July 26, 2013 § Leave a comment
Bohemea and I are pooling all of our original content/original posts from the Bohemea and Suicide Blonde tumblrs, this wordpress and her wordpress as well as naughty blog Pussy Les Queer into one new mega-awesome-URL!
July 6, 2013 § Leave a comment
I’m kinda obsessed with how beautifully framed and composed this picture of me that Bohemea took is,
June 24, 2013 § 2 Comments
I have a lot of thoughts about this book. I think Palahniuk owes David Fincher a lot – this book wouldn’t have its place in pop culture’s lexicon if it wasn’t for Fincher’s film. The book itself is weak, thin. The movie, the script, and the actors that fleshed out the weak characters from this novel are what made this book what it is today. The book is a gathering of facts and exaggerated boy-stories, it reads like a Maxim magazine. It also makes a lot of assumptions about class and gender. But all this is just fodder to the main point that kept hitting me over the head while I read, which was “THIS IS THE GAYEST BOOK I HAVE EVER SEEN” and this is coming from someone who used to regularly thumb through the Tom of Finland anthology from Taschen. The subtext of this book is so blatant it’s not subtext anymore. It’s like a gay porn that’s put in the straight section. I don’t know what exactly the author is trying to achieve here – the ability to have sexual contact with other men without condemnation or guilt, I suppose. Whatever it is, I would say the biggest audience this book would appeal to, and who I would most recommend it to over all is anyone who has a fetish for straight men fucking each other.
The Annotated Alice: Alice’s Adventures in Wonderland, And, Through the Looking-Glass Review by Suicide Blonde
June 23, 2013 § Leave a comment
This book presented me with a moral dilemma. These stories could surfacely be described as pure whimsy, but as I learned through the annotations, this isn’t silliness without any depth. This is satire, logistics, political intrigue, and a coming-of-age story wrapped in beautiful symbolism.
That being said, the annotations also repeatedly reminded me that these stories were written by a man over the age of 30 as a sort of love story about a 7 year old girl. The editor insists that Carroll’s interest in young girls was completely non sexual-but this is a best case scenario. The fact that this much older man would be so completely devoted to little girls is a difficult thing to view as innocent adoration. This obsession speaks of something in Lewis Carroll that was obviously damaged and this damage haunts the stories and eventually the reader.
But the moral dilemma is: is art made unworthy if the creator is of questionable motives? In this case, it’s difficult to separate the creation from the creator.