Wednesday, October 15, 2008

Breaking Up Is Hard To Do

Particularly when you are Madonna Louise Ciccone Penn Ritchie.

According to the Huffington Post (which broke the story before People!)

"Madonna's spokeswoman said Wednesday that the singer and her husband, Guy Ritchie, will divorce after 7 1/2 years together.

A statement e-mailed to The Associated Press from Liz Rosenberg said that the couple had agreed to divorce, and requested the media maintain respect their privacy.
The statement, co-signed by Ritchie's representative, said the couple had not agreed to a settlement."

Well according to the Daily Mail, Guy could stand to receive up to 150 Million pounds in the divorce. He could make a lot of gangster movies with that. Also, according to the Mail, Gwyneth Paltrow has been playing marriage counselor for months with Madonna, trying to convince her to save her marriage. Who knew Gwyneth had that kind of time?

Seriously, although its sad that Madonna is heading for her second divorce, I kind of feel for Guy Ritchie. It can't have been easy to have lived with her for almost 8 years. She seems like even more of a control freak than I am. Apparently Kabbalah couldn't keep these two together.

What I want to know is whether or not she's going to ditch that faux British accent now?

Tuesday, October 14, 2008

Quantam Tuesday


I cannot tell you how excited I am for the new James Bond film Quantam Solace to come out. After finishing series 6 of MI-5/Spooks, I'm ready for a hot guy to do some butt kicking, and Daniel Craig is awesome as James Bond.

Don't get me wrong, I adored Pierce Brosnan but Daniel Craig actually looks like he kills people for a living. No other James Bond, apart from Sean Connery, had that edge.

November can't come soon enough for me!

Monday, October 13, 2008

Hey Are You Looking at Me?

This weekend I went to a roundtable at the Philoctetes Center on "From Looking to Voyeurism." Given how disappointed I was about the Shakespeare roundtable, I was kind of nervous about this one, but I was pleasantly surprised. Dany Nobus, the moderator, kept the discussion going and it was quite lively. He started off reading a bit of Freud, which always gets my hackles up, given my feelings about the father of psychoanalysis, and then the discussion went off.

I was particularly struck however by a comment by one of the panelists that women do not like looking at naked men. Really? What women do you know? Perhaps it is a generational thing but I know that I and my friends have no qualms about admirining the male body. We may not be as vocal about it as men are, but we do just as much looking let me tell you. I remember being twelve years old and sneaking copies of Playgirl underneath my Seventeen magazine at the newsagent (I had no idea at the time that more gay men read Playgirl than heterosexual women!). Despite my being underage, I never had a problem buying it and my friends and I would pore over the pictures of the men in the magazine. Perhaps it was the fact that it was kind of forbidden that made it so exciting. Maybe that's why women aren't as vocal about our appreciation of the male form. There is still something forbidden about a woman admiring the male form unless it is the contexxt of an art class or in a painting or sculpture. My friends and I discussed yesterday the parts of the male nude body that we liked, particularly that arrow of hair that points directly to....Given the amount of money that Chippendales made and now Hunkmania, I can safely say that Dr. Nersessian has no idea what he is talking about!

And women do go to strip clubs. Perhaps not as often as men do. We certainly don't say to each other "Hey, instead of going to that movie/bar/lecture, let's go to a strip club" the men do, but we go. However it is more of an event, like a bachelorette party or a girl's night out, not an ordinary or average event. Again, it's that whole forbidden connotation. For a women to go to a male strip club, we are seeking a way to blow off steam, to be a little naughty away from our husbands or boyfriends. Which is probably why women are insane when they go to these places, screaming and ramming five dollar bills in their g-strings.

I was struck by what one of the panelists, Katherine Frank said, about how men in strip clubs use the women as sort of a confessional, telling them about how their wives/girlfriends/male friends don't understand them etc. It's like the modern equivalent of going to a priest, particularly if you are not religious or Catholic. Whereas the male strippers that I encountered the one time that I went to strip club, spent most of the time talking about themselves. They were totally not interested in us, which I thought was strange since the point was to entice us to buy a lap dance. Maybe it is because women are used to be listeners, and men aren't.

The thing I remember the most was when a group of us turned our chairs around to watch a lap dance, just out of curiousity, because we couldn't fathom how that worked with a guy performing one. When it got to the questions from the audience, Adam Ludwig brought up a point that I was thinking of, which was the opposite of voyeurism, exhibitionism. People who like to be watched, who get off having sex in public places because they know there is a possiblity that they might be seen or caught.

The same woman who brought up where to find men in New York at an earlier roundtable (a constant refrain of my friends and I), now wanted to know if men who went to stripclubs were inherently narcissistic, which was kind of strange because why would a narcissist go to a strip club? He might think that every stripper in the club would of course fall over themselves to give him a lap dance, but I don't think he sees himself reflected in these women.

So question, are there other women out there who enjoy looking at naked men or was Dr. Nersessian right?

Friday, October 10, 2008

Hey Liz Maverick won an Award


Liz Maverick just found out she won the Prism Award for her book Wired from the Futuristic, Fantasy and Paranormal Chapter of RWA.
Read all about and the adversity she had to overcome to win this award here.

John McCain - Maverick or Just Business As Usual

If you are undecided about whether or not to vote for John McCain, read this article in Rolling Stone magazine:

http://www.rollingstone.com/news/coverstory/make_believe_maverick_the_real_john_mccain

Elizabeth

Thursday, October 09, 2008

Blog-O-Rama


I got nothing to day, so here are some of my favorite posts from around the blogosphere.

Leanna Renee Heiber brings up Halloween Awareness here.

Hope Tarr talks about our adventures at the Film Society of Lincoln Center on Monday here.

Marianne Mancusi has pictures of her new YA Gamer Girl here.

Liz Maverick discusses Men who love Cats here.

Kwana discusses the latest episodes of Project Runway and Top Model here.

Wednesday, October 08, 2008

It's the Economy Stupid!

I'm not normally so political on this blog but I'm kind of obsessed with this election. Not just because it is so historic but because the country is kind of in the crapper right now, and I'm a little concerned about who is going to be leading it in the next four years, after the past 8 years of misery that we've had to endure thanks to Shrub and his henchmen Cheney and Rumsfeld.

So I watched the debate last night and while the candidates didn't say anything differently really then they did two weeks ago, I was struck by how much this election seems to be turning on the economy, something that McCain seems not to grasp fully. Remember lo those many years ago when Clinton was running and the refrain was "It's the Economy Stupid!" Well, I kind of think that logic applies to this election.

But McCain seems to be running on empty. He and his pit bull Sarah Palin are now bringing up stuff that had been dealt with in previous debates, and stretching the truth to suit their purposes. I'm talking about Bill Ayers and Jeremiah Wright. I almost feel sorry for McCain. It's clear that he has absolutely no respect for Barack Obama. Consider him calling Obama "That one" last night on the debate. Right now he seems like a bitter old man. After twisting himself like a pretzel to appease the right wing of the party and choosing Dick Cheney in heels to be his running mate, he has to be aghast that he's still behind in the polls.

I think he looks at Obama and thinks that everything has come easy to him. After all McCain spent 5 years in an North Vietnamese prison, before that he wasn't even at the top of his class at Annapolis, he's spent 26 years in the Senate, and this is what? His third or fourth run at the Presidency and along comes Obama, only in his first term in the Senate, running for President, snatching the nomination out of Hillary's hot little hands, and gosh darn it people like him without Obama really trying. That has got to hurt. McCain reminds me a little bit of Richard Nixon right now when he was debating Kennedy during the 1960 election. I think it was a huge mistake for him to leave the town hall early and to not stay around schmoozing and glad-handing the way Obama did. People are going to remember that.

Of course the fact that right now Obama is ahead in the polls means nothing. What matters is what happens on November 4th when people step into the election booth. Is the nation really ready to elect an African-American president? Not just a Democratic junior senator from Illinois but a man of color.

God, I hope so or we might just be even more screwed then we are now with McCain/Palin in the White House.

Tuesday, October 07, 2008

Polyamory Anyone?

I found this article in the New York Times Style section called "Hopelessly Devoted to You, You and You"kind of depressing. You can read the article here.

The article details this New York couple who practice what is called polyamory, which means they maintain multiple steady relationships. I find this amazing, since I'm having a hard time finding one person that I want to spend a lot of time with, let alone 3 or 4. I just don't see how this is doable given the nature of humans, and messy things like emotions. My favorite part of the article was where Diana Adams gets upset because her boyfriend bought his other girlfriend a better toothbrush than he did her. Seriously this is what you get upset about? According to the article both the Diana and her boyfriend Ed are bisexual. He has a boyfriend out of town, and she has two women that she sees besides him. So each are seeing three people steadily. When do they have time to see their friends? Or their family? Or work for that matter? How do they keep everyone straight? Not that I'm knocking them. If it works for them, more power to them.

Tilda Swinton, who won the Oscar for Best Supporting Actress, is very open about the fact that she has a partner that she shares a home with in Scotland, the father of her two children, but she also has a yonger lover who travels with her. Even Carla Bruni Sarkozy, before she met and fell in love with the President of France, had expressed her support for open relationships. The whole thing reminds me of this book I read as a teenager called The Harrad Experiment, which was a college where the students were encouraged to have multiple relationships. The book was written in the 1970's back in the day when Erica Jong was writing about the 'zipless f*&k' and the sexual revolution was still raging.

I confess in my misspent youth I once tried to date two guys steadily at the same time and it was a total disaster. I had read one of those dating books by Myreah Moore that said you should always have a spare around, that old 'don't put all your eggs in one basket' kind of thing. She didn't say anything about what you are supposed to do when you end up having deep feelings for both men, and how hard that is, and how even though you are dating two people, the idea of them dating anyone fills you with unspeakable rage.

I was very open with both men about the fact that I was dating them both, also that I was still going to go out on blind dates. Ah, the arrogance of the young. It was at a stage in my life when I was basically saying yes to anyone who asked me out. I finally had to make a choice. I couldn't keep on this way, so I finally sat down and decided who was better for me in the long run, who did I really consider to be my boyfriend? And I chose. It was the hardest thing I've ever had to do. I'm just not built to have multiple relationships.

And I'm not sure in this day and age they really work all that well. But that's just me, I'm still old fashioned enough to believe in one man/one woman or one man/one man or one woman/one woman. Maybe that's why I read romances.

Monday, October 06, 2008

Would You Wear These Shoes?



From the "What was she thinking category?" I found this picture on the London Daily Mail web-site. These are the shoes that Victoria Beckham aka Posh Spice wore to go shopping with her kids in the mall. Yes, shopping in a mall, not walking down the red carpet or a talk show appearance. Just an average weekend day.


Now I've been known to rock a pair of 4 inch heels but just looking at this picture makes my feet hurt and my back ache. I can't even begin to imagine how she navigates a mall in those shoes or why she would even want to. Why can't she just wear tight jeans, funky boots and a great top like other celebrities?

Sunday, October 05, 2008

Ode to the Bard

Last Friday, I went to a lecture on Shakespeare at the Philoctetes Center and I have to say that I was a tad disappointed. Maybe my expectations were too high, but I felt that the evening fell far short of what was promised in the handout. I have a great love and appreciation for the Bard of Avon. When I first decided to become an actress, my biggest dream was to one day perform Shakespeare with the Royal Shakespeare Company. That was before I realized that I would have to be British to accomplish that one.

We didn't really touch the Bard much when I was in college. So I made it my mission afterwards that if I was going to take acting classes in New York that I would focus on Shakespeare. I managed to find a mentor in Eric Hoffmann at The Riverside Shakespeare Company, and then to get to study in London at BADA and The Royal National Theatre Studio. One of my fondest memories is watching Mark Rylance play Henry V in the inaugural season of the Globe in London, standing in the pit. Shakespeare in Love is one of my favorite films and I even watched Michael Wood's 4 hour Searching for Shakespeare program. Now the bar was set a little high for me.

There certainly was a distinguished panel of experts, Robert Brustein, the former artistic director of Yale Rep and the American Repertory Theater was the moderator. Daniela Varon (who practically saved the evening) from Shakespeare & Company represented the director's eye, Alvin Epstein, who has had a distinguished career in the theater represented the actor's point of view (and said practically nothing all evening. At one point, I thought he had fallen asleep), Ron Rosenbaum who has written a book called The Shakespeare Wars, Eugene Mahon, a pyschoanalysis and playwright. But there was something missing. Perhaps it was the Bard himself. I would have liked to have seen perhaps some readings of the Sonnets or some of Shakespeare's monologues. It would have taken the discussion from the abstract into something more concrete.

Interesting points were brought up and then dropped. Robert Brustein mentioned the idea that Shakespeare was a mysognist and that was never really addressed. And other ideas were brought up and then just dismissed. One of the most interesting was who was Shakespeare? Was it the man from Stratford? Was it a committee of men as put forth by Delia Bacon? Was it Edmund de Vere, the Earl of Oxford? Brustein dismissed the idea out of hand because Ben Jonson said that Shakespeare was Shakespeare. J.P. Wearing spoke about Shakespeare as a working playwright, who not only had to work with a company of actors, and tailor parts to suit them, but he also had to write plays that pleased the audience. The fact that he managed to do so on so many levels is amazing.

For me, the 400 pound Gorilla in the room was the fact that no one even really mentioned Merchant of Venice. Critics and Scholars have been divided for 400 years about whether or not the play is anti-semitic or not. I would have liked to have seen the panel delve into that. One of my favorite episodes of John Barton's playing Shakespeare is the one in which Patrick Stewart and David Suchet talked about playing Shylock and how they approached the role, particularly David Suchet since he's Jewish (or his father is, I'm not sure if he was actually raised in the faith). Daniela Varon mentioned in terms of The Taming of the Shrew that audiences have to look at the play both from a 21st Century point of view but also to understand how modern Shakespeare was in the context of his time in writing this play.

I disagreed with Ron Rosenbaum that you can't find Shakespeare in his writings, and is his notion that what was the point since we don't know anything about Homer apart from his blindness yet we continue to read The Odyssey and The Iliad. I think that almost every writer, whether he does it consciously or unconsciously reveals something about himself in his writing. I know that I personally have used themes that I'm interested in, emotions that I've experienced, things that have happened to me, in my fiction writing, not just what I write here on the blog.

So while I was disappointed in the evening ultimately, I'm glad that I went, if only to hear Daniela Varon speak. I'm sorry that I missed the production of Robert Brustein's play about Shakespeare that she directed, because I'm intrigued now to see what she would do with Shakespeare on stage. I was also struck by a question that an audience member asked of the panel. He said that he hadn't quite gotten a clear picture of each person's Shakespeare and I thought that would be such a great campaign for The Public Theater, to have famous actors who have worked there to describe their Shakespeare.

Friday, October 03, 2008

National Treasure - Patt Milhailoff

Patt Milhailoff, Me and Chris Keeslar after he received his award

I'm a little hungover and from celebrating the lovely Hope Tarr's birthday last night. I didn't watch the debate but I did read the transcript in today's New York Times. It's interesting to read what they said without being guided or mesmerized by watching them on television. No Sarah Palin trying to look adorable or Joe Biden looking like a professor, just the facts ma'am as it were. I found that reading it, Sarah Palin came off okay. I find her folksy manner, that she's just regular people to be such a joke after reading about how women were forced to pay for their own rape kits and taking a per diem from the state so that she could work from her house.

So instead I'm posting this last picture from the GAA because it is a lovely one of member Patt Milhailoff, who is like the crown jewel of RWA NYC. She is one of the most enthusiastic cheerleaders for the genre and for our members that you could wish for. She's also a multi-published author with Cerridwen, but success has not gone to Patt's head. She is still as down to earth as ever, always there with the tough love, trying to get people to write and submit there work. Every year she makes the award certificates that we give out to our honorees, and she used to raffle off goodie baskets as well at the GAA's. We don't get to see enough of her.

And despite the fact that we've tried numerous times to give her Member of the Year or to get her to run for office, she won't hear of it. That's a great member, and I wish that I had 80 Patt's as chapter members (that's not to say that we don't have amazing members in our chapter). It's just that Patt is a National Treasure. I'm sure that a lot of chapters have members like Patt, someone who goes the extra mile without being asked.

We love our Patt!

Thursday, October 02, 2008

Happy Birthday Hope Tarr

Today is the birthday of the lovely and talented Hope Tarr! Not only is she one of the nicest people that I know, and a lot of fun, but she's a fabulous writer. Check out her website for a sneak peek at her new Harlequin Blaze here which will be available in January. And gaze longingly at the groovy new Blaze cover. What a great New Year's present.

You can read my recent interview with Hope here.

Wednesday, October 01, 2008

Crazy Celebrity Parents

I wasn't sure I had anything to write about today. I've been struggling to get back to my historical YA that I hope to have finished by the NJ Conference, so I'm outlining the next three chapters that I have to write.

But thankfully Sharon Stone is around for people like me. Recently she lost physical custody of her oldest son Roan to her ex-husband Phil Bronstein, because among many things, she wanted to have his feet Botoxed because they were smelly. Apparently teaching him good hygiene, like putting talcum powder in your shoes, if you don't wear socks or just washing them didn't occur to her.

Seriously botox for an 8 year old's feet?

I've always liked Sharon Stone. She's always had a good sense of humor about her career and her place in the industry, and she's always been impeccably well-dressed in her films. And I admired her for adopting three boys without a husband, but no I'm starting to wonder.

Who is raising these kids while she runs around the world? Phil Bronstein is at least Roan's legal father but what about the other kids. When will celebrities realize that kids are not accessories like chihuahuas?

Tuesday, September 30, 2008

Don't Blame the Democrats!

Wow, so many things are going on that I totally missed that I had written my 1,000th post yesterday. I can't believe I've had 1,000 things to say in the past 3 years. Yeah me!

And wasn't last night's Gossip Girl awesome? It totally made up for the fact that I have yet to pick a favorite couple on Dancing with the Stars. I'm just not that excited. Truthfully I had more fun watching the NKOTB Behind the Music special than I did DWTS. Maybe it's the fact that so many of the celebrities are pretty bad (I'm talking about you Kim Kardashian and Rocco DiSpirito) and not in a fun way. When Brooke Burke is wowing the judges with her dancing (and surprisingly she's kinda good), it's a wacky world. I feel for Karina Smirnoff. According to my dance teacher, she's the only one of the pros, who has an international title, yet apart from the two Mario's, she's had dud after dud of partners. Is it because she's not as family friendly cute as Cheryl Burke and Julianne Hough? Or because she comes off as kind of desperate to win?

In other news, the bailout bill proposed by the President was defeated in the house 228 to 205, and this time you can't blame the Democrats because more Republicans voted nay than Democrats. Of course, McCain tried to blame Obama and the Democrats for the defeat because Nancy Pelosi blamed Bush for getting the country in the situation in the first place. Guess what, it's not their fault that the Republican members are more worried about saving their seats and their asses. Yeah, sure Obama could have gotten on the horn and tried to persuade more Democrats to vote yes, but clearly he wasn't sold on the deal in the first place. I guess McCain can't take credit for brokering the deal since it didn't go through.

Loved Jon Stewart's take on McCain suspending his campaign to fix things and they are still not fixed.

Sigh, is November 4th here yet?

There is however some good news. Today is the Jewish New Year and it is also the release date for Liz Maverick's new book Irreversible with the groovy cover that looks straight out of the AHA video from the eighties.

You can see the cover here and read an excerpt or just go out and buy the book!

Monday, September 29, 2008

Tag, I'm It!


I have been tagged by Kwana!
Ok here goes...
Here are the rules:Link to the person who tagged you.
Post the rules on your blog.
List 6 unspectacular quirks you have.
Tag 6 bloggers by linking them.
Leave a comment on each person’s blog to let them know they’ve been tagged.
And now, to my singularly unimaginative quirks:

1. I'm stealing the first one from Kwana and Jax. I can only drink water at room temperature. I will actually ask the waiter to bring me water with no ice.

2. Although I tan easily, I hate sitting in the sun. I would rather sit under a tree with a book than sunbathe. During camp, I would deliberately get knocked out early in dodge ball, so that I could sit in the shade.

3. I love ABBA. I know they are cheesy and the two women had absolutely no rhythm, but I still love them.

4. I can't stand people who pop their gum. Seriously, I have come close to hurting people on the subway who pop and crack their gum. I'm sorry, I think it is the most disgusting habit on the planet, and people who do it are totally low class.

5. I have to have my Starbucks chai tea latte with no water and no foam. And I will make them remove the foam if I see any. Seriously for $4.23 a pop, the cup should be filled to the brim.

6. I can't stand the smell of vinegar, unless it is balsamic. However, it does clean out the drains.

Okay, I'm torturing Marianne, Liz Maverick, Hope Tarr, Leanna, Maureen, and Keira

Friday, September 26, 2008

McCain Makes A Boo-Boo

By now, everyone has heard about how John McCain was supposed to appear on The Late Show with David Letterman, but cancelled at the last minute, citing his need to suspend his campaign to focus on the economy. He told Letterman personally that he was on his way to the airport.

Unfortunately for McCain he got caught in a little bit of a life. He may have been on his way to the airport, but he managed to stop off at CBS News to be interviewed by Katie Couric about his decision.

And to top it all off, Letterman was informed of this in the middle of the taping, and showed the feed of McCain being interviewed by Couric to the audience. So now the entire viewing audience of Late Night believes that McCain is a big fat liar who dissed Letterman for Katie Couric. Of course, Letterman went to town on McCain, and his decision to suspend his campaign for the moment, and not in a funny ha-ha way. He apparently talked what McCain might do, if say he decided he wanted to suspend being President for awhile. It was clear that Dave was quite pissed off.

Now of course it is entirely possible that while he was on his way to the airport, CBS News called and grabbed him to come in for an interview, but it was certainly unfortunately timing on his part. Particularly since Letterman has been very good to him. McCain has been on the show something like 15 times, and announced his run for President on the show. It was not a good thing for him to have pissed Letterman off.

And just to show that not all conservatives are taken in by Sarah Palin, here is list of Sarah Palin's lies listed by Andrew Sullivan on the Atlantic Monthly blog.

Thursday, September 25, 2008

Movie Review: The Duchess

Last Friday night I went to see The Duchess with one of my closest friends to cap off a pretty up and down week. I thought "hey a movie with pretty costumes, yeah!" Unfortunately there is only one word to describe this movie and that is adequate.

The plot in a nutshell involves a vibrant beauty, Lady Georgiana Spencer, who marries an older man, William Cavendish, the 5th Duke of Devonshire and goes to live with him in his beautiful London mansion, Devonshire House. But she quickly learns that her husband prefers his dogs to her. She becomes a celebrity of her time and ends up trapped in an unhappy triangle with her husband and his live-in mistress. She falls passionately in love with an ambitious young politician, Charles Grey (later 2nd Earl Grey and Prime Minister, you know the one the tea is named after) and the affair causes a bitter conflict with her husband and threatens to erupt into a scandal.

Keira Knightley suffers beautifully as Georgiana but she is not given much more to do than to look hurt, and to be a clotheshorse. While she wears the costumes well, I was always conscious of how painfully thin she is, especially compared to the paintings of the real Georgiana. Ralph Fiennes manages to capture the essence of a man for whom duty and appearances were all. He manages to act with his entire body where as Knightley seems to act mostly with her jawline. However, the writers have included a scene between the Duke and Duchess that I found inexplicable and hard to deal with. There is a brilliant moment towards the end of the film where husband and wife try to reach out to each other if only briefly. Hayley Atwell, as Lady Bess, is not really given much to hang her character on. Did Bess love the Duke, was she calculating, or did she have genuine affection for Georgiana?

A movie of less than 2 hours can never hope to do justice to the complexities of the relationship between Georgiana, her husband, and Lady Bess Foster, nor does this movie even try. The film spends entirely too much time emphasizing the parallels between Georgiana and her however many greats niece, Lady Diana Spencer, future Princess of Wales. Hmm, let's see, both married older men who were emotionally distant, and who preferred the company of another woman, leaving the beautiful wife to flee into the arms of an adoring lover. However, Prince Charles never moved Camilla into Kensington or Buckingham Palace, forcing Diana to share living space with her rival. Nor were Camilla and Diana ever best friends the way Georgiana and Bess were.

The movie muddles up even the basic facts of the triangle. When Georgiana met Lady Bess in Bath, she had been married for about six years, and had yet to have her first child. The movie gets it right that she was hoping that taking the waters at Bath would help her to conceive. Lady Elizabeth Foster was the daughter of the Earl of Bristol. She and her sister, both seperated from their husbands, were living in genteel poverty when she met Georgiana. Soon the two women were bosom buddies, and Bess and the Duke were sharing long rides out in the countryside. Bess was hired initially as a governess to the Duke's illegitimate daughter Charlotte Williams, who she spent almost two years abroad with.

No one knows for sure when Lady Bess and the Duke became lovers. And Georgiana apparently didn't find out until it was revealed that Bess and the Duke had had a child together, Caroline St. Jules (who later married George Lamb, the brother-in-law of Lady Caroline Lamb). Bess seemed to fill a need in both the Duke and the Duchess. She gave Georgiana the affection and attention that she craved, and she seemed to be able to stroke the Duke's ego the way that Georgiana was incapable of doing. She was the linchpin that allowed the marriage to work between the Duke and Duchess. Instead in the movie, we never see the relationship develop between Bess and the Duke. Georgiana comes home one day and hears them in bed. When she asks Bess why, Bess explains her actions away by telling her that the Duke promised to help her gain access to her children (which for some reason the writers have given her three sons instead of two, perhaps to emphasize Georgiana's inadequacies more?)

The other problem with the movie is that the trio seem to exist in a bubble. The rest of Georgiana's, apart from her mother, doesn't exist in the film, nor does the Duke's. And how can they make a movie without the Prince of Wales? Especially since the Regency crisis occurred during the time period of the film. Instead, the audience is introduced to Charles James Fox, and Richard Brinsley Sheridan who function as sort of lackeys to Georgiana, you know in between writing plays and governing.

There is hardly any mention of what was going on in the outside world apart from a brief mention of the Whigs supporting the Americans in the Revolution and a fleeting reference to the revolution in France. Georgiana's life as a political hostess is completely truncated, nor does the audience get more than a glimpse of her gambling which was a serious addiction for her. During her lifetime, she was constantly fighting off her creditors, at certain points she owed over 100,000 pounds. She was also possibly anorexic or bulemic and addicted to opiates to deal with the hollowness of her life. She was also an author, who published her only novel at the age of twenty-one, as well as a poetess.

In the movie, Lord Charles Grey is depicted as her contemporary, when in reality he was 7 years her junior. When they met, she had finally given birth to two daughters, Little G and Harriet, always called Harryo, but the pressure to give birth to a son was overwhelming. Grey basically chased her, and she was flattered by his attentions. He wasn't her first affair, she'd already possibly been intimate with her good friend Charles James Fox, and she was very close to the Duke of Dorset, one of the great womanizers of the age (a man who had also had an affair with Bess). When the Duke tells Georgiana that she must end her relationship with Charles Grey because of the scandal, I had to laugh. As if living openly in a menage a trois was not scandal enough?

What the movie does get right is the heartbreaking moment when Georgiana has to give up her child by Grey. For the one thing that Georgiana loved more than anything was her children. She was an unusual mother for the time because she insisted on breast-feeding all her children. She was such a remarkable mother, that one of her daughters writing her a letter when she was an adult and a mother herself, remarked on what an absolutely wonderful mother she was.

For audience members who know nothing of the real story, I'm sure this lackluster treatment will suffice. For those of us who have read Amanda Foreman's masterful biography, one longs for what might have been if the book had been given the same lavish treatment and care that John Adams and Queen Elizabeth I had been given in recent miniseries.

I can only give this film a C+

Wednesday, September 24, 2008

Interview with Anna Godbersen, Author of The Luxe Series

Got It Goin On is pleased to welcome Anna Godbersen, author of the totally addictive series The Luxe from Harper Teen.

Q: Tell us a little about yourself, what is your background and how long have you been writing before you were published?


I was born in Berkeley, California and moved to New York to attend Barnard College, where I took some creative writing courses and wrote a story collection for my senior thesis. After college, I tried to write a “serious” novel, whatever that means, and worked as a bartender and in the literary department at Esquire. I also ghostwrote young adult novels, which was how I began thinking about The Luxe…


Q: Tell us about when you got “the call”?


I was in California, in Big Sur, staying at a place with very little cell phone reception. So I was at a payphone in the woods when I heard that my book had sold. As a writer, you probably obsessively imagine all kinds of scenarios for every hypothetical event that may occur in your life, so of course I’d contemplated getting the news that I was going to be a published author and how that would feel. But when it came it was still quite a surprise and very thrilling.



Q: Your first release The Luxe and the sequel Rumors from Harper Teen is set in late 19th Century New York. How did you come up with the idea? Is there a particular reason you chose the year 1899?



I was kicking around ideas for a YA series with the editor I’ d worked with as a ghostwriter, and the gilded age just seemed like such a glamorous setting. I picked 1899 in part because of the dramatic possibilities—close of a century! New Years! etc.—but also because it was the end of an era, and I wanted to be able to play up the clash of the newer, less-scandal averse members of society with the more old fashioned ones. I think it makes it so much richer that the strict rules my characters struggle with are—unbeknownst to them—soon to be things of the past.


Q. I am an unabashed history geek so I loved reading these books. Tell us about your research. Any behind the scenes stories that you’d like to share?

I started out reading general histories of the time, and then I began to look into their primary sources—the gossip magazines and etiquette books and memoirs that were available in places like the New-York Historical Society and the New York Public Library. I just followed stories and images that interested me and I used them to form this fictional world for my characters. There are plenty of scandals from that era, but most of them have been pretty well documented. I’m reading American Eve by Paula Uruburu right now, about the murder of a society architect by his former teenage lover’s new husband. It’s quite sad and fascinating.


Q. In what ways do you think life was different 100 years ago? In what ways do you think it is the same?

I was actually surprised, language and idea-wise how similar the culture was to now. There are tremendous differences obviously, but they were less pronounced then I expected, in part because I think we imagine the 19th Century as a monolith and forget how radically the country changed after the civil war, and especially in the decades leading up to the dawn of the twentieth century. I think that the greatest difference— at least for my characters, who are very privileged and not subject to the terrible life expectancy and other insecurities of the urban poor at that time—is the roll of young women. Elizabeth, for instance, is a perfectionist who would be playing field hockey, running her school paper, and volunteering for a literacy program if she lived today. In her own time, she is only able to be an overachiever in decorum and dress, so that is what she tries to do, with tragic results.


Q. What modern convenience unavailable in 1899 are you grateful to have today? Do you think you would have enjoyed living in 1899?
I am the happy beneficiary of a lot of modern dentistry, and I wouldn’t give that up for all the ball gowns in the world. I am curious about many past eras, especially from a fictional perspective—the assumptions and problems of characters a hundred years ago are so fascinatingly different from our own. But I don’t think I would have wanted to actually live then—I would not have fit very neatly into the Victorian idea of womanhood, and I like wearing pants and having a glass of wine in mixed company way too much.

Q. What do you think the differences are in the life of a teenager in 1899 compared to today?

This is really an interesting question to me, because there’s this notion that a teenage consciousness didn’t really exist before the 1950s. And in some ways, that’s true—the possibility of a leisurely lifestyle for people who may not emotionally be adults but who are physically pretty darn close, not to mention a whole consumer culture aimed at defining who they are, is definitely a more recent development. But it also goes against the logic of what it is to be human not to imagine that many of the themes of teenage life today would have been the same then: experiencing love and loss for the first time; discovering what it is to be an individual in the face of peer pressure; becoming one’s self outside of the family. And I think those underlying issues connect my experiences and my readers’ experiences to those of my characters.

Q: What are some of the challenges and rewards of writing for the YA market?

The rewards far outweigh the difficulties, namely that the readers are so great and so enthusiastic and invested in characters they care about. There is very little ironic distance there. And also, as I said above, I think the themes of teenage life are especially rich: rebellion and conformity, family and individuality, innocence and looming adulthood. I do sometimes find myself having to hold back because I want the pacing of these books to hold teen attention spans, or I struggle with what parents will think is appropriate versus what seems dramatically true, or I worry that soemthing might be over the heads of young readers. But challenges are always good for a writer, and having to think about how to achieve clarity and hold the interest of a particular audience can be really important.


Q: What do you think is the most effective way for a writer to promote his/her books?

There are probably as many ways as there are kinds of writers, although I’ve found for myself that being available through a Myspace page is really satisfying and immediate. It’s really lovely to hear from people, and exciting to know that someone out there is anticipating words I haven’t even written yet. Readers seem to really like having that kind of connection with a writer, too. I suppose it’s also really helpfully to get your publishing company to put a lot of money behind your book.


Q. What/Who do you like to read?

My favorite writer is Joan Didion—she is such a unique observer of the self, but is still is so courageous in using her writing to address the wide world. I also love the dry Brits—Evelyn Waugh and Kingsley Amis et al. And I am always interested in what a really great writer can do with the historical fiction genre, like Steven Millhauser’s brilliant Martin Dressler.

Q. What is your writing process? Do you plot extensively first or do you tend to “fly in the mist?” Has your process changed over time? Do you write multiple drafts or clean up as you go?

I do plot extensively first. In writing a scene, I sometimes find wonderful things come from figuring it out as I go along, but for the most part the books I’ve done have been on such a tight schedule that I can’t risk going down the wrong path for too long. I also find that having clear ideas about the emotional tone and associations I want in any given scene really help me to focus and have good ideas.

I do multiple drafts with my editor, though not for myself alone, mostly because of the time constraint. I do go back, though, after writing each chapter and clean up. I find that the my imagination is still more open to changes then—once any episode has been left for too long, it becomes almost like something somebody else wrote, and then it is more difficult to imagine how events might play out or dialogue might be said differently.

Q.) Both The Luxe and Rumors are written from multiple points of view. How hard is it for you to keep track of the different voices of each character?

I have been sitting with these characters for a while, so in my mind it’s always very clear now. I do think it took me some false starts to get there, when it was all a little fuzzier. But it is definitely a writing challenge, and I do worry on days when maybe my brain isn’t working to full capacity that the voices blur a little. But it’s also a really useful device for this kind of story, in which façade and perception are so important but also so fickle, to be able to let your readers see from some disparate sets of eyes.

Q.) I was very struck by Lina, Elizabeth's former maid. Her love for Will leads her to betray Elizabeth, but yet at the same time you feel sympathy for her.

Oh thank you for saying so! I hear so often from readers that they hate Lina, and she is very dear to my heart. For me, she is the most relatable character—she is the girl who hasn’t yet grown into herself or her looks, who desperately wants her life to be beautiful but has no idea how to achieve that. She wasn’t born with much, but she is determined to take the rocky road to making it better. And really, there are more Linas out there then there are Elizabeths.

Q) In both books, people are not always what they seem, and friendships seem to shift and change.

Yes—I think this is both true to the period and to teenage life. The Gilded Age, with its obsession with outward displays of wealth and success, with its Victorian rules and elaborate codes of behavior, was necessarily a time of glittering surfaces and audacious hypocrites. And teenage life is like that, too. No one quite knows who they are, but they are trying on all these elaborate personas, all these rigid ways of being, and they can’t help but draw competitive comparisons and lie a bit in the process. The true self, in both scenarios, is elusive but persistent.

Q: Do you have any advice for aspiring novelists?

Always be reading, and don’t be afraid to unpack even the most exalted novelist’s work. I learn all kinds of things by wondering about the choices and mechanics of writers who are far more talented than I am, and I find that thinking critically about pretty much any kind of literature makes me want to get back to my own computer and start forming the hazy observations in my mind into solid sentences.

Q. What are you planning to work on next?

Right now I’m finishing up the third Luxe book, and then it’s on to the fourth. After that I’d like to do another series for teens—it will be historical, but I’d otherwise like to shake up the formula I’ve been working with for nearly three years now. And I’d also like to try to write a stand-alone novel with a beginning, a middle, and an end that’s about grownups and for grownups. But we shall see!

Thanks Anna! You can purchase The Luxe series from Barnes and Noble Amazon or Powells. And stayed tuned for the third book in the series coming in 2009!

Tuesday, September 23, 2008

More Pix from the GAA Awards


Maria Ferrer, our membership chair, and Karen Cino, Vice President of RWA NYC

Jason Gaffney (Suzanne Brockmann's lovely son), me, and Lis Eng (partial view)

The lovely Dee Davis, our author of the year with her husband, and me


Chris Keeslar, Marianne Mancusi, Alyssa, Leanna Renee Heiber, and Ron Hogan from Media Bistro




Me doing my Evita impersonation



Karen Cino, Vice President of RWA NYC and Lisbeth Eng, Treasurer