Tuesday, February 21, 2006

Who I Hate, But Must Attend To

We all have those moments - like driving by a road accident - when our rational side says, nothing to see here, move along, but our hedonistic side forces our senses to the scene. We know that indulging in an activity is bad for us, but we do it anyway out of a secret desire to see how bad it can actually be.

There are two such activities that I indulge in on a regular basis, my brain both hating and secretly enjoying each. I always complain about them afterwards, but still I come back to them. These activities are: reading Leah McLaren's column in the Style section of the Globe and Mail on Saturday and listening to the Dean Blundell Show on 102.1 The Edge on weekday mornings.

Leah McLaren



I will fully admit that the green-eyed monster doth mock when it comes to Leah. She has the job I want: she writes a column in a national newspaper AND she found a publisher for her book. Some have argued that nepotism got her the column and the column got her the book deal. They must be bitter...

But come on - that column about jeans and sitting in the bathtub (Feb. 11) was just so...inconsequential. One would like to think that anyone writing for a major newspaper would have some serious education and experience behind them, but these qualities rarely shine through in her column. Granted, she's writing in the Style section, but I put more stock in what Jeanne Beker writes about bikinis than what Leah writes about Botox because Jeanne can back up anything she writes with a wealth of experience.

Yet every week I read the girl and every week I roll my eyes and think, "I could be doing this! Why can't the Globe hire me?" I am not interested in the goings-on at her farm. I don't care what she thinks of silent dating. I think her move to London was a safe and structured way for her to become "well-travelled" and "cosmopolitan". And my god, did you really write a novel about a 35-year-old woman whose eggs are on the outs?

I gave her credit for her column on the smugs (Jan. 21). Leah describes a list of the different types of smug people (giving credit a bit too late, in my opinion, to Helen Fielding who created the term "Smug Marrieds" for her series of novels about Bridget Jones). There were smug singles, smug healthys, smug parents; all with a mini-description. She ended her column with a description of smug columnists: "the kind who criticize the social crimes of others while implying that they are somehow above the fray, this high-handed breed would never own up to feelings of smugness. Except as a clever way to end a column." It was a clever way to end the column. But it was the one bit of cleverness I've seen out of a profusion of ephemera.

And perhaps this is why I still read Leah: somewhere in the bastion of banality (now there's a phrase she'd use!), I am hoping for some little clever connection, some little clue as to why it's her, and not me writing that column.

Dean Blundell et al



The great cougar hunt? The ugly contest? And now the best ass contest? Exactly how juvenile are Torontonians able to go at 8 o'clock in the morning?

Apparently, quite so. I thought we'd worked this out of our system with Howard Stern on Q107. These guys are like the table of jocks in the high school cafeteria that eyeball and chuckle when lesser mortals pass by. They find humour in waving in the background of Breakfast Television's weather report, discussions of J.D. Fortune's (new lead singer of INXS) genitalia with his ex-girlfriend and making fun of poor Eduardo, a frequent caller.

Dean, Todd and…that other guy…seem to have trouble treating women as equals. They once did a segment called “Cheerleader Math” where Todd attended a cheerleading audition and asked math questions, airing only the incorrect answers from the women.

Yet every morning, my radio is tuned to this crew of obnoxious arseholes. And every morning I laugh out loud at their conversations. I enjoy their off-colour humour – up until a point, but they always seem to take it just one step too far. Like the hammered guy at a party who thinks it’s totally okay to pee in the plant in the corner, these boys cross the line of social niceties way too early in the morning.

And when they do cross the line, my rational side says, "Change the dial! Go back to Humble Howard!" However, my hedonistic side keeps attending, listening for more coarse and twisted bits of the Dean Blundell morning show, seeing just how bad it can be.

2 comments:

SoW said...

And I thought I was the only one who held that kind of opinion on Leah. I have no problem with her and I only keep reading (or at least skim) her column b/c I enjoy reading pretty much the entire wkend issue. But my god! It's a shame that she is given a column space that is equal to writers such as Doug Saunders and Lynn Crosbie. I've been a fan of Doug's column (Reckoning) for a few years because he is ENDLESSLY INSIGHTFUL. And Lynn (Pop Rocks) discusses pop culture topics with a sharp analytical approach. She disses with strong supportive arguments. This is the type of writing that maintains myself as a fan of print media such as the globe and the guardian. I guess, like you, I keep glancing over Leah's column in neverending hope that maybe she'll improve. It's just baffling that she is allow to occupy a prime column space that is on par with the space alloted to Doug Saunders! I'm not saying she's a bad writer. Looking at the writing elsewhere in the Globe, I just expected more. Her column is the one area where the Globe went soft. (and yes - me too - the thought "Even my writing is more interesting/inspiring/insightful than that sometimes!" has occured to me while reading her column)

SD said...

I agree - it's not that she's a bad writer, but could never be on par with someone like Doug Saunders. That man has so much knowledge and analytical skill! I do like reading Lynn Crosbie, but I find her really bitter sometimes. Have you read excerpts from her new poem? It's amazing poetry, but so angry.