

 

 

 
This is a threaded commenting system. click [Reply to this comment] for your comment to be underneath the comment you're replying to.

Comments  

 
0 # BLITZ 2010-02-23 05:27
I'm so glad that you wrote this column. Long overdue and there isn't anything that I disagree with. Ugly started in the sixties when Mick Jagger became
some kind of repulsive icon.
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
0 # Pat Fortunato 2010-02-23 07:42
Aw, Mick is kinda cute in his own way. Repulsive? I'd have to say that the fat guy wrestling in Borat wins that contest. Which was, I guess, the point. But who needs it.
Anyway, thanks for the enthusiastic agreement on this. Sometimes I think that everyone is chasing beauty — away.
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
0 # Susan Schuander 2010-02-23 16:50
Ugly Betty IS NOT UGLY!
How do you think Amanda Ferrara feels about that?
How about ugly in Avatar with those distorted faces and bodies?
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
0 # Pat Fortunato 2010-02-24 04:08
You're right: Ms. Ferrara is not ugly at all. So what's with making her look ugly. I truly don't get that show.
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
0 # Barbara Ehrentreu 2010-02-26 08:28
I agree with you about that wrestling scene in "Borat" Yuck!!! I don't want to have to watch men with bellies hanging out, but somehow the movies have decided it's okay for men to be shlubby and ugly as long as they're funny. TV is now going the same route. Yet for women who might be a little overweight, not the overweight of "Precious", but a little flabby, there is practically no work or they are forced to play matronly parts.

However, there is a danger here, because the standard for men is so different than for women. When women's liberation showed us that we could actually let it all hang out, literally, by getting rid of our bras, we thought that we were liberated forever. Then suddenly, it all changed and women now have to look together all the time. Men, however, get to let it all hang out. What happened?
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
0 # Pat Fortunato 2010-02-26 09:03
I'm afraid, Lionmother, that the standards for the way men look have always been lower than those for women. Ask the average woman what she thinks of her looks and she'll come up with ten things that are wrong with her: thighs, eyes, derriere, whatever. Ask a less-than-average man and he'll think he's good looking.
Harumph.
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 

Add comment

Notify me of follow-up comments

Blog Roll

Comments

My site was nominated for Best Humor Blog!

Bitter Patter

NO LAUGHING MATTER:

Did Demi Moore overdose
on laughing gas?? 
That's what's being reported
to those of us at:

A DEVOUT COWARD 
GOES TO THE DENTIST

Have you seen The Artist? Seeing it mentioned at
The Golden Globes reminded me that that not ALL movies are 
Incredibly Loud! 

Do NOT Google Santorum.
I warned you . . .

 I did it!
I actually got that 

LITTLE BLACK DRESS!

How hard was it?
Click on the link above
.

I also got my iPhone.
It's great.
Thank you Steve Jobs
Wherever you are.

  Just as I posted I WAS THE GIRL PHANTOM, I found a website called The Ghost Who Blogs about The Phantom comics:

http://falkonthewildside.blogspot.com

Writing Comics. . .
Was a small but wonderful part of my checkered career, and doing a post about it  brought back a lot of great memories. If you know any other women in NYC who wrote — or are writing — comics, tell me how to get in touch with them. 

I'm on a watching-old-movies kick these days.
Great way to lose yourself.
If you're lucky, you'll never be found. 

REVIEWS TO PERUSE

I'm All Right, Jack:
"Jack" is not just all right, it's totally delightful and fresh as a daisy after all these years (made in 1959), with Sellers, although not technically the lead, giving the brilliant performance that launched him as an international star. He plays an all-too-zealous union leader and father of a blonde bombshell who falls for Stanley, the British Upper Class Twit played, also to perfection, by Ian Carmichael, who you might remember from the Lord Peter Wimsey series. The makeout scenes between the the Twit and the Bombshell are priceless. But what is Stanley doing in this working class atmosphere anyway? Working. And too well at that. Forced by financial circumstances too dreary to discuss, he gets a job in his uncle's factory and messes things up for the other workers by, well, working, and thus making his fellow employees look bad. The film takes a big shot at unions — but also at management: they are manipulating white-collar thieves who'll do anything for a buck. Or a pound. Except for the ones, like Major Hitchcock, played by Terry Thomas, who are just plain lazy and inept. Needless to say, Stanley foils everybody's plans, labor and management alike, to my great joy and delight. Oh, and on top of everything else, Margaret Rutherford plays dotty dowager Aunt Dolly. Delicious!

 The Big Lebowski:
What can you say that hasn't been said before: brilliant, inspired, with some of the most memorable lines ever to come out of a movie, the most quoted being "The Dude abides." Oh yes. For anyone who hasn't yet seen the film, and it's now out in a special Blu-Ray edition if that floats your bowling ball. The Dude in question,  played to perfection by Jeff Bridges, is an out-of-work pothead who is roughed up and has his rug destroyed by some thugs mistaking him for another, bigger, Lebowski. The Dude is really upset about this because, man, "that rug really tied the room together," which The Dude says with all seriousness and not a trace of irony, a great comic touch considering the condition his condition is in.  Oh, and besides "Just Dropped In," all the music is perfect for the film. The plot, according to Wikipedia, which has been known to be wrong, is "loosely based on Raymond chandler's novel, The Big Sleep." Could be. But who cares. It involves a bowling competition, "the occasional acid flashback," a trophy wife, a group of German nihilists, a kidnapping gone awry, a mad millionaire and his lackey, in another great performance by Philip Seymour Hoffman. Actually, they're all great performances. Never a fan of John Goodman before or since, he is brilliant in this film. And so are John Turturro, overacting his little heart out, Steve Buscemi in a nerdy, needy role that makes you marvel at his star turn in Boardwalk Empire, and even the actors in the smaller parts, especially Julianne Moore and Sam Elliott. Elliott plays The Stranger (God? Everyman? The part of us that roots for the bad boy?) who elicits from Bridges the immortal words, "The Dude abides." Which prompts The Stranger to comment to the audience: "Don't know about you but I take comfort in that. It's good knowin' he's out there. The Dude. Takin' 'er easy for all us sinners. Shoosh. I sure hope he makes the finals." We'll never know about the bowling trophy because there's never been a sequel to this 1998 film by the great Coen Brothers, and I hope there never will be. It just abides, as all great films do.

Prince of the City:
Okay, the criticisms of this movie are not totally unfounded: it's too long, and Treat Williams may have overacted a bit, although I found him so deliciously charming I couldn't care less, and there's one part concerning the Jerry Orbach character I just didn't understand. But get over it, The New Yorker, this is one powerful movie. And yes, Dog Day Afternoon it isn't, but what it? The DVD has a great special feature with Williams (I so want to call him Treat) and Sidney (what the hell: I once made a meatloaf sandwich for the man) that explains a lot about filmmaking in general and this movie in particular. Also, Sidney's views on good and evil, and how things are not so black and white as you think. I loved it.

Bad Day At Black Rock:
Recommended on TCM by Robert Osbourne as a film he originally had no interest in seeing, then loved it, and by Alex Baldwin, who pointed out the great actors in the cast, including Lee Marvin, Ernest Brognine and Dean Jagger. Well, after all that, I had to like it, right?  I did. A lot. It was a Good Day On My Couch.
Behind the Scenes Stuff: Spencer Tracey was off drinking and wouldn't commit to the film until the producers (who wanted him desperately) told him that they had Alan Ladd, at which point Tracey grabbed it.  He was perfect for the part, wearing a dark suit and tie the entire time in a western setting,  pulling it off perfectly. Other than that "fashion statement," the film makes a strong case against racism: the hatred of the Japanese during WW2. See it.

Song of The Thin Man:
I usually like these frothy, silly, suave, utter unrealistic films from the 30s and 40s, with William Powell and Myrna Loy as the couple we'd all like to be — if only we had the looks, brains, money, a huge capacity for drinking and a dog like Asta. But this one was a stinker, rather than a stinger, or maybe a sinker, because  it turned out to be the last, not to mention the least, in the series. Watch any of the others four sequels, but not this one: Even the pooch jumped the shark.

The Children's Hour:
It had its moments, and just looking at Audrey Hepburn makes life worth living, but mostly I kept thinking that the play, by Lillian Hellman, was so much better. It's about two young women runing a school for girls, who are accused by a hateful little brat of being (GASP!) lesbians. And although the closest we get in this 1961 production to using that actual term is the word "unnatural," it's enough to ruin their lives.  A young Shirley McClaine is worth seeing in this, and James Garner, and Audrey Hepburn is, well, Audrey Hepburn. The rumor of the love that dare not speak its name is totally untrue — or is it? And I'll say no more, because you should see the movie for yourself, imperfect as it may be, as is Life Itself.

Because when I am not blogging, I sometimes cook,
and because woman does not live
by martinis alone,
I like this blog:

grapesandgreens.blogspot.com

To comment on
BITTER PATTER
Click on:
Welcome To My Blog


Scroll down to
PAT'S FAVORITES
for a blast
from the past.
rssfeedV2