MONDAY, OCTOBER 9, 2023
Why we can't have a sane world: Rhonda Garelick went to the finest schools, as this thumbnail makes plain:
She received her doctorate, masters, and bachelor's degrees in French and comparative literature from Yale University, doing graduate work at the University of Paris/VII afterwards.
She's said to be 61 years old, not that that seems to have helped. Meanwhile, the New York Times thumbnails Garelick as shown:
Rhonda Garelick writes the Face Forward column for The New York Times’s Style section. She is the D.E. Hughes Jr. Distinguished Chair for English and Professor of Journalism by courtesy at Southern Methodist University. She is the author of three books, including “Mademoiselle: Coco Chanel and the Pulse of History,” and is currently writing a book on fashion and politics.
She's an SMU professor "by courtesy?" We don't know what that means.
Garelick is also a good, decent person. Yesterday, she posted a Face Forward column about Cassidy Hutchinson—a column which started in the manner shown, painful headline included:
Cassidy Hutchinson’s Subtle New Style
After Cassidy Hutchinson’s history-making testimony before the Jan. 6 committee last June, threats to her personal safety compelled her to leave Washington, go into hiding and eschew all public appearances. Now she’s back, in a big way, publicizing her new memoir, “Enough.” And for her book tour, Ms. Hutchinson has been refining her style.
On camera during her testimony, Ms. Hutchinson’s style was muted and tailored (she wears the same look on her book jacket). A blowout, blazer, fitted black pants and black top, tiny circle diamond necklace, and a white manicure. Her Zara jacket was white, too—a color associated with purity, the suffragists; the color of the Capitol building that had been breached and sullied on Jan. 6.
That structured, buttoned white blazer allied Ms. Hutchinson visually with the Capitol. White also suggested that Ms. Hutchinson was turning over a fresh page, moving away from Trumpworld (and the President Trump-affiliated attorneys who’d encouraged her to answer questions with “I don’t recall”), and offering the committee her full cooperation—total candor. The word “candor,” in fact, derives from a Latin word for “whiteness.”
When Ms. Hutchinson resurfaced on “The Rachel Maddow Show” this September, her outfit recalled her look of last spring—but with notable differences. This time, while she spoke of her ongoing loyalty to the Republican Party (calling herself a “moderate Republican”), her blazer was of brightest blue—a potential nod at least to the other side of the aisle. Beneath that jacket she wore a drapey, low-neck top of high-gloss white silk. The blouse’s high-sheen fabric and cut added glamour, suggesting a new, more relaxed stance and ease in the spotlight. And Ms. Hutchinson did seem more relaxed and unguarded—in both demeanor and in what she had to say.
Hutchinson's blue blazer was a "potential" nod to our side of the aisle?
Translation:
Garelick doesn't have the slightest idea why Hutchinson chose that color. Presumably, that's also true of Hutchinson's earlier visual alliance with the Capitol, which is white.
You can't blame Fox for this sort of thing. This sort of thing comes to us live and direct from our own tribe's side of the aisle, and of course from the finest schools.
The column goes on and on and on from there. Nothing will make such piddle stop. This explains why, at the end of days, we simply can't have nice things, let alone a serious world.
Earlier: Al Gore wore too many earth tones. Plus, he wore three-button suits—and those polo shirts!
Stop it, Bob. That is NOT a NYT column!
ReplyDeleteIt’s the freaking Babylon Bee.
The left wing didn't invent fashion reporting. It has been a thing for centuries. Somerby cannot say that Cassidy Hutchinson didn't wear blue as a nod to Democrats, and then suggests that our tribe is responsible for fashion reporting.
ReplyDeleteI am old enough to recall the book "Dress for Success" which said that blue signals sincerity and truthfulness. That is more likely what Hutchinson was trying to convey, nothing to do with our so-called blue tribe.
No one bases their vote on such stuff. Al Gore lost for many reasons that have nothing to do with what he wore.
Somerby might profitably read one of the many books about fashion, culture and society. They would explain to him why people on both sides of the aisle notice and care about clothing.
Do you think the necklace with the small diamond or the round neckline of Cassidy’s blouse represents the steering wheel that Trump is said to have tried to grab out the hands of his driver that day? Or both?
DeleteMe- I’m thinking that Garelick’s entire column is virtue signaling like a son-of-a-bitch.
Virtuoso virtue signaling. “Yes, I’m a ridiculous putz, but nothing is so important than you knowing I’m a putz for Biden putz.”
She’s sixty-one, so I don’t see her getting a tv gig, but an occasional segment on The View. That could happen.
Somerby grabbed one statement out of context and made a fuss about it.
DeleteIt would be odd if the publisher of Cassidy Hutchinson's book hadn't given her a makeover in order to be in the public eye during her book tour. She has new clothes. So what? It isn't a big deal and some people might be interested in what a young woman might wear under the circumstances. The professor Somerby has chosen to mock is an expert on interpretation of fashion choices in a political context. She too is promoting a new book.
Hutchinson is testifying against Trump. But she is not campaigning for Biden. One random remark about blue doesn't change that. Nor does that remark make the professor a Biden supporter.
Cecelia, you are way out of line. Someone pressed your paranoid button this morning and you are still running off at the mouth about deprogramming and hidden Biden supporters discussing suit colors. Take a pill.
If someone is promoting Biden you will know by the lapel pin that says Biden for President in 2024. Why would someone work hard to be so subtle when the goal is to be loud and proud about the person you are pushing?
DeleteAnonymouse 7:21pm, stop pretending to be dumb enough to think the blog was about Cassidy Hutchinson or her book.
DeleteYou’re dumb as dirt, for sure, but not that un-savvy.
Anonymouse 7:22pm, “subtle” was it?
DeleteGarelick was less subtle than you are being right now.
That means she was as subtle as a semi-truck crash.
Suggesting that the blog was NOT about Cassidy Hutchinson and her book, and also about fashion in politics, makes you a paranoid weirdo. Her publisher and their promotion staff recruited and planted the article to promote sales for both authors.
DeleteI might check and see whether the same publisher has produced both books. I wouldn't jump to the conclusion that this must be some plot to promote Biden by mentioning the color blue. You are off the deep end. This is how Q-Anon creeps think about the world. If you weren't a paid troll, I would suggest you consult a shrink because these are what loose associations look like, which are a symptom of schizophrenia. The fashion writer is merely working overtime to connect fashion to politics, not promoting Biden or any other blue candidate, including any who happen to be running in Hutchinson's home state, wherever that is.
Anonymouse 8:04pm, nothing you say makes me a paranoid weirdo.
DeleteIt’s doubtful Garelick or the NYT could have ever been induced to write or publish such an idiotic and politically contrived column for Tara Reid, Sarah Palin, or any other woman on the wrong side of any current liberal political agenda.
The only person who worked overtime to connect the color of Hutchinson’s blue blazer to Democrats was Garelick, herself.
Everyone else but the columnist, the rag, and anonymices would have been too embarrassed.
Now you are calling the right a victim of the press on pure speculation about Palin or Tara Reid (the former was a legitimate political candidate, the latter falsely accused the President and lacked credibility even while the focus of press attention). These are very different women. Garelick's speculation is nothing like yours, which IS very weird. Garlick has some basis for her speculation, unlike you.
DeleteAnonymouse 9:08pm. if anybody wrote the identical fashion column on the court room attire of a witness against Harvey Weinstein you’d still have to pull out an electron microscope in order to find any area that wasn’t as contrived and intellectually insulting as Garelick’s piece.
DeleteCecelia: Witnesses, defendants and plaintiffs are advised to dress a certain way, to make a good impression on the judge and/or jury. Maybe that’s tyrannical, but that’s the reality. Of course, Hutchinson is not a witness against Weinstein. She is making the rounds of interviews and on a book tour. You don’t think she might choose her outfits with certain considerations other than mere fashion in mind? She may have a fashion consultant, just as she may have a PR consultant.
Deletemh, and that aspect of how public perception is manipulated by professionals for hire would be a worthy discussion from a NYT fashion expert-columnist.
DeleteWe didn’t get that.
Except you did.
DeleteAnonymouse 10:34pm, no, we didn’t. We got gushing tribalism.
DeleteWe know to expect that from anonymices, not supposed experts.
I'm not interested in fashion, but lots of people are. I see nothing wrong with a column about fashion.
ReplyDeleteSports news is equally insignificant, but millions of fans are interested and the Times properly reports on it.
The Times recently shuttered their entire sports department.
DeleteA Republican congressman criticized Obama for wearing a tan suit.
ReplyDeletehttps://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barack_Obama_tan_suit_controversy
David - I think Somerby objects to the opportunity cost.
ReplyDeleteIf you are suggesting that Somerby thinks all space and segments in the media should only be about the things he personally cares about, you are probably right.
DeleteI’m suggesting that Somerby thinks that in political reporting, certain topics (e.g., medical expenses, school achievement gaps) are more important than others (e.g., clothing choices), and that focusing on the latter distracts from the former.
DeleteThe last part of your paragraph doesn't follow. There is no reason why a column like this one should "distract" from anyone else's discussion of those other topics. Internet space is infinite, unlike newsprint pages, so there is no reason to exclude one person's interests in favor of another's.
DeleteOnce again I want to remind people here that New York City is the center of the US fashion industry. Many people who live and work in that city are employed in fashion. It is not unusual in the NY Times, the newspaper that serves New York City, to include articles connecting fashion to a variety of other enterprises, interests and activities.
In Los Angeles, there are articles about the sale or purchase of movie star homes. That's because entertainment is a major local industry in which many people, not solely actors, are employed. In Boston, there are stories in the news about the activities of the numerous universities that are their local industry. Somerby's disdain for the concerns of other people reflects his own narcissism, not much different from Trump's preoccupation with himself and nothing else.
Anonymouse 7:56pm, in that spirit… perhaps the cooking section should do a piece on stewed prunes for an octogenarian president who, without comment, calls a lid mid-day after an atrocity against an ally
Deletewhat does "calls a lid mid-day" mean?
DeleteStill waiting for an explanation.
DeleteGood.
DeleteSo it is just gibberish.
DeleteI call a lid on Cecelia. I am not Corby.
DeleteDogface, it’s a bit much to accept
Deletethat I guy who refuses to see any
significance in Jan 6, 91 indictments
against Trump, etc., really cares
about this. That is, he didn’t give
a crap about Ms Hutchinson when
She told him critical things about
an inside job against his Country
(that almost worked), so why should
he object when they write about
her fashion sense. Can you
complain about the trivial when
you ignore the critical?
Calling a 61 year old woman with an academic Distinguished Professor chair and several books to her credit a "yale grad" and pretending that she is a flighty co-ed just out of school is demeaning to her. This is a very ugly essay that shows Somerby's utter disrespect for a person's achievements simply because Somerby himself doesn't care what anyone wears.
ReplyDeleteAnonymouse 7:50pm, and here I thought that you would object to this bit of sagaciousness:
Delete“The word “candor,” in fact, derives from a Latin word for “whiteness.”’
Cecelia, all of us are concerned about you. Please stop drinking while commenting. Your reply to 7:50 has nothing to do with what was said in that comment.
DeleteOn the contrary, Anonymouse 8:09pm, my comment has every thing to do with anyone who would defend a fashion writer for acting like a flighty dorm room pundit by likening a white blazer to the Capitol building.
DeleteIn Latin, candor means a dazzling, lustrous white.
DeleteIronic isn’t it.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
DeletePerhaps Hutchinson simply chose colors she liked or look good on her. There is however a long tradition of white representing the good guys or the angels, and that could be a part of hutchinson’s subconscious.It’s probably speculation on Garelick’s part, but it’s an interesting theory.
Deletemh, it’s not interesting at all.
DeleteIt’s contrived nonsense for a fashion-cum-political-virtue-signal columnist.
You’d be better off staring at your navel.
Oh, sorry, Cecelia. I forgot that if you don’t find it interesting, then it isn’t interesting, my opinion be damned.
DeleteThe color of Hutchinson’s blazer also matches the color of Biden’s posterior. Is that an interesting comparison?
DeleteYou are crude in a way most women are not.
DeleteFirst of all, it’s interesting that Cecelia knows what color Biden’s posterior is. On second thought, he’s tan, so it’s highly doubtful it’s anywhere close to pure white. Now, it’s possible that Trump’s is not as orange as the rest of him, because he slathers that stuff all over his face.
DeleteAnonymouse 9:36pm, “posterior”?
DeleteYou’re disingenuous in the way anonymices are.
mh, you have a point. We should ask Biden’s female Secret Service watchdogs.
DeleteYou don’t even know what that word means — you are using it incorrectly.
DeleteAnonymouse 9:49pm, yet more anonymouse disingenuousness.
Deletedisingenuous definition:
Delete"not candid or sincere, typically by pretending that one knows less about something than one really does"
That doesn't fit this situation at all. You keep using words without knowing what they mean. It makes you look foolish and interferes with communication. You should look up unfamiliar words, because that is what intelligent people do and how they increase their vocabularies.
You are truly the Lauren Boebert of trolls.
Anonhmouse 10:33pm, you are insincere in your suggestion that women are too delicate and sensitive to utter a shocking word such as “posterior”, let alone the suggestion that Biden’s is whiter than cocaine on Marilyn Manson’s…arm pit.
DeleteCecelia's response, like that of all Right-wingers is in service to bigotry and white supremacy. The only things Right-wingers care about. Everything else is negotiable.
DeleteLike I said, crude.
DeleteAnonymices, it’s your counters that are crude.
DeleteHowever, I do understand it’s the best you’ve got.
Lame and crude.
DeleteWhen the context requires it, I’m willing to say, “Anterior.”
DeleteCecelia is the worst Right-winger in the world. Imagine posting these complaints about what someone is wearing without first calling Liberals "snowflakes".
DeleteWhat an amateur.
In all candor, I’m as white as a snowflake.
Delete“Al Gore wore too many earth tones. Plus, he wore three-button suits—and those polo shirts!”
ReplyDeleteThe difference here being that those comments about Gore were supposed to mean he was weird. The article about Hutchinson isn’t a hit piece.
Garelick may be onto something, maybe not. In that column that Somerby claims “goes on and on and on” (it isn’t really that long), Garelick does mention how Giuliani groped her, Boehner told her to lose her ponytail, and Trump told her to try to look more like Hope Hicks (a former fashion model): “Cassidy,” she recalls him [Trump] telling her, “you should get some of her highlights. I think they would look really nice on you.” Ms. Hutchinson lightened her hair immediately, a choice she says she later regretted.”
It seems that men do care about (women’s) fashion, and they sometimes do inappropriate things or make demeaning comments. I hope that Ms Hutchinson is dressing to please herself, rather than powerful slobbish men. Perhaps she did wear blue as a signal. Perhaps not, but more power to her if she did.
mh, it’s interesting that you think that Garelick’s treatment of Hutchinson was less objectifying to her.
DeleteNo, what you found interesting was your own idea about “objectification” that has nothing to do with my comment. Those men committed sexual harassment. Garelick merely talks about the possibility that Hutchinson didn’t simply reach into her closet with eyes closed and put on whatever she grabbed. Clothes can be used to signal things.
Deletemh, Garelick didn’t do any such thing in her column. She mentioned nothing about experts and she would certainly consider herself one.
DeleteShe praised Hutchinson’s wardrobe as though it was straight from the halls of Psyche, rather than unpacking any notion of something that was crafted by paid professionals in the arts of messaging.
Who thinks Hutchinson wasn't helped to prepare for her book tour? You are the person who doesn't know how the world works -- New Yorkers are more sophisticated than you are Cecelia.
DeleteAnonhmouse 10:36pm, there’s not a professional on the planet who would appreciate Garelick tying a white blazer to the Capitol building on behalf of their insinuated expertise.
DeleteThey know New Yorkers are more sophisticated than that.
I wouldn't take fashion advice from a man pretending to be a woman on the internet.
DeleteCorby dresses appropriately for every occasion.
ReplyDeleteCorby is retired and focused on villainous rightwing bridge players and Bob Somerby.
DeleteShe only has time for mumus.
There may have been other news today that was being reported in the New York Times besides this hugely important fashion piece.
ReplyDeleteAre you sure?
DeleteI know that MSNBC is currently doing 24 hour live coverage of Israel.
DeleteCecelia, don’t you ever use the clicker and see what’s not on Fox or Newsmax? You don’t even have to get up off your fat can….
DeleteAnonymouse 3:18pm, I very rarely watch tv, although the old man and I did marathon a tv series some months ago.
DeleteIt can be strange to see President Biden still in office during a time when there are two significant and dangerous wars taking place. Some feel it's important to self-censor criticism of his performance even though his leadership has not at all met their expectations. Even if they feel pressure and suppress it publicly, privately people are questioning his foreign policy decisions and acumen. "Four more years of this?" is what I keep hearing.
ReplyDeletePresident Biden has not made the world a more dangerous place. It's just the world became a more dangerous place while he was in office due to circumstances out of his control.
DeleteHe will be ordering an ice cream cone in aviator sunglasses soon which should make everything better.
DeleteBiden solved the inflation problem. I'm sure he can handle this too.
DeleteI keep hearing, thank God we have a sober experienced leader who has the respect and cooperation of the entire free world rather than fucking crazy orange man.
Delete“I keep hearing” you mean like
Delete“People are saying?”
No one gives a sh@t, no
one should.
What about your daddy, the orange maniac pussy, do you think he gives a sh@t?
DeleteOne of these years, Somerby will realize the the NY Times does not write for "our tribe." Until then, more shit like this.
ReplyDelete"Nothing will make such piddle stop."
ReplyDeleteThen I'm at a loss as to the point of this whole enterprise.
mh - we know how you feel.
DeleteI am Corby.
ReplyDeleteRiddle one:
ReplyDeleteA fanny
The meaning of ‘fanny’ differs between UK and US.
DeleteZionism has been a disaster.
ReplyDelete