This weekend, I made the journey to the Kendall Square Theater to see Persepolis.
Since Kendall is the only theater in Boston showing the movie right now, it was packed, forcing me to the second row, where I slumped as down low in my seat as I could and craned my neck to watch. Luckily, it’s one of the best movies I’ve seen in a long, long time.

Persepolis, nominated for the Academy Award for Best Animated Feature, tells the story of Marjane Satrapi, a young Iranian woman. Based on the graphic novel written by Satrapi, the film details Marji’s coming of age as her country dissolves into revolution and war with Iraq. Marji’s story doesn’t need lush color or flashy animation–the film is almost entirely in black and white stark graphics, true to the graphic novel format. Though Marji is forced to wear a veil and cannot be seen consorting with men, drinking alcohol, or listening to music, she somehow manages to remain fiercely independent. The film is charged with humor (watch out for the Marji’s rousing rendition of Survivor’s “Eye of the Tiger”) and grace, even while people are executed and the country is bombed. I don’t know much about Middle Eastern history or culture, and I learned a great deal by just seeing this movie. I highly recommend giving it a watch, even if it means sitting in a crowded theater in a far away neighborhood.

Brook Busey-Hunt went from working in a cubicle to stripping a la stage name Diablo Cody to blogging on The Pussy Ranch to writing a memoir called Candy Girl: A Year in The Life of an Unlikely Stripper all by the age of 28. It isn’t a traditional path for a screenwriter, but it’s the way this particular Midwest girl got to Hollywood – and her first film Juno comes out this week.

Juno might be one of the best films out right now for a number of reasons.

1. It is not a war film
2. It is not begging for an Oscar (although it might get nominated for a couple)
3. It is an indie film! We love indie films!
4. Killer soundtrack

But probably the best reasons are the lead actress, Ellen Page, and aforementioned Brook Busey-Hunt, who now goes by Diablo Cody, and who penned the script for this film. The premise of the film is pretty basic: high school girl gets pregnant, decides to keep the baby and then put it up for adoption. The boy who impregnates her is Michael Cera, from this summer’s blockbuster Superbad, and the adoptive parents are played by Jennifer Garner and Jason Bateman. It sounds simple, but Cody’s script is fast paced and Page delivers the lines effortlessly. It is refreshing to see an actress and a film that can be smart and funny, and not in your face, especially at this time of year when the Oscars are right around the corner. And this film will certainly re-launch Page’s acting career and grant her celebrity status; Diablo Cody’s name will soon pop up in many opening credits. She is already working on her next projects, another book and a pilot for a Steven Spielberg inspired TV series for Showtime. She isn’t pretentious – she knows she has a talent and shes putting it to good use.

Since this is an independent film, it is only on limited release this week, in NY and Los Angeles. When this movie finally is nationally released, go see it. Even if it is not in your nearby theater, find where it is playing and go see it – that’s the only way to get other theaters to pick it up. And trust me, it’s definitely worth the $10 ticket price.

So it has been a while since I’ve posted, but when you hear my story, you’ll forgive me.

I am pregnant with my first child (due April 30th), and though I am utterly thrilled, my husband and I didn’t exactly plan the pregnancy. Being the crazy person that I am, I decided that I would get a second (third??) job and work as hard as I could for as long as I could to make some extra cash..afterall, we all know how expensive babies are! So I was happily working an extra 15 hours a week for TripAdvisor, bringing in some dough, and feeling proud and capable.

But these things catch up with a person…especially when the first trimester of pregnancy makes you extremely tired all the time. I was walking home from the subway, rushing to be home in time to start my second job. It was dusk. I was using the only 10 minutes I’d had free all day to call a friend, and…dun, dun, duuuuun…I was hit by a car while crossing the street.

I got a concussion, some stitches in my face, a bruise on my hip and some nasty swollen, strained knees, but the little one was fine…protected by my belly and by the amniotic fluid.

But all of this is just background for my amazing revelation…I just don’t need to do everything by myself. I am looking at the last 6 months of my life where I’ll have time just for myself, where I’ll be able to lie on the couch all day watching movies on Sundays if I want to, where I’ll be able to go out to a movie with my husband without finding a babysitter. So damned if I am going to waste it working 60+ hours a week for a few extra bucks.

If you need me during the next 6 months, you can find me reading (I am currently reading The Witch of Portobello by Paulo Coehlo, and it is fabulous), knitting (check out my newest endeavor, which I found on Knitty.com), catching up on my sleep, and enjoying alone time with my (existing) baby (a.k.a. my husband Andy).

Yay for selfish Julia. She deserves at LEAST 6 months of my life, right?

This video on safe sex and condom usage is from Nrityanjali Academy, Secunderabad, Andhra Pradesh, India.

I have to say, I wish Americans would let condoms be this friendly…

Today Doris Lessing is the winner of the 2007 Nobel Prize in Literature. She’s the 11th woman to win this distinguished honor. Her extensive writing has confronted social issues such as feminism, race, and communism, yet her sophisticated literary style keeps her from being confined to a political writer. I’ve only read one of her many novels, The Summer Before the Dark, and was captivated by the main character’s journey at a crucial point in her life to discover her true identity while old age lies waiting in the ‘dark’ future. Ms. Lessing’s first novel The Golden Notebook is next on my list to read: its historical impact on the feminist movement in the 60s is still important today.

So here’s a Fringe toast to this outstanding writer. We are thrilled that her literary achievements have been recognized and rewarded.

In my last post I discussed the way main stream media (MSM) inevitably ran the small press out of business, and now I’m going to finish up my critique through a discussion of how I think MSM actively broke its trust with readers.

The press should operate as the fourth estate — a check on government power through the free exchange of ideas. (But whether the public actually wants this from MSM is another blog post). Impartiality is embedded in the concept of journalistic objectivity — reporters are supposed to check their biases at the door. Also, ideally journalism should give us the facts. MSM has failed on all three accounts.

1. MSM has not provided the public with accurate information:
   • Many journalists have recently been caught plagarizing. Jayson Blair is the obvious example.
2. MSM has failed to operate adequately as a check on government power, particularly as applies to the Iraq war, which broke the contract in two ways:
   • Because MSM didn’t scuttle fast enough, we went to war. We didn’t hear that there were no weapons of mass destruction, we didn’t find out about torture soon enough to prevent it — the Bush administration was not held up to scrutiny in the days surrounding 9/11. Journalists were sleeping on the job.I understand that the Bush White House, and perhaps other White Houses as well, grant better access to and answer more questions from favorably inclined reporters, as opposed to ones who ask tough questions. This is a plainly unacceptable situation, and I would like to see reporters banding together to boycott substance-less press conferences where only the softball questions get answered.
   • Because reporters rolled over and accepted the administration’s press conference rules, they lost the credibility that objectivity brings. Right-leaning news organizations got great access but weren’t very critical, left-leaning organizations got bitter and preachy. In a sense, Bush polarized the media, although I’m sure earlier administrations helped.
3. MSM has failed to operate impartially:
   • In an ideal world, newspapers would disseminate information freely and reporters would not be paid. The absence of money would help ensure that reporters were in it for the truth, and not for cash. Obviously, we do not live in an ideal world and newspapers and reporters must be paid for their work, but MSM has taken things too far. My perception, which I believe others share, is that news corporations are owned by uber-conglomerates that hawk a wide variety of stuff, and I don’t have time to parse these relations myself. I worry that this commercial bent is slanting news media, imbuing it with consumerism. The news is not the news, but PR information fed to me (and perhaps to reporters also) to get me to buy stuff.
   • Newspapers have money, and are often run by white men. The lacking diversity of op-ed pages in the nation’s newspapers has been widely lamented — few women and writers of color figure into these pages, although this has been changing for the better. However, I think that many people perceive newspapers as old boy’s clubs, where the old boys hire and pay people who are like them to produce the news, which makes newspapers sound suspiciously like the establishment they are supposed to be covering.

So, I can pay to read inaccurate biased news written by white guys that subliminally tells me to buy stuff (MSM), or for free I can read inaccurate biased news written by a diverse population that is not unilaterally motivated by money (Internet).

Somewhat reductive, I know, but is there any wonder that folks have turned to media on the Internet?

In the search for my own engagement ring and an ethical diamond, I came across a peculiar trend: the right hand ring. Ads and websites urge women to “celebrate your success” with a diamond ring worn on the right hand. (Now single women can join in the fun of owning a diamond and show their individuality and empowerment — through blind commercialism! That supports slavery!)

Like Art Editor Julia, I loathe ad campaigns that encourage pamper-spending for women. And obviously, the promotions occasionally insult women’s intelligence. This Generous Gems page actually tries to convince you that right hand rings are fitted differently from left-hand ones.

My personal annoyance aside, I think the most interesting part of this trend is the way that it equates marriage with a successful career. Right hand rings are supposed to showcase a woman’s monetary success, while presumably left hand rings showcase her skill as a mantrap.

I find this distinctly unsettling. Marriage and engagement rings are part of the private sphere and of a tradition that extends back through time, while careers are part of the public sphere, and for women at least, a relatively new concept. By extension, the right hand ring suggests that career women are married to their careers, and as such unavailable/unable to engage in marriage. Reminds me of the horrifically-insulting-to-women-everywhere Forbes Article “Don’t Marry Career Women.”

Furthermore, I’m not sure we should celebrate when anyone becomes a workaholic, married to their jobs. Careers are not replacements for a rich private life, whether that life includes marriage or not. And yes, we should celebrate success, but why not do so with a plum 401(k) that sustains long after a person has lost the will to work?

Before Harry Potter took over as Ultimate Hit of Summer 2007, there was a very popular movie called Knocked Up, comedically chronicling two young people deciding to keep the baby. All of a sudden, these stories are everywhere: Glamour has hired a 26-year-old single mom-to-be to blog about her experience (and here’s what Gawker burped up), and the NYT recently ran a poignant Modern Love about journalist Ronda Kasen’s decision to keep her unplanned baby.

What’s going on? First question, is there a subversive anti-choice message going on here? As the trend grows, it’s almost inevitably going to swing that way, unfortunately. But for all the backlash about the film Knocked Up being anti-choice propaganda, I don’t think that’s the case. I think we can thank the ultraconservative, sex-fearing MPAA for abortion and sexual issues’ absence in contemporary American film (and if you haven’t seen Kirby Dick’s This Film Is Not Yet Rated, you oughta).

I think this trend elicits something different — the bittersweet idealism of launching a baby into a crumbling world. I’m 25, and of all my friends and cousins, know no one having a kid. It’s too awful out here. Even despite these troubled times, we’re just too poor, too busy, have too many plans. So when we see other compassionate, intelligent, flawed people in those months before the little human lands, it’s hard not to get sucked in, and put pessimism aside for a moment to nod to the potential of new life.

In general, I’m not susceptible to reality TV (unless it involves cooking), but I have to admit that even though I don’t make a point of watching E!’s show The Girls Next Door, I find myself flipping to it during commercials with shocking frequency.

The show is “reality” fare that follows Hugh Heffner’s three girlfriends’ lives in the Playboy mansion. Of course the reality presented does not resemble the reality I live in, but is strangely compelling nonetheless.

So why do I, a self-proclaimed strident feminist, get sucked in?

In a certain way, the very substance-less nature of the program appeals to me — Kendra, Holly, and Bridget are doing exactly what popular culture tells our women to do:

• Define their value in relation to men;
• Consume, consume, consume;
• Spend a lot of time exercising, waxing bikini lines, putting on makeup, and vamping for men.

To watch the girls on screen is to see my psyche as I might be if I bought in to the standards of beauty and consumption that our culture elevates. For this reason, the show both fascinates me and sickens me.

On the other hand, the girls have each made shrewd calculations and sacrifices to get where she they are — these are not ditzy girls who lucked into the gig. In the episode “My Bare Lady”, Kendra goes out to buy real estate, talking about how her boob job was her “first investment”, noting that it’s paid off. Holly starts an internship with Playboy, and we see her willingness to be involved in the production of porn, which she views as a creative act that finally puts her where she wants to be: in the director’s seat, while Bridget uses the show’s fame to jump start her second career as a voice actress.

I don’t mean to suggest that the series’ approach is either degrading or empowering — it seems as though both sensibilities are mixed together. The girls are the perfect product of our consumer-oriented and sex-obsessed culture, but they are also real women trying to make money and build names for themselves.. This paradox is what makes me watch.

As a promotion for the Simpsons Movie, 7-11s around the country have been turned into Kwik-E-Marts. My first thought was “how cool,” but after reading both Angry Asian Man’s and Ultrabrown’s blogs about the promotion, I’m not so sure. Both bloggers think the character of Apu is racist, or at least that the promotion focuses on the racist aspects of his character (Too Sense applauded the Simpsons for complicating Apu’s character, but noted that the Kwik-E-Mart promotion included none of this complexity). One particular objection was that actual desi owners of stores participating in the promotion are having this racist caricature thrown in their faces — they have to dress up in a uniform modeled after Apu’s.

Well, color-me educated! As a clueless white chick, I didn’t realize that many South Asian folks were offended by Apu. For all the other clueless white folks, here’s why Apu is/might be racist(please add reasons I may have missed in the comments):

• He has a poorly done Hindi accent, and is voiced by a white dude. Some have likened this to white dudes who put on blackface for minstral shows. Desidreaming has an interesting post on this — the discussion in the comments is also intriguing.
• His catchphrase, “Thank you, come again” has evidently been used to taunt Indian convenience store workers across America.
• The broken english on the signs in Kwik-E-Mart stores, or for that matter, on the show, is condescending and ignores the fact that many immigrants speak English well. In short, it’s a cheap shot.
• Apu is the stereotype of the hardworking immigrant business owner.

The potential racism of the accent seems self-evident to me, but from reading the various blogs linked above, I’m seeing a subtler line emerge: some Indian folks think Apu is racist, some don’t. Everyone agrees that he represents a stereotype, and it seems to me that there are a lot of racist folks out there who use the Apu stereotype to make racist comments to Indian-Americans. So the question becomes, “Is a stereotype that is sometimes used for racist purposes racist in and of itself?”