tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8904953186670979875.post1636005459893835886..comments2023-11-02T09:56:04.768-04:00Comments on dinghy: unmoored.: skills to pay the billsVhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16597646249022075072noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8904953186670979875.post-35014950643686059672008-07-25T01:26:00.000-04:002008-07-25T01:26:00.000-04:00I am not sure what you are trying to say here. Is...I am not sure what you are trying to say here. <BR/><BR/>Is Sex and the City a complex and valuable cultural phenomenon? Maybe. Has it transcended its simple labels to become something bigger? I don't know; the show remained exactly what it always was, which is: everything women want in a television show. <BR/><BR/>It's the perfect mix of fantasy and reality. When you put aside the silliness and get down to the bare bones of the conversations those women were having, it was incredibly realistic. Realistic television had been done before, as had fantasies involving clothing, men and living a fun and lavish lifestyle in an exciting city. But the thing that made Sex and the City special was that it used very flawed characters, and realistic situations and subject matter, to bring depth and credibility to the fanciful aspects of the show. Women could actually identify with these characters, which both made the elements of fantasy seem that much more accessable, and encouraged viewers to become emotionally attached to the women on-screen. <BR/><BR/>I certainly did not mean to give the impression that I would discount the impact of the show. Sex and the City was (and still is) huge, and it's going to remain a lasting part of our culture. But aside from becoming an enormous pop-culture phenomenon in itself, has it <I>really</I> changed anything in a fundamental way? No -- but it has changed the way we watch T.V., which is a big deal in these parts. The same could be said of The Simpsons. <BR/><BR/>Sure, we've picked up some catchphrases. Cosmos had a few good years, Manolo Blahnik sold some more shoes, and women everywhere are still looking for their "Mr. Big." Empowering? Definitely not.<BR/><BR/>I think we agree on that, at least.<BR/><BR/>In any case, I didn't write the story about watching the movie in order to make some insightful social commentary on the show itself; it had much more to do with my lifelong feelings of awkwardness at not "fitting in" with what I percieve to be the feminine norm. And of course, as in most of the anecdotes I post here at the Dinghy, I have greatly exaggerated almost every aspect of the story (including my real or imagined neuroses) for the sake of humor and/or plot.Vhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16597646249022075072noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8904953186670979875.post-24853645702846057372008-07-24T22:47:00.000-04:002008-07-24T22:47:00.000-04:00oh c'mon now, things aren't as simple as that. "Th...oh c'mon now, things aren't as simple as that. "This is a comedy, this is serious political commentary, this is snuff." Many things have transcended their simple labels to be something bigger. How about MASH or The Simpsons, two comedies that permanently left a dent on American culture (beyond the weekly chuckles)? <BR/><BR/>Like it or not, Sex and the City is bigger than a comedy. It showed a slice of female urban culture that hadn't gotten a lot of airtime before. As such, people say it is empowering, groundbreaking, etc. Which is crap. <BR/><BR/><A HREF="http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/news/society/sex-and-the-city-'totally-empowering',-says-manky-slapper-20080513949/" REL="nofollow">One example</A> of an article that is proud as punch of SatC.jessehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13449897637951162697noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8904953186670979875.post-81860557207785726482008-07-24T22:21:00.000-04:002008-07-24T22:21:00.000-04:00Both the pieces on Rafter are shortened versions o...Both the pieces on Rafter are shortened versions of previous Dinghy posts. <BR/><BR/>Look, if somebody finds Sex in the City "empowering," then they are clearly misguided. It's not a political or social statement; it's entertainment. It's a sitcom, for chrissake. There's nothing wrong with that, by the way. Simple entertainment = good.<BR/><BR/>The funniest comment I have ever heard about Sex in the City came from Chuck Klosterman; he said he tried watching it to see what all the hype was about, but all he saw was four peculiar-looking women talking like gay men.Vhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16597646249022075072noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8904953186670979875.post-38225967714275983442008-07-24T21:29:00.000-04:002008-07-24T21:29:00.000-04:00Did you write that Sex and the City post just for ...Did you write that Sex and the City post just for Rafter? The thing that bugs me about that show/movie is that many people seem to legitimately believe it's empowering to women, because the characters have jobs, love sex and aren't afraid to go out and get it. <BR/><BR/>Of course, their ultimate goal is to land a man who can build them a dream closet but hey, girls will be girls. <BR/><BR/>Oh yeah, you're obviously superior to the girly archetype. duh.jessehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13449897637951162697noreply@blogger.com