Distracting You With A Supermodel.


by Clairwil
12th December, 2006 at 11:13 pm    

Hello,
Bloody hell! So much for lighthearted December. The thread below started well but the last time I checked it had descended to Muslims are ace v Muslims are Satan. Mr Sunny is going to be outraged when he returns. I shudder to think what horrible punishment he’ll subject you all to. So there.

Anyway in an effort to distract you all until the divine Miss Newton returns. I offer you Naomi Campbell. Let’s all give her a deafening round of applause for her latest achievement, namely the Plain English Campaign’s annual Foot in Mouth prize.

Frankly I was stunned it wasn’t some sort of servant beating award but life is full of surprises. Well at least mine is, what the builders left in my bathroom today being but one horrifying example. Anyway here is Ms Campbell’s award winning quote;

“I love England, especially the food. There’s nothing I like more than a lovely bowl of pasta.”

Poor Naomi, blessed to be as statuesque and beautiful as Venus and cursed with the brain of a wilted houseplant and the social skills of a nightclub bouncer. So near yet so far.


              Post to del.icio.us


Filed in: Events,Humour,Media,Uncategorized






71 Comments below   |  

Reactions: Twitter, blogs
  1. GoodMennen2

    good blog is dead blog:-) long live!…




  1. Desi Italiana — on 12th December, 2006 at 11:24 pm  

    Ha ha.

    This reminds me of Priyanka Chopra, when she was asked “Which living person do you admire the most?” and she replied, “Mother Teresa”– who was already dead.

    Interesting article on Salon.com about Paris Hilton and how she provides excellent fodder for female hating, female bashing, and the whole, “look, women are just pretty nice things to look at, and that’s about it.”

    http://www.salon.com/mwt/feature/2006/12/11/paris_hilton/

  2. Desi Italiana — on 12th December, 2006 at 11:27 pm  

    “excellent fodder”

    Oh crap, major typo. I meant, “She provides abundant fodder for female hating…”

  3. Leon — on 12th December, 2006 at 11:46 pm  

    Heh, talk about proving the theory about supermodels…

  4. Ravi Naik — on 13th December, 2006 at 1:24 am  

    “Heh, talk about proving the theory about supermodels…”

    How many dimensions do you reckon this theory needs? :)

  5. Desi Italiana — on 13th December, 2006 at 5:00 am  

    It’s interesting to note gendered stereotypes such as the “dumb jock” and “ditzy supermodel.” And then the crossovers- such as female athletes being “ditzy jocks” and male dolls as “dumb supermodels”???

    BTW, the most highly paid women are supermodels (at least, the last time I checked.)

  6. BevanKieran — on 13th December, 2006 at 8:36 am  

    I’ll have a go at defending Ms. Campbell and suggest she might have a point. I’ve spent the last week in Strasbourg where the restaurants serve predominantly local cuisine; Shoucrout (pig on sour cabbage),Rognol (gizzard in sauce) etc. Considering English dining habits have become more global, her statement is as true if she had replaced pasta with curry.

  7. Jai — on 13th December, 2006 at 9:37 am  

    I wonder when we’re going to see the first British Asian supermodel…..

  8. Bert Preast — on 13th December, 2006 at 9:46 am  

    Don’t worry Clairwil, the builders bathroom surprise is just their way of showing affection.

  9. Sid — on 13th December, 2006 at 10:27 am  

    Germaine Greer’s:
    “The first attribute of the art object is that it creates a discontinuity between itself and the unsynthesised manifold.”

    is pure post-modernism.

  10. Arif — on 13th December, 2006 at 10:53 am  

    She isn’t afraid to call an unsynthesised manifold and unsynthesised manifold.

    Leave her alone – she is one of my (ahem) heroes like Julie Burchill, Melanie Phillips and Diane Abbott. Their teeth are too sharp for them to dare put their feet in their mouths.

  11. Sid — on 13th December, 2006 at 11:03 am  

    Isn’t an “unsynthesised manifold” what the builders left in Clairwil’s bathroom?

  12. Kismet Hardy — on 13th December, 2006 at 11:34 am  

    Jai, we have British Asian supermodels already. There’s Shivani Kapur, who I’ve had sex with, who went to Mumbai and became the face of L’oreal and Lakme, and Karishma Kotak, who I tried to have sex with, who went to Mumbai and became the Kingfisher Girl. Watch out for Tia, who I can’t talk to because I babble so don’t know her surname.

    No, these are not porn stars

  13. Anas — on 13th December, 2006 at 11:41 am  

    The thread below started well but the last time I checked it had descended to Muslims are ace v Muslims are Satan.

    I think some people took the title of the thread too literally.

  14. Billy — on 13th December, 2006 at 11:57 am  

    You mean pasta isn’t English?!

  15. Kismet Hardy — on 13th December, 2006 at 12:05 pm  

    Can we please play the Pretentious Game? Top prize for the person who can wax lyrical about Pickled Politics in the ponciest possible way. Here’s my entry:

    Bringing together both a homologous and capaciously divergent diaspora of bluestocking ivory dome litterati, Pickled Politics trangresses the realms of the quotidian blogosphere and breaks into the coliseum of the truly sententious, like a languorous leaf enabled with a cogent fervor mighty enough to crush the twig it is rooted to

  16. sonia — on 13th December, 2006 at 2:13 pm  

    :-) echoing Billy and BevanKieran – a good bowl of curry!

    yah these women are laughing..they get paid shit loads so no doubt dont care what the rest of us think ( and paris hilton’s probably pretty smart – she no doubt realizes there’s a sizeable section of society which wants to carry on thinking women are pretty things to look at and if she can make lots of money out of it..)

    Jai – well there’s ‘priti’ miss england 2006 ..

  17. sonia — on 13th December, 2006 at 2:15 pm  

    id personally say the whole celebrity thing reveals how we ‘fans’ are the dumb ones. or society in general i mean – for venerating such silly things. the celebrities are the clever ones making a mint out of er..strutting about and DOING nothing for the most part. forget paris – what about all these big brother house ppl?!

  18. sonia — on 13th December, 2006 at 2:16 pm  

    Interesting Link Desi.

    “We need to acknowledge that Hilton is not simply a tabloid diversion but a malevolent blight on the pop culture landscape.”

    again – i’d say – why blame Paris herself? the whole pop culture landscape itself seems to be pretty blighted in general these days.

    :-)

  19. soru — on 13th December, 2006 at 2:16 pm  

    Kismet: Not bad, but it runs the risk someone might be able to understand the words, and notice you are not saying anything especially clever.

    Vocabulary is not enough: you need to use a more complex sentence structure, and throw in some subtle references to Continental philosophers and current US TV series. Do it right, and only someone who has both read all the volumes of Heidegger’s collected works and seen series 3 of Veronica Mars can be _sure_ you are talking bollox.

  20. Kismet Hardy — on 13th December, 2006 at 2:26 pm  

    ” it runs the risk someone might be able to understand the words, and notice you are not saying anything especially clever”

    Soru, you silly monkey. That’s exactly the point of being pretentious

  21. Jai — on 13th December, 2006 at 2:27 pm  

    =>”Can we please play the Pretentious Game? Top prize for the person who can wax lyrical about Pickled Politics in the ponciest possible way.”

    Pickled Politics, that flirtatious minx of a blog which promiscuously attracts suitors from right across the racial and religious spectrum, dancing in the Diwan-e-Khas of your laptop while pimp and brothel-keeper Sunny Hundal ensures that decorum is maintained and receives all the plaudits for his protege’s performance. May PP continue to entice, inflame, seduce and devastate commenters from opposite sides of the debating battlefield, leaving them exhausted and frustrated over topics such as I/P while she looks on, a coquettish smile and a flashing-eyed glance revealing nothing except her amusement at the futile duels being fought over her honour.

  22. Thortz — on 13th December, 2006 at 2:36 pm  

    Germaine Greer’s been losing it a bit recently but she puts up a spirited defense of her unsynthesised manifold here, in which she explains she was talking pure Kant.

  23. Sid — on 13th December, 2006 at 2:46 pm  

    If one examines Chairwoman’s simulation, one is faced with a choice: either accept neodialectic theory or conclude that discourse must come from the collective unconscious. The destruction/creation distinction intrinsic to Pynchon’s The Crying of Lot 49 emerges again in Gravity’s Rainbow. But Kismet suggests the use of neoconstructive narrative to deconstruct sexual identity.

    In Pickled Politics, a predominant concept is the distinction between opening and closing. The subject is contextualised into a neodialectic theory that includes culture as a totality. Thus, Sonia suggests that we have to choose between realism and Sartreist existentialism.

    Arif promotes the use of predialectic nationalism to attack the status quo. It could be said that Sunny uses the term ‘neodialectic theory’ to denote the stasis, and some would say the absurdity, of textual society.

    Leon suggests the use of the neocultural paradigm of reality to read and analyse class and narratives of futility. Thus, the premise of realism holds that consciousness is part of the futility of language, but only if culture is distinct from art. Many sublimations concerning the bridge between sexual identity and culture may be revealed. But Chairwoman promotes the use of the postcultural paradigm of context to challenge capitalism.

  24. Thortz — on 13th December, 2006 at 2:47 pm  

    Yes, but PP embodies unity in diversity, liminally immanent at the boundary of cultural singularity and political plurality, its discourse strives to supersede consensus and deconstruct and problematise our ubiquitous meta-narratives of flow and différance.

  25. Jai — on 13th December, 2006 at 2:49 pm  

    Kismet & Sonia,

    =>”Jai, we have British Asian supermodels already.”

    I meant people as famous as Naomi et al.

  26. Sid — on 13th December, 2006 at 2:50 pm  

    Yes true, just as Katy’s essay on submaterial semanticist theory states that reality is used in the service of the status quo, given that the premise of posttextual structuralist theory is invalid. However, if the prestructural paradigm of reality holds, we have to choose between posttextual structuralist theory and cultural deappropriation.

  27. Jai — on 13th December, 2006 at 2:59 pm  

    One may, indeed, define Pickled Politics as being saturated with self-created stereotypes perpetrating self-hatred in response to the institutionalized oppression of the brown man by post-colonial mainstream Western culture (and the demonization of the Mohammadam race in particular, creating a tendency towards Islamophobia on one side and hyperIslamism on the other), corresponding to the ongoing objectification and exotification, exotificationization, indeed exotificationalizationism of South Asian women at the hands of both popular Western society, with its historical bias towards Orientalism, and the continuing misogynistic suppression of such women by the entrenched orthodox South Asian patriarchal infrastructure, often self-stereotyped and self-perpetuated by the women themselves.

  28. Thortz — on 13th December, 2006 at 3:01 pm  

    Sid, I’m worried that you’re falling for the old prestructural paradigm fallacy when everyone knows that reality is inherently and intrinsically anti-paradigmatic. Attempts at breaking the phase-structure duality of uncertainly are, by definition, futile.

    Hey, where did all the supermodels go?

  29. Sid — on 13th December, 2006 at 3:05 pm  

    Gosh, I didn’t see that! In which case it could be said that expressionism states that the significance of the participant is significant form. If Kantian image holds, we have to choose between subcapitalist deconceptualism and postcultural narrative framed in the subliteralist paradigm of Derrida!

  30. Thortz — on 13th December, 2006 at 3:06 pm  

    Jai – is that fair? I think it actually makes sense.

  31. Arif — on 13th December, 2006 at 3:07 pm  

    Sid’s bold reinterpretation of Chairwoman’s post-structuralist discourse construes this as a return to New Hegelian idealism. Yet the implicit temporal circularity asserted by citing Pynchon’s proto taoist dualism draws the reader to assume an eventual turn to a Marxian framework where the base/superstructure.

    Caught in this ever-turning vortext, PP has saddled itself in a lingustic straitjacket where terminology replaces the struggle for liberation championed by Kristeva. Where this liberation is rudely attempted by sonia, it is reconceptualised by immediate commentary, undermining attempts to understand with a tyranny of frameworklessness.

    Leon promotes the NGN Manifesto as the missing framework to spin a new web of power/knowledge, but for others this merely becomes a regurgitation of the abject, reproducing distinctions of creation and destruction which serve to repress the very bridges Sid believes are revealed as sublimations.

    By misunderstanding our linguistic terrain, we merely tighten the chains that bind us to Kismet’s eventual victory as the interpreter of the collective id, as the denials are mutually misunderstood to the point that Sunny has to fly to another continent.

  32. Arif — on 13th December, 2006 at 3:09 pm  

    * where the base/superstructure provides the next solution.

  33. Sid — on 13th December, 2006 at 3:09 pm  

    I don’t see what Kristeva has got to do with it.

  34. Thortz — on 13th December, 2006 at 3:10 pm  

    Sid – precisely! I couldn’t have put it better myself. ;-)

  35. Jai — on 13th December, 2006 at 3:13 pm  

    Thortz,

    I see those terms a lot in posts by some commenters on Sepia Mutiny, so I’m just doing some light-hearted parodying. I’m basically making it all up as I go along ;)

  36. Sid — on 13th December, 2006 at 3:14 pm  

    No no Thortz, I have to grant you that Burroughs’ predominant concept is the concept of cultural sexuality. Therefore, your use of the term ‘neomodern situationism’ to denote the common ground between sexual identity and society. An abundance of deappropriations concerning the neodialectic paradigm of discourse exist. Thank you for opening my eyes to this. ;0)

  37. Katy — on 13th December, 2006 at 3:22 pm  

    *tiptoes quietly away*

  38. Sid — on 13th December, 2006 at 3:22 pm  

    Arif, I see your point. But only if you can accept the position that neo-absurdist subtexts of post-capitalist discourse are antithetical to cultural identity. As stated in Kismet’s thesis of “Capitalist Dualism As Interchangeable Narrativity”.

  39. Thortz — on 13th December, 2006 at 3:23 pm  

    Indeed, and this brings us full circle to the presiding metonymic presence of the supermodel over this unfolding peroration, her autopoetic self-affirmation of the idealised other punctured only by her frequent use of colonial Irigaray-tion.

  40. Sid — on 13th December, 2006 at 3:25 pm  

    quite.

  41. Jai — on 13th December, 2006 at 3:34 pm  

    Bukwaas Zindabad ;)

  42. Thortz — on 13th December, 2006 at 3:47 pm  

    Anyone else being harrassed by calls from the editors of Social Text? Apparently they want to feature this discussion in their bumper xmas holiday edition. ;-)

  43. Leon — on 13th December, 2006 at 4:02 pm  

    Leon suggests the use of the neocultural paradigm of reality to read and analyse class and narratives of futility.

    If I knew what you were on about I could comment (or take the piss) properly…

    Leon promotes the NGN Manifesto as the missing framework to spin a new web of power/knowledge

    What?!

    *bewildered*

  44. Billy — on 13th December, 2006 at 4:07 pm  

    No one has mentioned “paradigms” yet.

  45. Leon — on 13th December, 2006 at 4:18 pm  

    See above.

  46. Arif — on 13th December, 2006 at 4:18 pm  

    Leon, don’t get coy about the Foucauldian roots to your Habermassian rationality. A dialogic process will be more fertile than reproducing the harsh dualisms we ironically critique.

    As for Kristeva, Sid – can there be any better exponent for PP as a site for release dressed up as experimentation? A “friend hacked me” here, a “chortle” there, but no one is fooled, though we may take strategic decisions to appear to be. We believe what we say while we say it, but then we are different afterwards. This performative ritual of self-reconstruction undermines all the identity politics which we lob at one another.

    Neo-absurdist subtexts are not the only bases undermining cultural identity. PP is creating a subculture based on undermining it – but are we neo-absurdist? No, I suggest we are post-absurdist, as we behold the need to rebuild after the neoliberal v neoconservative bonfire has left only relativists to face communalism.

  47. Leon — on 13th December, 2006 at 4:20 pm  

    Leon, don’t get coy about the Foucauldian roots to your Habermassian rationality. A dialogic process will be more fertile than reproducing the harsh dualisms we ironically critique.

    Er.

  48. Arif — on 13th December, 2006 at 4:21 pm  

    Er(r) indeed(!)

  49. ZinZin — on 13th December, 2006 at 4:25 pm  

    Post 47#

    Thats how Post-modernism leaves me.
    As well as angry that anyone takes this shit seriously.

  50. soru — on 13th December, 2006 at 4:36 pm  

    ZinZin: I think such crude pomophobic discourse is hardly an adequate response to the issues raised by Sting in his classic work ‘Da Do Do Do, Da Da Da Da’.

  51. Thortz — on 13th December, 2006 at 4:51 pm  

    Classic dadaism: Da Da Da

  52. Kismet Hardy — on 13th December, 2006 at 5:09 pm  

    Update :: The Award for Grandiloquent Extraordinaire in the Pretentious Game is a close call between Sid, Jai and Thortz. Arif would win but I don’t think he’s actually playing

  53. Sid — on 13th December, 2006 at 5:15 pm  

    I think Arif wins because the posttextual structuralist theories he posited were entirely qualitative in their neodialectic aspect. Also, he has rather splendid man boobs.

  54. ZinZin — on 13th December, 2006 at 5:16 pm  

    Pomophobic
    Love it. I will add it my other phobias.

  55. Kismet Hardy — on 13th December, 2006 at 5:36 pm  

    Sid that’s so munificent of you. ZinZin that’s so cognizant of you. Soru that’s so effervescent of you. Thortz that’s so vivacious of you. Arif that’s so, well, Arif of you.

    (with apologies to Rogets)

  56. William — on 13th December, 2006 at 6:38 pm  

    Has anyone got an aspirin!!!!

  57. soru — on 13th December, 2006 at 6:50 pm  

    Pomophobia is not a joke, it is a serious issue.

  58. William — on 13th December, 2006 at 6:54 pm  

    For a moment I thought it was Australian PC i.e fear of Poms = Brits

  59. ZinZin — on 13th December, 2006 at 7:07 pm  

    Poor Naomi, blessed to be as statuesque and beautiful as Venus and cursed with the brain of a wilted houseplant and the social skills of a nightclub bouncer. So near yet so far.

    Clairwil
    You can not be beautiful and intelligent its against the rules.

  60. William — on 13th December, 2006 at 7:19 pm  

    I have just found the aspirin so here goes!!

    The unsynthesized manifold! Sure but what if the art of opinion itself becomes the art object. Would this not subvert the whole notion, replicating what we try to solve replacing it with a meta discourse involving multi hydra headed elements. As such this rhizomous stream of many discourses would dissolve into multiple circular considerations around endless points each searching for a centre but never finding an alternative to the first theory. Would this just be a disaster for this post capitalist endeavour to reach beyond it’s binary opposites and in fact
    Would just ressurect Aristotle’s metaphysics of presence defying the challenge to Western notions of duality.

  61. Douglas Clark — on 13th December, 2006 at 7:45 pm  

    I see Social Text is subscription only. As it includes such articles as “Narrating Immigrant Genders and Sexualities in New York” and “The Social Practices of Men on a Street Corner”, I can only, for the sake of your academic reputations, suggest that this is not the sort of magazine you would wish to publish in. This, however, is a research organ of the highest standard:

    http://www.dccomics.com/mad/

  62. Chairwoman — on 13th December, 2006 at 8:05 pm  

    What me worry?

  63. Desi Italiana — on 15th December, 2006 at 5:31 am  

    Arif, Sid, Thortz:

    Your posts made me feel like I was back in grad school :)

    Troubling thing is, the more someone bullshitted, the more people would nod their heads in agreement, as if something earth shatteringly profound was being voiced, and the heavens were opening up to let the glorious light shine onto the podium.

    **************************

    From that Salon article I linked to (http://www.salon.com/mwt/feature/2006/12/11/paris_hilton/index1.html):

    “In some ways, Hilton’s presence on the celebrity scene is troubling because of the suspicion that she is a straw woman for all those who like to think of young women as dumb floozies. We keep her there, as a mortifying symbol of American womanhood — yes, she is famous overseas — in part because she is a satisfying punching bag for anyone with women issues….

    It’s easy to suspect that it is because she offers gratifyingly inappropriate opportunities to lash out against femininity and sexuality (outbursts to which few object, because there is literally no one who wants to defend her) that she has remained famous at all.”

    I’m sorry I keep fixating on Paris Hilton, it’s because I can’t stand her. But as Sonia says, it’s the cultural landscape; the stage is already set for the likes of her to be under the limelight.

  64. mirax — on 15th December, 2006 at 5:55 am  

    Kismet before you hand out the grand prize, be aware that the fellas – except for Jai- were likely cheating using the pomo generator/dada engine ;-)

  65. mirax — on 15th December, 2006 at 6:06 am  

    >>I’m sorry I keep fixating on Paris Hilton, it’s because I can’t stand her.

    That’s ironic because you and the writer of that article help to focus the spotlight on her all the more. She isn’t the only stupid vacuous rich spoilt girl in the world and she certainly doesn’t have to ‘stand ‘ for anything , not more than any other stupid badly behaved MALE celebrity- her detractors reveal more of themselves than anything else. I hardly like Paris Hilton but she simply doesn’t figure in my universe and i don’t stay up nights worrying worrying about her pernicious influence on anything or anyone.

  66. sonia — on 15th December, 2006 at 11:33 am  

    ah well! you have a point mirax but still..as desi says – its the cultural landscape – the stage is set. im totally clueless when it comes to big brother stuff – but everybody else is so into it. and of course they both feed into each other – but it really does amaze me = the whole power of celebrityhood thing – we’re so entranced on a societal level by glamour. Modern day magic i suppose.

  67. sonia — on 15th December, 2006 at 11:33 am  

    or what we perceive to be ‘glamour’ of course.

  68. Desi Italiana — on 15th December, 2006 at 4:52 pm  

    “That’s ironic because you and the writer of that article help to focus the spotlight on her all the more.”

    I don’t know about Malaysia, but here she is EVERYWHERE. I mean, EVERYWHERE. Mass pop culture has an amazing way of asserting itself everywhere, no matter how much you try to avoid means: TV, radio, anything. For a year I didn’t have a TV out of personal preference, and on the radio, I tried to listen to news. But lo and behold, she makes it to political radio talk shows (because here, entertainment is news and news is entertainment). And you end up getting sick of her. When a presence is so ubiquitous, someone feels impelled to address it. Sure, there are a lot more vacuous people out there- but they don’t garner the spotlight as much as she does.

  69. mirax — on 15th December, 2006 at 5:20 pm  

    Dunno about Malaysia (but they are generally more conservative when it comes to western cultural ‘decadence’) but here in Singapore, much like in the rest of East asia, Hilton comes in with imported american pop culture but is not ubiquitous to the extent you describe. Must be grateful for small mercies like these! But it is the cynical producers and mindless consumers of pop culture I’d save my ire for ; hilton is way too easy (and thus meaningless) a target. Spears, Lohan, Ritchie, hilton et al are similar units of consumables, that’s all.

  70. Desi Italiana — on 16th December, 2006 at 1:00 am  

    “But it is the cynical producers and mindless consumers of pop culture I’d save my ire for”

    Oh, of course. That’s what Sonia and I meant by “cultural landscape!”

    “Must be grateful for small mercies like these!”

    Lucky you guys.

    “Dunno about Malaysia…but here in Singapore,”

    Sorry, I said Malaysia because I thought you were from there. My bad ;)

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.

Pickled Politics © Copyright 2005 - 2010. All rights reserved. Terms and conditions.
With the help of PHP and Wordpress.