Well to start: it'd be nice if authors left jokes out of essays. It feels like you're reading a magazine, and they're typically not very funny (well I guess that's debatable, I don't think they're funny thouh).
I enjoy the topic, not the writing style. It seems like you're reading an interesting topic being kicked around in the head of a ditzie blonde stereotype. However, it is easier to read and pay attention to than many of the other pieces. I think it's because of her lack of use of esoteric jargon and rigic, old-school "trying to sound brilliant" crap. It's nice to have some straightforward writing. I think that sums up my main writing philosophy. Probably because I'm so tired of pretentious debater's and philosophy major's semantics. Their trademark nasally tones come to mind when red "intrinsic entropy playig a suitable parody to one f nature's many paradigms."
I have to disagree on one not-so-relevant part of the essay. Inbasic classes like Physical Anthropology 101 we covered male mating displays in hominids and other species closely related to humans. She assumes because she doesn't know about it, or it isn't mainstream knowledge, that no one is talking about it.
Again with this essay, too many generalizations. People want hard answers, I guess. Statistics are the only other option (apparently?). It's disconcerting.
Yeah the parenthetical substitute "blacks or whites" on 177 is ridiulous. It's like saying "try adding not to the sentence and see the change."
I'm not sure what sort of change she is pushing for or what her major point is. If it's that we need more naked or sexually represented males in our culture, culture will take care of that. Kind of pointless to point it out.
As for the Calvin Klein part it would be more interesting for me to discuss Klein's marketing genius (I mean they're still the same briefs they used to be, but he realy did change things). And the ads were controversial, I remember hearing a lot about them at the time, but they somehow did play to both heterosexual and homosexual males. The subtle joke part the homosexuals get when watching it was very interesting. I mean they don't overtly play to heterosexual males, I doubt they were like "yeah wow he looks good." They probably noticed female's reactions to the ads and realized it might be a good idea to make the switch.
It is good that people can look at the male body as sensuous and overtly sexual nowadays. I remember Elaine from Seinfeld saying, "the male body is utilitarian, it's like a jeep." Kind of an understatement of the male body's potential, but still a very common belief. However, I'm still not really sure why she write so much about it.
The fragrance ad clip was hilarious. I emailed it to a few friends. Delightful.
This essay certainly goes on, I think authors are embarrassed in front of their colleagues to publish anything under 20 pages, or maybe it's pressure from their publisher...I don't know, they should focus on just getting their point across, done.
Then she references too much damn pop culture and again I feel like I'm reading something in Cosmo...this probably was originally published in a magazine. At least it's pretty good for a magazine article.
She does a poor job in her "cultural perspective" part, very thinly hiding that it's from her perspective of culture and then back to the main topic. Then she sort of slowly meanders over to the topic of African Americans, which could probably have been saved for a seperate essay, but why not throw it in I guess.
I really zoned out most of it past that, the essay ended with me sighing and shaking my head..maybe I have too short of an attention span.
Also, I had no clue until I read this that there is such a thing as a gay theorist? What does a gay theorist do? Theories of impact/origin/change in homosexual subgroups? I want that job.
In conclusion, this essay made me want to go to a gay bar tonight...that's about it.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment