a bi-weekly column
by michelle ampofo ’25
managing editor
✶✶✶
an iron pillar.
I KNOW MORE NOW THAN I’VE EVER KNOWN.
That’s all. That’s the intro.
✶✶✶
J.k. because I feel like ending the year that way would be super anti-climactic. But I still don’t want to come up with something new to write… So as a compromise, I will just paste an essay I wrote on Clarice Lispector here (I haven’t read it since I submitted it in the fall, so if it’s bad that’s not on me xx):
Age-old Desire in the Works of Clarice Lispector
In the works of Clarice Lispector, the author explores the theme of female sexuality and desire in various stories. There are different levels of sexual repression and alienation expressed in her stories, specifically in Miss Algrave, In Search of a Dignity, The Sound of Footsteps, and The Conjurings of Dona Frozina. In Miss Algrave, the main character begins as a pious women who is separated from her sexuality but after an encounter with the otherworldly being, Ixtlan,
becomes sexually active and flagrant. The basis of Ixtlan’s existence is questionable, and it can be argued that he is a figment of Miss Algrave’s imagination that gives her license to begin exploring onanism. In this essay, I will use Miss Algrave and its motif of sexual repression and transformation in conjunction to the sexual experiences of elderly women in Lispector’s stories. In the same way that Miss Algrave explores and renews her sexuality through masturbation, older women in Lispector’s stories depend on the sexual act as well. In a society where a woman’s value is determined by her youth and attractiveness, elderly women learn to gratify themselves sexually as a way to cope with their unfulfilled desire. But although they gratify themselves in this way, the act is not always liberatory or completely fulfilling.
Miss Algrave starts with a reference to a prior sexual indiscretion the main character made when she was young and tried to make babies with her cousin (“They’d do everything to make babies, without success.”) (2015: 511) Lispector hints that the setting influences the content of the story. The plot unfolds in London, “where ghosts exist down dark alleys” suggesting something seemingly supernatural in the city itself. (511) Miss Algrave’s life is monotonous and normal—“Her day, Friday, had been like all the rest.” (511) She “lives alone in a top floor flat in Soho,” “works as a typist,” “writes to the newspaper,” “goes to choir practice,” “knits,” “has a coffee date with an old woman,” (511, 512, 513) all of these aspects of her life are simple and unremarkable. Lispector describes in full that despite her rejection of sexuality, Miss Algrave is an attractive woman. She was or “Irish stock,” “redhead,” “wore a severe bun at her nape,” “had loads of freckles and her skin was so fair and delicate that it resembled white silk…She was a pretty woman.” (512) Miss Algrave is aware of this beauty, and takes pride in them as well. “She took pride in her figure: buxom and tall” (512) and liked seeing her name in the newspaper publishing (512). Despite this, there is an alienation from Miss Algrave and her own sexuality to the extent that her own body seems impure and not to be touched. On page 512 Lispector writes, “She bathed just once a week, on Saturdays. In order to not see her naked body, she wouldn’t even take off her knickers or bra.” (512) Miss Algrave doesn’t remove her undergarments, intentionally masking her breasts and genitalia. She sees the body as something to be avoided, and that rule applies even in the innocuous act of cleaning.
To Miss Algrave, “eating meat was a sin,” “pets were too bestial for her taste,” “children were immoral,” as well as the cooing of pigeons. (511, 513, 514) Her ideas of what is sinful and what is not are highly questionable. She equates pleasure with sin (513). She is highly traditional and feels disdain towards the prostitutes looking for work on the street corner. (511) When she
goes to the park, she brings a Bible to read. (513) The sun in the park is “so fierce, so good, so hot.” There is a sexual undertone to this description suggests a latent desire. When at the park, “she did her best not to look at the couples who were kissing and fondling each other without the least bit of shame.” (513) It is interesting that she “does her best not to look,” suggesting that there is a part of her that would like to and that she is restraining herself from her latent sexual curiosity. Lispector writes, “Miss Algrave felt very happy, even though…Well, even though.” (513) The latter part of this sentence implies that not all conditions for her happiness are being met. We are shown a part of her internal dialogue: “But if that’s how God wanted things, so be it. But no one would ever touch her, she thought. She went on coping with her loneliness.” (514) The fact that the reality of her not ever being touched by anyone sexually keeps recurring makes me believe that there is the latent desire for her to do so. Miss Algrave is “lying in bed with her loneliness. The even though.” (514) This loneliness has its own presence, and its presence can be felt, almost as if it’s a separate being.
It should be noted that Ixtlan came in the “form of wind,” suggesting he is not a structured being. His formlessness also serves as a contrast to the natural elements of the story, as Miss Algrave begins a sexual relationship with a being she cannot touch or see, only one she could feel. There is the sense that her sexual being needs to have a foreignness of some kind about him (ie. not having a human form, having a foreign name, being an otherworldly being) in order for her to allow herself to give herself up to him freely and subscribe to her belief of what is occurring. Although she does believe fully in the sexual encounter and keeps her blood stained sheets as “proof that it all really happened,” (516) Ixtlan’s foreignness is what allows herself to continue—she is not defiling herself to an English man or sinning in anyway, Ixtlan does not apply these rules that she has bound herself to. Furthermore, the two “understood each other in
Sanskrit,” (515) further emphasizing the distance (albeit welcomed) between them. They communicate in a language other than their own, which contributes to the foreign nature of their involvement. Because it is not the usual case of fornication, there are no rules being broken.
Ixtlan says, “I came from Saturn to love you.” It is interesting that Ixtlan’s way of loving Miss Algrave is by way of sexual and physical intimacy, rather than an emotional one. I wonder whether the purpose of his being sent is to fill Miss Algrave’s deepest, most hidden desire? If following this line of thought, her greatest desire is not to end her loneliness by way of emotional intimacy and friendship, but rather through engaging in a purely sexual relationship. The sex scene itself is notably short and void of emotion. Ixtlan tells her to take off her clothes, “lays beside her on the wrought-iron bed,” and “[runs] his hands over her breasts.” (515) There is no emotion, vulnerability, or connection displayed in the act, only physical. Immediately after the act, Ixtlan leaves through the window (which was transformed into a portal of some kind) and tells Miss Algrave to “use herself” until the next full moon when he’ll return. (516) Despite this, Miss Algrave expresses her love for Ixtlan (“I love you, my love! my great love!”) has her sexual restraint replaced with an insatiable hunger, “never [wanting] it to end,” is “[craving] more, more and more,” (515) and willing to “pay whatever she had to” to keep this happiness. (517) (She is even willing to make herself more cross-eyed to look more appealing to him. (517)) Miss Algrave imagines scenes of domesticity—imagining ”reclining beneath the satin canopy above her bed,” “[ringing] the bell to summon the butler who would bring her coffee that was hot and strong, strong.” (516)
After she has sex with Ixtlan, a transformation occurs in Miss Algrave. Firstly, she doesn’t go to church (516), representing Miss Algrave’s departure from her religion and the values that were attached to it. She eats bloody meat and red wine and finds it “wonderful,” “she
no longer protests,” and she thinks of sex as not “a sin but a delight.” Animals “no longer nauseate her” and she no longer feels “revulsion at the couples in Hyde Park.” Lispector writes Miss Algrave feels “bestial” and this is a good thing (517). This is not the first bestial or natural element within the story, in fact, it is seen throughout. While the religious component and references within the story lessen as it progresses, pagan and natural elements are abundant throughout. There are various references to the full moon, red and bloody meat, the night. This coupled with general natural imagery like “the red geraniums,” “vegetables and fruits,” “the breeze,” “birds,” “fresh air,” “grass,” “sun,” and the fact that the story takes place in the spring not only serves a sensory undertone for the reader (which likely mirrors the heightened sensations Miss Algrave feels after sex), but also places Miss Algrave’s sexuality as something just as natural as these elements in nature.
There has been a change in the way Miss Algrave navigates the world. She “drools with pleasure” at these previously sinful things and longs to engage in them more. This is a significant change from how she used to live, which was from a place of internalized shame and guilt. This is seen in the guilt she holds from her sexual relations with her cousin and in the language Lispector chooses to use. Phrases like “She was ashamed,” “God forgive her,” “she deeply regretted,” all display the state of mind that Miss Algrave was living by before she encountered Ixtlan. After she has sex with Ixtlan, when Miss Algrave goes to Hyde Park, instead of bringing her Bible and intending to read it like she did before, she instead “lays down in the warm grass, parting her legs slightly to let the sun in.” Not only is this act sexual, it is also self-satisfying, an act Miss Algrave would not have previously let herself indulge in. The sun in this instance mirrors Ixtlan and her otherworldliness—Miss Algrave is using even nature to gratify herself. We see here how the setting of the story itself also contributes to Miss Algrave’s becoming a
sexual creature. Miss Algrave is not judging others around her or partaking in a religious activity, instead she is displaying a small act of pleasure—one she would have denied herself before. In order to maintain her happiness between Ixtlan’s visits, Miss Algrave goes to Piccadilly Circus and gets compensation for sex and plans to “walk the streets and take men back to her bedroom.” (518) Miss Algrave now has a desire to maintain this vision of a newfound lifestyle where “she could drink Italian wine every day,” and “[buy] a red dress with the money the hairy chap had left her.” Miss Algrave now sees the lifestyle she could live by exchanging sex for money and no longer sees that as a sinful exchange. Though in the beginning of the story she was proud of her looks but not overly concerned, now she “[lets] down her thick hair that was the most beautiful shade of red” and “resembles a howl.” (518) Miss Algrave is now aware of her beauty and what her sex appeal can bring her. She “had learned that she was quite valuable.” (518) And intends on using sex to get herself a promotion at work. Miss Algrave is clearly a story of sexual awakening and transformation, but the question for me becomes: does the story end with her in a more liberated position? It is true, after encountering Ixtlan, Miss Algrave begins to see and live in the world differently. She embraces the idea of love, has a more positive outlook, and no longer binds herself to a set of strict rules. She is no longer sexually repressed, and finds joy in sex. She is now aware that by using sex, she could better her life materially, as seen in how she has sex with men in order to buy luxurious items and get a raise at her job. Though she starts as a pious, constrained woman in the beginning of the story, she ends as a conventionally “naughty” or “depraved” woman, in terms of her obsession for sex and her willingness to exchange sex for money. (518) In some ways, this is liberatory—for a woman to reject her sexuality is to reject a part of herself, and she has a better grasp at both in the end.
On the other hand, Miss Algrave undergoes a reduction of character where she becomes the very thing she disdains in the beginning of the story. Instead of focusing on her practical and respectable job, she decides “she had other talents” (518) and is now using sex as a way to achieve a seemingly better life. No longer is she dependent on her own ability as a typist, she now is dependent on her desirability and sexual prowess and how it will be received by men. One would assume that a career as a typist is more stable than a career as a sex worker, because the woman has more autonomy and control. Additionally, Lispector leaves Miss Algrave in an obsessive state over sex—she craved “more, more and more.” (515) This display of female carnality goes hand in hand with the pagan of the story such as references to the full moon, blood, and meat. (516, 517) With this being said, there is a sardonicism that Lispector presents the story with. There is something ironic about a very pious, religious woman having sex once and suddenly displaying characteristics of a sex addict. There is a reason why Lispector chooses to exhibit both extremes of sexuality.
Another question that arises is the extent to Ixtlan’s legitimacy—is Ixtlan real or is he a figment of Miss Algrave’s imagination? Lispector begins the story by addressing this, writing, “She was liable to be judged. That’s why she didn’t tell anyone anything. If she did, people wouldn’t believe her because they don’t believe in reality. But she, who lived in London, where ghosts exist down dark alleys, knew the truth.” (511) Ixtlan’s otherworldliness and lack of real form, beg the question of whether he exists at all. The day that he visits Miss Algrave, is the day that she is being tormented by the awful memory of her past (511), as in her previous immoral sexual behaviors with her cousin. It is interesting to me that Ixtlan visits Miss Algrave on a night that “had been like all the rest” (511) except for the fact that she was thinking heavily about sex. Lispector tells us that her thoughts of sex are the only difference between this Friday, and all the
ones that have passed. (511) We also see that Miss Algrave has the desire to experience something sexual—she is lonely (514), “never had anyone touched her breasts” (512), she does “her best not to look at the couples who were kissing and fondling one another” at the park. (512) When Ixtlan arrives and tells her to take off her nightgown, she does not protest and instead does it immediately. Lispector writes “The moon was enormous inside the bedroom.” (515)
It is possible that Ixtlan is not real at all, but has been created by Miss Algrave as a way to allow herself to experience sexual pleasure on her own, via masturbation. The fact that Ixtlan arrives “from Saturn” on the day she is being tormented by the thought of sex (515), that she is lonely and “is lying in bed with her loneliness” (514), and that she does her best not to watch couples that kiss and fondle each other (513) leads me to believe that is possible Miss Algrave decided to “take care of it” (517) and quell her sexual tension herself. As mentioned earlier, it would make sense for Miss Algrave to create this nonhuman, otherworldly character to start her sexual journey because that way, she technically isn’t sinning at all, just doing what she was told by this separate authority figure. She needed to create a proxy and justification in order for her to succumb to her sexual desire. This would explain why Ixtlan tells Miss Algrave “use yourself” when she begins to feel sexual longing, thus giving her license to masturbate and explore her sexuality on her own, no longer even needing this other being to participate in the act. It also explains why the hairy man from Piccadilly Circus ”didn’t care to believe her story” and “laughs at her” when she shows him her “blood-stained sheet.” (518) Ixtlan’s words “use yourself” is interesting in itself because her body becomes instrumentalized in order to fill a specific sexual purpose.
The idea of a woman’s self-pleasure is not one that Clarice condemns or shies away from, even when it comes to older women/women who believe they cannot partake in the act. In In Search of a Dignity, Senhora Jorge B. Xavier experiences the impossibility of abandoning sexual desire, despite her old age and invisibility in the world. (419) When she speaks, people don’t understand her (425), she feels bestial and clown-like in her old age (428), and has accepted her status as a nobody. (429) But even though Senhora Xavier is seventy, she is still a sexual being—”from the outside—she saw in the mirror—she was a dried up thing like a dried fig. But on the inside she wasn’t shriveled. Quite the contrary. On the inside she was like most gums, soft like toothless gums.” (428) Even though Senhora’s appearance causes her to not be seen as a sexual being, she very much still is. This is seen in her intense liking of Roberto Carlos, a young singer from whom “she wished for nice and romantic feelings in relation to.” (429) Clarice writes, “It was a base hunger: she wanted to devour Roberto Carlos’s mouth. She wasn’t romantic, she was crude in matters of love. There in the bathroom, in front of the mirror above the sink.” (429) Similarly to Miss Algrave, Senhora Xavier is not looking for emotional intimacy, she is looking for physical pleasure. What she wants is simple—sex, and with an attractive young man. Lispector hints that Senhora Xavier already is in the practice of masturbation, as seen in the “mirror above the sink,” but she still desires more. Lispector insightfully describes Senhora Xavier as being tangled in a “deep and fatal well” (429) and describes her body as a place with depths unseen and possessing a malignant darkness. (429)
Senhora wonders to herself: “Why hadn’t other old women warned her that this could happen up till the end?” (429) Senhora Xavier’s desire to be a sexually active person is all consuming. Like Miss Algrave, Senhora possesses this boundless hunger that, unfortunately for her, will probably never be appeased. There is the repeated sentiment that is challenged within
Lispector’s works, that women lose this natural part of themselves as they age. There is the belief that old women do not experience sexual desire, and as I mentioned previously, to alienate someone from their sexuality is to alienate and deny them of themselves. Senhora Xavier spends the greater part of the story walking anxiously through a series of seemingly never ending hallways and doors of a stadium (which itself is a place for displays of excitement and youth), showing not only the inescapability of sexuality but also the impossibility of being able to express sexuality as an older woman. At her age of seventy, Senhora Xavier has been relegated to the outskirts of society because she is no longer young and therefore is unable to incite sexual feelings. Even though she practices fake smiling in the mirror (428) and colors her hair to conceal its white roots (429), unlike Miss Algrave, she no longer has the ability to navigate the world and receive things because she is an attractive person. In a society where a woman’s experience is determined by her desirability, “easiness to look at,” and ability to incite sexual desire in men, and the reality that exchanges are made based on these politics, Senhora Xavier is completely void of currency. She also has no ability to change her situation—old age is essentially a woman’s place of no return. Like Lispector writes, she is “indelibly sullied.” (429) The solution to this problem is simple and follows her everywhere, yet still remains out of reach.
The idea of old age and sustained (perhaps even relentless) sexual desire, is also seen in The Sound of Footsteps and The Conjurings of Dona Frozina. In The Sound of Footsteps, the protagonist Mrs. Candida Raposo is eighty-one years old, and had been a beauty in her youth. (551) Mrs. Raposo’s “desire for pleasure” has not gone away even in her old age, so she goes to a gynecologist to ask for help (551). Mrs. Raposo asks the doctor when “the thing” will go away, (551) “the thing” being her sexual desire. Mrs. Raposo’s choice to use an impersonal word shows the separation between herr and her sexualdesire, and her inability to claim her sexuality as her
own. Throughout the story itself, Mrs. Raposo’s sexual desire or way of alleviating that is never explicitly named, rather it is merely alluded to. While yes, one reason for this is because of Lispector’s writing style and another reason is because of the time the story was written, the absence of frankness is telling. When the doctor tells Candida that her sexual desire will never go away, she “stared at him in shock” (551), a similar reaction to Senhora Xavier’s shock and distress that no one had told her that she would experience this.
Mrs. Raposo asks for a cure to alleviate this sexual desire, implying that her sexual desire has made her feel diseased (the fact that she is going to a medical doctor to ask these questions should also not be overlooked). When the doctor says there is no cure for this desire, she asks, “And what if I paid?” (552) The insinuations that occur from this suggestion are twofold: firstly, Mrs. Raposo is considering paying for sex, to which the doctor replies, “You’ve got to remember, ma’am, you’re eighty-one years old.” (552) Secondly, the question brings forth the established idea of sex and beauty being a form of social currency. Beauty and sex appeal are features that heighten life experiences and could lead to the acquisition of more traditional currency (as seen in Miss Algrave using her beauty to buy wine and expensive dresses, etc). Of course, you can only get these things if you are considered beautiful, which Mrs. Raposo is not. Because she is considered void of beauty, her experience, much like Senhora Xavier’s, is quite the opposite. The fact that Lispector makes a point to mention that Senhora Xavier had once been beautiful, worsens her situation. Not only is she experiencing a difference in treatment in her life and suffers from a sexual desire that will not be satisfied, she is also acutely aware of what is causing this issue. Mrs. Raposo has had to experience her personhood and desirability decrease while she aged and has had to first acknowledge, then accept it as an unfixable thing. Because of course, a woman cannot pay to be desired—social currency and financial currency are not convertible
when it comes to desirability in old age, particularly as a woman. When Mrs. Raposo asks the doctor whether she could take care of it herself (552), he replies that it “might be a remedy.” The word “might” denotes a lack of certainty that even masturbation will satiate Mrs. Raposo’s desire. Lispector ends the story interestingly:
“That same night she found a way to satisfy herself on her own. Mute fireworks. Afterward she cried. She was ashamed. From then on she’d use the same method. Always sad. That’s life, Mrs. Raposo, that’s life. Until the blessing of death. Death. She thought she heard the sound of footsteps. The footsteps of her husband Antenor Raposo.” (552)
Mrs. Raposo’s act of self pleasure leads to “mute fireworks,” showing that she cannot even derive complete pleasure from her sexual experience because she still believes it is wrong. Although she cries and feels ashamed after the act, she continues to engage in the sexual act because of her sexual cavity. This is to the point where death is seen as liberatory, because it will free her from this cycle of unfulfilled, endless desire. The last sentence of the story, “She thought she heard the sound of footsteps. The footsteps of her husband Antenor Raposo.” This sentence can be interpreted in a few different ways. One interpretation is that Mrs. Raposo is hearing the footsteps of a dead husband after she finishes masturbating. This would explain why she feels emotions of shame and sadness after the act—perhaps she feels guilt or longing towards her husband. Another way to interpret this is that Mrs. Raposo has begun to masturbate while her husband is alive. This would explain, and further complicate her saying, “So what am I supposed to do? no one wants me anymore…” (552) and would suggest that her husband no longer feels sexual desire towards her. In this case, Mrs. Raposo’s sadness would be derived by the fact that she is undesirable to her husband. Therefore, every time she masturbates the fact of her undesirability would be reinforced.
The depiction of elderly female sexuality is quite different in The Conjurings of Dona Frozina. In this story, Dona Frozina, a seventy-something widow partakes in self-gratification in an entirely positive way. Dona Frozina has passed all conventional markers—she is “very Catholic and practically lives in churches,” was a young widow that never remarried, is old-fashioned (“nothing low-cut and always in long sleeves), and is a “good mother-in-law and fantastic grandmother…a good breeder. And kept on bearing fruit.” (486) Physically, she is also attractive as “her skin is spectacular” and is regarded as “the finest of ladies.” (486) But Dona Frozina is also very sexually active and possesses a spirit greater than that of many young people. (486) When women ask her how she survives unmarried she responds, “‘Conjurings, my girl, conjurings.’” (486) These “conjurings” of course, are what Lispector later defines as “the sleight of hand; mysterious trick, art of hocus pocus.” (488) For Dona Frozina, her sexuality and self-gratification is not incompatible with her religion. Unlike Miss Algrave, she doesn’t feel the need to abandon her religion in order to fully enjoy pleasure. This is seen even in the language Lispector uses to describe Dona Frozina’s acts of masturbation. Lispector writes,
“Dona Frozina invokes the name of God more than she should. One shouldn’t take God’s name in vain. But with her this rule doesn’t hold. And she clings to the saints. The saints are already sick of her, she’s pestered them so much. Not to mention “Our Lady”; the mother of Jesus gets no peace. And, since she’s from the north, she’s always saying: “‘Holy Mary!’… Dona Frozina would pray every night. She’d say a prayer to every saint.” (487, 488)
For Dona Frozina, religion and sexuality are not incompatible, rather, they intertwine. Lispector’s choice to use religious language to describe Frozina’s masturbatory act shows that religiosity and sexuality are used in conjunction and are both liberating. It is interesting to note, though, that even in this story, as in the previous ones, the characters’ masturbatory acts are never explicitly stated. They are always described implicitly, through symbols or metaphors.
Dona Frozina explores her sexuality so frequently that even Lispector, or rather the narrator, begs her to stop. On page 488 the narrator pleads, “Dona Frozina, enough of conjurings… I’m the one who’s had it with you.” Dona Frozina is unashamed about the frequency of her sexual acts, to the point where it has become too much for the author herself to bear. Despite her activity, Dona
Frozina considers herself a virgin, (487) which implies that she feels like masturbating has not forsaken her purity (which therefore shows that she still subscribes to ideas of purity), she has depended on masturbation as a way to find a way around pain all [her] life—”Yes, ma’am, thanks to my conjurings I kept escaping.” (487) For Dona Frozina, onanism is a mode of catharsis, a way to unburden herself.
One thing to note in this story and the rest, is the fact that none of the women in the stories are looking for emotional intimacy—they solely want physical gratification. While Miss Algrave is dependent on Ixtlan, Candida Raposo longs for her husband, and Senhora Xavier pines for Roberto Carlos, Dona Frozina does not rely on a man to experience pleasure—she relies on herself. There is something liberatory in this depiction, a woman having sex solely for pleasure and nothing more.
The themes of age, sexuality, shame, hunger, desire, repression, religion, and denial are ones that Clarice Lispector frequently explores in her work. Though Lispector herself is often unsympathetic about the appearance of older women in her stories, in her later works, she takes a particular interest in their sexual pleasure. Lispector’s choice to write about female elderly sexuality is subversive. There is a dearth of depictions of female sexuality after a certain age in popular media at the time of Lispector’s writing and even now. For women, there is an invisibility that comes with age. In a society where desirability dictates much of how you are treated in life, the value of women decreases as their age does the opposite. In the mentioned
stories, different women in various situations explore their sexualities to varying effects. While some find liberation in a way that almost becomes oppressive, others find catharsis in the exploration of their own bodies. The reading and analysis of these stories are important—in society, there are only narrow depictions of the type of women who enjoy sex. These depictions do not include mothers, elderly, ugly, religious, or widowed women, therefore contributing to their erasure and denial of sexual activity. In these stories, we see how a woman’s claim of her sexuality gives her a sense of autonomy and power in a world where she is otherwise overlooked and/or silenced. For older women to reclaim their sexuality is to reassert their value—that alone is revolutionary.
Works Referenced:
Lispector, Clarice, et al. “Miss Algrave, In Search of a Dignity, The Sound of Footsteps, The Conjurings of Dona Frozina.” The Complete Stories, New Directions, New York, 2015.
(Writer’s Note: Being an English major is knowing you could write an essay on elderly female sexuality; being a WGSS major is thinking you should.)
✶✶✶
Marianne Williamson Talk Notes:
I went to the Marianne Williamson talk with a couple friends and I absolutely loved it. I loved her. I love kooky, goopy, spiritual old white women and I eat up what they say. I left the talk actually feeling charged and empowered, and one good speaker makes going to all the bad ones worth it. Here are some notes I took (obviously these are
notes I took for myself so obviously it’s unique to me, but make what you want of them xx):
● Positive denial is looking at something and saying “this will not stand.” That is not the same thing as delusion.
● Education should help you understand.
● Recognize who you are.
● These are the years of wonder— allow them to be.
● Don’t focus on utilitarianism or rush to join the proletariat.
● The small still voice within you is the one to listen to.
● Don’t mess with your mind.
● Pray in the morning, kickass in the afternoon. (She actually said this and we all cheered.)
● Become.
● Your world is the projection of your thoughts.
● Put an emphasis on the morning.
● Don’t let the bastards get you down. (More cheers.)
● Personhood.
● We are way too precious these days.
● Conviction from one’s own heart.
● Moses.
● “Love and all that emerges from love.”
● Inner life.
● We are more than flesh and blood; there is another category of existence. ● Primacy of the heart.
● The heart has its own intelligence.
● Have conviction in possibilities yet unseen.
● Faith is visionary.
● The plant is always leaning towards the sun.
● Honor where you are.
● Don’t be afraid of your potential.
● Every thought is a cause and every cause has an effect.
○ Law of cause and effect.
● Atone in your heart.
● Take a moment to consider.
✶✶✶
Some Summer Goals:
1. Restart my summer garden.
2. Go as long as I can not knowing the day of the week.
3. Read A Little Life by Hanya Yanagihara (I’m begging myself at this point).
4. Take note of how much I cry when reading A Little Life by Hanya Yanagihara.
5. Listen and review all of Nas’s discography.
6. Learn the art of curated Spotify playlists.
7. Buy the Stanley Cup that all the girl bosses are obsessed with. 8. Embrace my inner bitch like all the girl bosses.
9. Fully finish a guided journal.
10.Stick to my rituals and routines.
11. Take note of patterns and synchronicities.
12. Read (literally what I want to do the most.)
✶✶✶
Watch:
I was going through past columns to re-recommend what movies/shows/etc stand out, and to be honest, not many of them do! But here’s a round up of past recs I *particularly* think you should get to if you haven’t already (if I was forced to choose):
The Worst Person in the World dir. Joachim Trier (2021)
What I Said Then: I watched this movie last year when it was still being screened at theaters and again a couple days ago. When it came out, there were rave reviews about how relatable and real the main character, Julie’s, life is. She begins as a medical student, then drops out of med school to explore psychology, then abandons that for photography. She has a slew of romantic interests as well, first her psychology professor, then a graphic novelist, Askel, a man at least 10 years her senior, and Eivind, the man she cheats on Aksel with. I thought this movie was fine—I loved the shots of Norway, how surprisingly bookish it turned out to be, and the protagonist being a 30-year-old woman who hasn’t quite figured it out. It reminds me of Lily King’s Writers and Lovers, Sex and the City, or even Ottessa Moshfegh’s My Year of Rest and Relaxation, in how it illustrates that even “older women” experience bildungsroman and that it is okay to live life fully, even if you don’t have everything figured out.
Me Now: Ok this isn’t the greatest movie ever, but I think highly of it. Like I said, it’s a movie where the main character is young and trying to figure it out, which is always a charming thing to watch. It’s also Norwegian which lends itself to great scenery and slow living shots of life (very different from what is depicted in American films). I think that I watched this at the perfect time and it is a great movie to watch in college as well (we are officially in the latter half of college years, wow. time flies.)
Shiva Baby dir. Emma Seligman (2021)
What I said Then: I fucking loved this movie, and am so happy to have watched it (at the recommendations of my sister and friend Sofia (woah, first name drop in the column!)). I feel like trying to explain this movie, and the reasonings behind my enjoyment of it, are something that should be thoroughly explained rather than concisely. This column is already quite long though, so I will keep it short. I loved the score of the movie, the setting being used as a character itself, the relatability of the main character, the tension throughout, and the movie’s genre-bending, near-horror-like, nature. Like I said, none of that does the movie justice, you should watch for yourself. (I’ve seen it described as the Uncut Gems of hot girls, and I would second that description.)
Me Now: I stand by everything I said! This is a really great movie and now that I read my review I want to watch it again.
Disney and Pixar’s Soul dir. Pete Docter (2020)
What I Said Then: I’m by no means a Pixar connoisseur, but I fkn’ love this movie.
Me Now: Yes! I love this movie. Along with not being a Pixar connoisseur, I actually really dislike animated movies. But Soul is an exception. Though I will say, I’ve watched the movie twice and think that that might have been enough; I’d be okay never watching it again.
Party Girl dir. Daisy von Scherler Mayer (1995)
What I Said Then: I LOVED this movie. The movie stars 90s indie icon Parker Posey as Mary, a 20 something NYC party girl who, at the start of the movie, ends up in jail. Her austere godmother bails her out, but in exchange, Mary needs to pay off her debt working at the New York Public Library. Perhaps unsurprisingly, Mary’s IDGAF attitude, free spirit, and unfamiliarity with Dewey Decimal System makes it hard for her to prove herself to both her godmother and coworkers, but eventually, she finds her way. I love Parker Posey, party movies, movies that take place in NYC, and —perhaps most importantly — movies that take place in libraries. This one checked many boxes and was genuinely so fun to watch. Also this is the first movie I’ve seen with FERAL background characters. Instead of acting like usual quiet and docile NPCS, the people in this movie are completely unhinged (especially in the last party scene). They fight with each other and throw dirty looks at the main character, and never even stop dancing while doing it. All very funny to watch.
Me Now: Still fun to watch, only some will get it.
Girls created by Lena Dunham (2012-2017)
All Hail the Girlfailure — i-D Magazine
What I Said Then: Girls… What can be said about Girls? I decided to watch the notorious show by Lena Dunham after learning that it is in its resurgence. I loved it and it is definitely now one of my favorite shows which is surprising because I remember it, along with its creator, being heavily despised (every episode, literally every episode, especially towards the end, has at least five think pieces that go with it) . I think Girls suffered mostly because it was a show that people invested too heavily in, and therefore wanted it to fulfill everything they wanted it to be. It’s now seen as revoltingly millennial, but in reality Girls was revolutionary for its time. Dunham created the show as a rebuttal to Sex and the City, another favorite show of mine, where the women in the show are beautiful, accomplished, and at least semi put together. The characters in Girls are the antithesis of this. They start off bad and only get worse. They are selfish, ungrateful, unaware, and often disgusting. They don’t even really care about each other. But this endears me to them. There is much comfort to be had in the depiction of women as not put together. These are women who choose themselves first and foremost, women who try and fail, women that are still trying to figure it out. I think if Lena Dunham was more conventionally attractive and skinny, the reception of this show would be similar to that of Ottessa Moshfegh’s My Year of Rest and Relaxation, but
then again the show started in 2012, where “femcel-dom”, grotesque, and selfishness in women wasn’t a thing being considered. My only critique of the show (because I feel like I’ve been able to interpret every problem within the show) is that the lack of blackness, or any POC, really, is blatant. Dunham got a lot of rightful criticism for the dearth of color in the show and responded with this: “I wrote the first season primarily by myself, and I co-wrote a few episodes. But I am a half-Jew, half-WASP, and I wrote two Jews and two WASPs. Something I wanted to avoid was tokenism in casting. Not that the experience of an African-American girl and a white girl are drastically different, but there has to be specificity to that experience (that) I wasn’t able to speak to.” While this is one of the more reasonable responses I’ve read from controversies similar to this one, it is such an unfortunate thing that black people are forced to relate to whiteness in the media because there is an absence of the everyday black experience in television. It is clear that while black people have no choice but to see themselves in depiction of white people, white people cannot at all see themselves in black people. There’s much more to say, but for now, that’s all.
Me Now: To add onto my previous points, I think another reason why this show was so critiqued is because people related to it so much that they wanted it to be everything and mean everything. Nothing can withstand the projection of such weighty expectations, especially those highly personal to each viewer. I personally like to consume and find a way that media relates to me, rather than force media to pander to my tastes directly. Also, I appreciate work for what it is rather than what I think it should be. (And this point is not in response to the dearth of black people in the show because that critique definitely still stands, moreso in terms of plot decisions, character development, who gets with who, etc.) I also really love unlikeable characters so I didn’t have a major problem with that (although maybe this is me exposing myself as problematic, but I don’t see Hannah or any of the characters as that bad. Like I understand completely why they do what they do and don’t think any of them are unredeemable??? But again, that may just be me self-reporting.)
Things to Come (L’avenir) dir. Mia Hansen-Løve (2016)
What I Said: Would highly recommend this movie, not because it’s the pinnacle of cinema but because it is another scenic French film where nothing really happens! (Remember, in column four I said I was on the prowl for more “slice of life” films? This is for sure a good one.) The film stars Isabelle Huppert as Natalie Chazeaux, a philosophy professor (sexy) who adjusts to life after an unexpected divorce and other life dilemmas. This film is great because it is soft and quiet, driven by character instead of action, and you really feel like you’ve come to know and care about Natalie towards the end. It also has many shots of her French apartment, a summer vacation home, nature, books, coffee, simple but beautiful everyday life etc., so it’s good for visualizing if that’s what you want your life to look like as well.
Me Now: Still love it! Still scenic and perfect.
New Recs:
Grey Gardens dir. David Maysles, Albert Maysles, Muffie Meyer, Ellen Hovde (1975)
I don’t know if I’ve recommended this already but if not, here it is. This is one of the best documentaries ever in my opinion, and it also largely influenced what we think a documentary to be today. It follows Big Edie and Little Edie (Edith Ewing Bouvier Beale and Edith Bouvier Beale) through a couple of days in their hoarded mansion in the Hamptons. To me, it was much more interesting than that description, but it is truly a more character-based documentary, in terms of plot and/or action nothing happens. Also: recognize the middle names? The Edies are Jackie Kennedy’s family!
The Mummy dir. Stephen Sommers (1999)
I went to watch this for my egyptology class (and omg why was I the only person to show up along with my professor????) and WOW this movie is crazy af. The only thing I knew going in was that it is considered one of the last great adventure movies, a lot of people watched it as kids (although not really a children’s movie), and that people regard it very highly. I really don’t think there’s much worth saying besides the fact that I would recommend this movie to watch when you want something entertaining but don’t necessarily feel like watching something/nothing seems appealing (I know exactly what I mean when I say this but I’m not sure if it’s a universal feeling.) It’s surprisingly camp.
Dazed and Confused dir. Richard Linklater (1993)
Dazed and Confused: “It’s About the Vibe” | Current | The Criterion Collection I’ve been thinking about this movie a lot recently which means that I need to rewatch it. I could cry talking about this movie. It is literally one of the best movies ever and it holds such sentimental value. I went 3 weeks during quarantine where I watched this literally every day and I still am not sick of it. I plan on watching it again very soon. It takes place in the 70s and is about a group of high school students on the last day of school. It is so warm and cool and cozy. No friend groups exist in this movie either, which I feel is kind of rare for movies set in high school. The geeks hang out with the cool kids hang out with the art kids hang out with the stoners. I feel nostalgia when watching this for a time I’ve never experienced or known. It is also the movie that made me fall in love with Matthew McCoughnahey, and that counts for a lot.
Sunset Blvd dir. Billy Wilder (1950)
This movie is amazing. It tells the story of a fading Hollywood silent film star named Norma Desmond, who lives in a run-down mansion on Sunset Boulevard. A struggling screenwriter named Joe Gillis, in his escape from debt collectors, ends up in Norma’s driveway and, shortly after, her life. She hires him to help her write a screenplay that she believes will mark her triumphant return to the screen. Norma is grandiose, dramatic, and suffers from delusions (who doesn’t atp) which both fascinates and repulses Joe. He finds himself trapped in her world as they develop a toxic sugar mama, sugar baby dependent relationship. The film explores themes of delusion, obsession, and the corrupting nature of Hollywood, while also serving as a commentary on the industry’s treatment of aging actresses. Gloria Swanson, who plays Nora Desmond, was herself a faded actress when this movie premiered (as well as other older actors in the movie) which is a meta commentary of its own.
a non-exhaustive, rapidly growing list of what i want to watch or rewatch this summer: Tenet dir. Christopher Nolan (2020)
● People really like this movie! All I know is that it was a quarantine movie and that it stars Robeet Pattinson and John David Washington—that’s enough for me to watch it!
Parasite dir. Bong Joon-ho (2019)
● I actually need to rewatch this movie because I know there are important things I missed when I watched it the first time.
Barbie dir. Greta Gerwig (2023)
● Along with everyone else xx
Spring Breakers dir. Harmony Korine (2012)
● This is getting recognition now and I’ve never watched it so it’s time to do that now!
Beef (2023)
● Is this a movie or a show? idk anything about it except for the fact that my sister really wants me to watch it with her so I will.
American Psycho dir. Mary Harron (2000)
● Because of course!
Dallas Buyers Club dir. Jean-Marc Vallee (2013)
● Re: Matthew McCoughnahey and one of my fav movies ever. He looks so good in this.
Jackie Brown dir. Quentin Tarantino (1997)
● Pam Grier—of course.
Barry (2018-)
● Seriously, what is this show about??? All I know is that it’s in its last season so I’m going to check it out.
The Sopranos (1999-2007)
● I love mafia-core <3 Yes the f*ck I do. Also young Michael Imperioli? Chef’s kiss.
Shrinking (2023-)
● After Ted Lasso, this is the most raved about Apple TV show. Not the biggest fan of Jason Segel, because I can’t separate him from his role in that weird Muppet movie… But friend Kylie said it’s good.
Dream Lover dir. Nicholas Kazan (1993)
● Criterion Channel Synopsis: “What begins as a dream relationship gradually turns into a nightmare in this sultry psychological thrill ride. Successful architect Ray (James Spader) is reeling from a recent divorce when he meets the captivating Lena (TWIN PEAKS’ Mädchen Amick). She’s sexy, alluring, and more than a little mysterious—and it’s not long before the pair are married with children. But as the cracks in Lena’s too-good-to-be-true facade begin to show, Ray begins to wonder what dark secrets she’s hiding.”
Pillow Talk dir. Michael Gordon (1959)
● “The smash-hit sensation that made Doris Day and Rock Hudson one of he most beloved screen couples of their era, this irresistible romantic comedy set a new standard for late-1950s sexual sophistication and garnered five Oscar nominations (including a win for Best Screenplay). Playboy composer Brad Allen (Hudson) and interior decorator Jan Morrow (Day) are obliged to share a telephone line. Naturally, their calls overlap at the least opportune times, and just as naturally, this leads to them despising each other without ever having met in person. The resulting romantic high jinks enchanted contemporary audiences thanks to the risqué innuendo and breezy chemistry between Day and Hudson.”
What Happened Was… dir. Tom Noonan (1994)
● “A lost masterpiece of 1990s independent cinema reemerges in a new restoration. Winner of the Grand Jury Prize and the screenwriting award at the 1994 Sundance Film Festival, WHAT HAPPENED WAS . . . is Tom Noonan’s singular directorial debut: a darkly humorous take on dating dread that borders on the surreal. Featuring extraordinary performances by Noonan and Karen Sillas as two lonely hearts spending one claustrophobic Friday night together in an imposing apartment, this expressionistically rendered pas de deux—a noted favorite of Charlie Kaufman, who has called it ‘wildly heartbreaking and terribly funny’—exposes with startling clarity the myriad ways in which people struggle to connect.”
The Last Seduction dir. John Dahl (1994)
● “Linda Fiorentino is a diabolical delight as one of the most unrepentantly wicked femmes fatales of the neo noir boom in this deliciously entertaining thriller. After roping her doctor husband (Bill Pullman) into a deal to sell medicinal cocaine, beautiful but ruthless Bridget Gregory (Fiorentino) steals the profits and runs out
on him. Soon enough, Bridget has another unsuspecting man (Peter Berg) in her grasp—and a devilish new scheme cooked up for him.”
The House Bunny dir. Fred Wolf (2008)
● IMDb Synopsis: “After Playboy bunny Shelley is kicked out of the Playboy Mansion, she finds a job as the house mother for a sorority full of socially awkward girls.”
● This looks SO camp.
Gossip Girl (2007-2012)
● I’m very very afraid that the ship has sailed for my liking this show. Don’t get me wrong, I 100% appreciate it for the groundbreaking work that it is but, I just wish I got to it when I was younger. I was talking to a friend about this and she agreed. Still, I’m going to try to watch it—again, and hopefully it will be enjoyable even if it becomes a hate watch???
Severance (2022-)
The Piano Teacher dir. Michael Haneke (2002)
● Isabelle Huppert from Things to Come is in this so I want to get to it!
La Notte dir. Michelangelo Antonioni (1961)
● Criterion Channel Synopsis: “This psychologically acute, visually striking modernist work was director Michelangelo Antonioni’s follow-up to the epochal L’avventura. Marcello Mastroianni and Jeanne Moreau star as a novelist and his frustrated wife, who, over the course of one night, confront their alienation from each other and the achingly empty bourgeois Milan circles in which they travel. Antonioni’s muse Monica Vitti smolders as an industrialist’s tempting daughter. Moodily sensual cinematography and subtly expressive performances make La notte an indelible illustration of romantic and social deterioration.”
Dune dir. Denis Villeneuve (2021)
● I don’t know why I’ve been wanting to watch this recently, but I definitely do.
Jules and Jim dir. Francois Truffaut (1962)
● Have wanted to watch this since my friend Natasha recommended it to me literally months ago at this point. Apparently much chaos ensues, and that’s really all I need to know to be compelled.
The Bitter Tears of Petra von Kant dir. Rainer Werner Fassbinder (1972) Frida dir. Julie Taymor (2002)
Cleo from 5 to 7 dir. Agnes Varda (1961)
● “Agnès Varda eloquently captures Paris in the sixties with this real-time portrait of a singer (Corinne Marchand) set adrift in the city as she awaits test results of a biopsy. A chronicle of the minutes of one woman’s life, Cléo from 5 to 7 is a spirited mix of vivid vérité and melodrama, featuring a score by Michel Legrand (The Umbrellas of Cherbourg) and cameos by Jean-Luc Godard and Anna Karina.”
I read that YDN WKND piece by Hannah Kurczeski, and you know what? Her rankings are (almost) completely right. And she’s inspired me to re-watch some Disney Channel Original Movies I remember enjoying:
1. How To Build A Better Boy
2. The Cheetah Girls
3. Let It Shine
4. 16 Wishes
5. Radio Rebel
6. High School Musical 3: Senior Year
7. Starstruck
8. Princess Protection Program
9. Lemonade Mouth
10. Frenemies
11.Read It and Weep
12.Smart House
13. Cloud Nine (apres ski chic amirite?)
14.Minutemen
15.Get a Clue
16.Cow Belles
17.Wendy Wu: Homecoming Warrior
18.Freaky Friday
19.Another Cinderella Movie (don’t know if this is a disney original movie but deserves to be on this list)
Read:
Remember how in column five I was talking about the humongous books I wanted to read this year? Well it’s almost summer, and that is the time to do it.
These were the books on my list:
The Goldfinch by Donna Tartt
The Warmth of Other Suns by Isabel Wilkerson
The Second Sex by Simone de Beauvoir
A Promised Land by Barack Obama
Red Comet by Heather Clark
Ruth Bader Ginsburg: A Life by Jane Sherron De Hart
Why This World by Benjamin Moser
Sontag: Her Life and Work by Benjamin Moser
America’s Queen by Sarah Bradford
A Little Life by Hanya Yanagihara
11/22/63 by Stephen King
I think I could do it.
Curated reading list:
I’ve found that the people who hate self-help books the most are the ones who need help the most. This year I got really into reading them and it is now one of my favorite genres, that says a lot. These are the ones I’ve heard great things about that I want to
read over the summer! (I’m gatekeeping the ones I’ve already read and really like, I’ll admit, but I will report back on these ones. Just ask me about all the recs I’m gatekeeping in person atp.)
Ego Is the Enemy by Ryan Holiday
Quiet by Susan Cain
Make Your Bed by William H. McRaven
Atomic Habits by James Clear
Don’t Sweat the Small Stuff by Richard Carlson
Untethered Soul by Michael A. Singer
The Four Agreements by Don Miguel Ruiz
Random books I want to get to over the summer:
The Monstrous-Feminine: Film, Feminism, Psychoanalysis by Barbara Creed How Should a Person Be? by Sheila Heti
The Complete Poems of Frank O’Hara
Childhood, Boyhood, Youth by Leo Tolstoy
On Freedom by Maggie Nelson
The Good Thief by Marie Howe
The Kingdom of Ordinary Time by Marie Howe
Illuminata by Marianne Williamson
The Unbearable Lightness of Being by Milan Kundera
The Secret Life of Groceries by Benjamin Lorr
The Way We Never We by Stephanie Cootz
Disorientation by Elaine Hsieh Chou
The Secret History of Home Economics by Danielle Dreilinger
Just Us by Claudia Rankine
Pachinko by Min Jin Lee
Read this week:
(as usual, the more interesting articles are bolded)
Raven Leilani Needs To Know How Her Characters Pay Rent – Lux Magazine (ok so obviously it’s not a good thing and is something better romanticized, but there is something so charming about the gig economy, hustle culture, and trying to make it in nyc when you’re in your early twenties. i’ve always liked books and movies with that plot—a young person hustling (working side jobs and such) with the dreams of making it big, or just making it at all.)
What Was the Hipster? — New York Magazine – Nymag
I Really Didn’t Want to Go, by Lauren Oyler (rec’d by friend maia) (oyler strikes again)
Shipping Out, by David Foster Wallace
The Agoraphobic Fantasy of Tradlife – Dissent Magazine
The Great Deflation – by Jessica DeFino – The Unpublishable (amazing substack that every girl seriously needs to read)
The Body of Horror of ‘Aesthetica’ – by Jessica DeFino
“Succubus Chic” And The Problem Of Glamorizing Illness
How The ‘5-Minute Face’ Became The $5,000 Face
It’s Hot To Look Ill – by Jessica DeFino
Fish Rot | Issue 17 | n+1 (also rec’d by maia)
“I Speak Only for Myself”: Anahid Nersessian on Keats, Feminism, and Poetry – Public Books
Ogden & Hardwick’s Everyday Enigmas – Public Books
Like Woman Herself — Parapraxis
What Can Men Want? — Parapraxis
How Harmony Korine’s Spring Breakers launched A24 aesthetic movies (spring breakers has been getting a lot of attention recently, so now is the time to watch it! i never have, but i remember really wanting to when it came out but knowing i was too young for my parents to let me.)
The era of the tween icon is over as we know it (this was so sad to read because it’s actually true??? there are no tween icons anymore. gone are the olsen twins, the hilary duffs, the lindsay lohans that we all idolized in our youth because they felt so close to reach. now, young girls aspire/look up to actual adults (adult models no less) rather than girls who were older, but still close in age???)
Life or Debt – Lux Magazine
Annie Ernaux Is No Traitor – Lux Magazine
Work Sucks. Does the Work Novel Have To? – Lux Magazine
Raven Leilani’s Début Novel Deconstructs Domesticity | The New Yorker Legendary Female Artists on the Younger Women Who Inspire Them – The New York Times (read this only for lana)
Catherine Nicholson · Batter My Heart: Who was John Donne? · LRB 19 January 2023 (i’m enrolled in the donne class for next semester! it’s time for me to figure out who tf he is.)
Anne Enright · Eyes that Bite · LRB 5 January 2023
Anthony Grafton · A Degenerate Assemblage: Bibliomania · LRB 13 April 2023 Alcohology · LRB
The Age of Rudeness – The New York Times
cassidy grady – hi i’m holly – Forever Magazine
Morgan Maher’s intimate portraits of Girls in Bed — i-D Magazine It’s Sex O’Clock – Issue 10 – The Happy Reader
Happy Readings #25: In Youth is Pleasure
The New, Weirdly Racist Guide to Writing Fiction – Tablet Magazine (every. point. was. made.)
For Love or Money | Haley Mlotek
Is Therapy-Speak Making Us Selfish? (rec’d by friend audrey)
Iphigenia in Forest Hills | The New Yorker
Ten Days In The Life Of A Tampon (a classic)
A silent unheard voice in the Old Testament: The Cushite woman whom Moses married in Numbers 12:1-10 (black people were in the bible, wow! an article that also is vaguely relevant to my summer research)
You Call This ‘Flexible Work’? – The New York Times
Listen:
to this year’s column playlists!
(i looked back at the previous columns and all the playlist links are broken!!1!1!! turns out it is a good thing that i have been typing out all the songs as well…)
music:
column one (genesis)
column two (prelude)
column three (seduction)
column four (twelve pts)
column five (oro nocte (the lost column))
real column five (spirals)
column six (alchemy)
column seven (ALL THINGS MUST GO)
column eight (iron pillar)
I Want You To Love Me by Fiona Apple
4:00A.M. by Taeko Onuki
Mother Beautiful by Sly & The Family Stone
Big Dreams by Bakar
Wave by Joao Gilberto
Margaret (feat. Bleachers) by Lana Del Rey, Bleachers
The Grants by Lana Del Rey
I Deserve A Little Bit More by The Grooms
BELEZA PULA by Masayoshi Takanaka
La Bella Addormentata Stefano Torossi
Hey, Who Really Cares by Linda Perhacs
Acontece by Cartola
I Can’t by Foxy Brown, Total
Slow Like Honey by Fiona Apple
You’re Not The Only One I Know by The Sundays
Call It Fate, Call It Karma by The Strokes
Icarus by Fana Hues
Sweet Dreams by Beyonce
The Spins by Mac Miller
Always by Daniel Caesar
Get Free by Lana Del Rey
Toronto 2014 (with Mustafa) by Daniel Caesar
I’ll Be Your Mirror by The Velvet Underground, Nico
Dedicated To The One I Love by The Mamas & Papas
Try Me by Jorja Smith
Jorja Interlude by Drake
Did you know that there’s a tunnel under Ocean Blvd
I CHANGED MY MIND ABOUT THIS ALBUM, LANA. IT IS GOOD AND AMAZING.
podcasts:
The Ezra Klein Show
(Never in my life listened to this podcast before this week, but these ones resonated) The Quiet Catastrophe Brewing In Our Social Lives
The Art of Noticing – and Appreciating – Our Dizzying World
Sabbath and the Art of Rest
Star Girl
(This show selects controversial/polarizing female celebrities and explores the reason behind the love/hate relationship people have towards them. The show is also way better than this explanation.)
Episode 18: Lana Del Rey with Nisa Nesa (SUPER good episode)
Episode 13: Azealia Banks
Episode 10: Julia Fox
Episode 04: Jia Tolentino
CAN’T TAKE ME ANYWHERE
(Don’t really know how to explain this but very grime and sleaze in the best way) I LIKE HIGH STAKES with Michael Imperoli **TEASER** (Michael Imperioli!) SOLO EPISODE: MAIN CHARACTER ENERGY **full episode**
GIRL BOSS HIGH with Liv Reinerston **confessionals on PATREON**
Red Wine Talks by Damon Dominique
(I love watching Damon on YouTube! I would definitely recommend checking those videos out. It’s a shame, though, that his podcast is basically discontinued) Free-spirited *and* financially literate, Paris on the birth certificate, & lucid dreaming “Big city” FOMO, philosophy degrees, influencing past memories, and psychedelics
You Must Remember This
(All about Old Hollywood. Longworth is definitely a fan of doing series, so it’s hard to just jump into an episode without starting at the very beginning.)
Gossip Girls: Louella Parsons and Hedda Hopper (Small Town Girl, Episode 1)
endnote: nothing to say besides me being
sooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo ooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo happy for this school year to be over! bye!
xo,
Michelle unauthorized syllabi is a bi-weekly column. beyond that, i’m not sure what it is. last cycle, i wrote something about something….
