Sunday, February 26, 2012

Ty's Corner

Looking back on seven years, here's a few things I've learned.

ty


Most recently, I ended an e-mail with "Piss off, Ty." It's rare that a Orionjej@aol.com type can piss me off, but they still can. We started this website how many years ago? Seven. Wow. And, yes, some idiots who e-mail can really piss me off.

Like that piece of work who wanted to whine about 'poor Judy Collins' and tell me about how offended she was by "Trapped in an AA meeting with Judy Collins (Ava and C.I.)" Let me start by telling all the whiners who e-mail to gripe that it's your responsibility to know what you're writing about. Not mine.

The aol dummy will get it right away. But moving on to the idiot's criticism, "hot little number" is calling Judy Collins a whore.

No, it's noting that in that book (which I have read), Judy's forever attesting to how great she thinks she is or was. It's as thoguh she recorded (and repeated) every compliment she'd ever received on her looks in her long, long life.

The writer wanted me to know that she was just like Judy and now she wasn't a hot number either and that was from stress that society put on you and it must be real sad to be so all alone and blah blah and blah and whine and blah and bitch and moan and whine. And for some reason, the idiot wanted to bring sexual assault into it and apparently insist that Judy Collins was sexually assaulted by a family member when she was a child. (Ava and C.I. say not only has Judy never written of that, she's never claimed it in conversations either.)

Apparently?

The e-mail was fragments of rants that were never fully developed as a thought or a sentence. Leading me to believe the writer was 'feeling no pain' when she wrote.

Judy Collins wrote a book. Ava and C.I. critiqued it. I've read the book, I've read some of the reviews. It's amazing but I believe the only ones to offer a serious critique of the book were Ava and C.I. The New York Times offered two supposed reviews. Those weren't reviews.

So AOL trash, I'm sorry that like America's educational system, your mind is in decay.

However, Ava and C.I. wrote a critique. You don't have to agree with it, you don't even have to read it. But don't pretend that they weren't describing what was in the book. They quote from the book, they often provide page numbers, they compare and contrast the book with earlier efforts of Judy Collins telling her own story in book form.

That's probably the strongest book review of that book and, I'd argue, it's probably the strongest book review I've read in years. It's also been read 187,651 times -- specifically read. That doesn't count the Sunday we published it and people read it just by scrolling through the edition. That only counts people specifically clicking on it.

This site turned seven-years-old last month. And, for the most part, e-mails like that roll off my back. But sometimes they still really get to me. Probably because they are so rare today. We've established a following online and I read the bulk of the e-mails to this site (thirdestatesundayreview@yahoo.com) and maybe I'm just not used to the negative attacks the way I once was?

What else has changed in the seven years?

I've laughed as other sites have briefly attempted to do what Ava and C.I. do. That's been fun to see. Since I'm reflecting, let me share the story longterm readers already know. It's the first writing edition. C.I. was speaking at our school. Jim dragged her back to meet us and told her that we had wanted to start a website (we were all Common Ills readers). So she comes back and meets us (she and Ava will later discover that she already knows Ava's aunt and mother). And Jim's like, help us out. So C.I. agrees to help with the first writing edition. Not realizing (no one did) that it would be an all nighter. And we're going over what needs to be covered and what doesn't -- we is Jim, Dona, Jess, Ava, C.I. and me -- and Jim is very adament that this weekly website, this online magazine, has to cover TV. Jim points out that most college students watch TV (and this started as a publication for college students). Ava and C.I. are the ones objecting. They don't want to take part.

And they'd never seen the show. (Joey.) But when the final draft wasn't working, C.I. came up with a recurring phrase for the piece that managed to hook the elements together. Ava rewrote the ending. She and C.I. had been suggesting things throughout. And it was their input that people quoted back in e-mails and in phone calls. And that was true of the second piece. And on the third, they really just take over. I don't mean that in a mean way. I mean we all want to write about Will & Grace but they're writing so fast and we're basically shut out. (That was the first piece they worked on about a show they actually watched.) They were creating dialogue for scenes that show should have. And getting it correct. And that review really turned the tide. We probably -- Dona, Jess, Jim and me -- contributed what amounted to a paragraph to that piece. And this was the most popular TV piece up to that point. And though they never read the e-mails nor their own writing, they were so jazzed on TV that they said, "We should cover Medium next week." "We" meaning all of us. So when the next Sunday rolled around and we'd read the 'reviews' (e-mails), we were all decided that Ava and C.I. were going to handle TV on their own. And their piece on Medium kicks that off. (Dona, Jess, Jim and my sole contribution is three sentences on the polling we did during the week.)

And it's Ava and C.I.'s writing that made us.

And they make it look so simple. They make it seem so easy. Which is why various outlets (including print magazines) think, "Oh, I can do that!" And then they try. For a month or two or an issue or two. And then they go back to their campaign coverage that they try to pass off as political coverage (yes, I agreed with Ava and C.I.'s point a few weeks back on that). Because it's not easy at all. It's really tough to write like they do.

Right now, they haven't started their latest piece. Right now, they have no idea which show they're going to cover even. They, like everyone else working on this edition, are in a mad rush to try to haul together new content and complete the edition.

In seven years, I've learned that the best writing often isn't planned at all. Often, it consists of nothing more than Jim saying, "We need a piece on ___. Go write it."

I've learned that accidents are often miracles if you take a minute to breathe.

I've learned not to panic when I'm trying to open the last Lays Stax cannister and the plastic covering comes off all around the rim leaving nothing else to pull it off with. As I was in a panic one weekend, Dona grabbed an ink pen, slammed it down on the plastic covering and then pulled it up. When you've been up for over 24 hours and are trying to write, you can get punch drunk and miss the obvious.

I've learned that trusting your own instincts matter. It was Jess (though Jim will disagree) who first suggest our now popular feature "From TESR Test Kitchen." Jess suggested it because he was already surprised to discover there is an entry on "TESR" that comes back to us online. Ava and C.I. use that phrase in their CSI pieces (for the main show, the Miami show and the NYC show). Ava and C.I. came up with the phrase just for the CSI pieces. We tend to shorthand the site as "Third" here and that comes from Betty who has a relative who is a III and is called "Third" by his friends and family. So Jess had been on us to think of some way to use TESR since a web entry existed that explained TESR was us, The Third Estate Sunday Review. And Trina had sent something back with Ava and C.I. for us to eat and Jess just seized on "From the TESR Test Kitchen!" Jim then asked what it would be about and Jess said "this" referring to the conversation Jim and Dona had been having for at least 15 minutes about some candy (I think it was Junior Mints) and whether they tasted the same as they always did (Dona) or were actually sweeter a few years back (Jim). It had nothing to do with anything related to writing but it was consuming a large amount of time. Jess had a point. And he repeatedly brought it up until we finally made it a regular feature. Once it was a success Jim started with: "Well whoever created it . . ." But it was Jess. And it's been a huge success.

I've learned that when you're tired of something, stop doing it.

During the time Bully Boy Bush occupied the White House, one of our regular features, at least once a month, sometimes more, was a collage. We'd do a comedic piece with one paragraph to describe the visual we'd come up with. And it was political and it was funny and Kat does collages and that's where we got the idea. But it was too popular and too much pressure and when Barack got into the White House I believe we tried it initially and then just stopped. How it originally worked was we would have a ton of newspapers and magazines ready to go through and we'd offer different ideas for features for this week -- it was our bull session. Ava and C.I. would take notes and the rest of us would go through and clip and clip and clip. And soon we even had files of clipped photos we wanted to work in at later dates. But around the time that the Bush folder was two inches thick, we were bored to death.

We could have kept on until the readers were bored to death. Fortunately, the feature was still popular when we discontinued it.

And that really underscores that one day we're going to shut this site down. We do want to go out when we've still got an audience. And we're lucky that, thus far, it just keeps growing.

But when we started, there really was a community type feeling about the online world. And people e-mailed you and stuff. (I'm talking about other websites and about bloggers.) And a lot of those people were run off by the Cult of St. Barack. A lot of really great writers are no more because of that Cult. That's especially true of women writers online. The sexism and the violence ran off a number of political women. I know because I've heard from them. Usually e-mails that say, "I just couldn't take it anymore." And I do understand that.

Equally true the Cult includes a large number of 'professionals' -- they're the ones who started the purging of blogrolls. The online community was a community in 2005. In 2012, it's really not. You've got a group of professionals who write ad copy for the Democratic Party and try to pretend they're a community or about reporting or some other b.s. But they're nothing but ad men (and I use "men" intentionally) eager to turn readers into suckers so that they can fatten their wallets.

I keep waiting for a remergence, a rebirth of the internet. I don't think that's possible while Barack's in office. He instills group think and kills individuality.

I like Joe Biden. But last week, he made a fool of himself. And I bring that up because that's how a number of websites lose credit with me. Wally and Cedric called Biden on it in "THIS JUST IN! FINGER POINTING JOE!" and "Joe's the last one to talk." Joe decided that the easiest way to kill off his critics was to paint them as racists. In 2007, Joe was painted as a racist for the way he complimented Barack. By the same token, after Barack entered the White House, I lost a lot of respect for a number of websites (The Confluence, for example) that felt the need to insist others were racists. They seemed to think they'd ride that back into the Boyz Club. I found it hilarious. There are few sites that even have a right to talk about racism in others as far as I'm concerned. The Confluence? Did they even have one Black voice? Here at Third, you've got me and countless others. And we have serious conversations about race. We don't just bring it up when we want to attack someone. As I write this, I've got an ear on the piece Jess is doing, he's doing a discussion with C.I. and Elaine and they're bringing up racism, a pattern of racism. That's what we do here. We don't just cry, "Racist!" and move on. And yet a lot of people seem to do that online. Some to shut down discussions, some to try to tar and feather others to make themselves look better.

Want to prove you're not racist? Create a community that empowers all. All the websites in this community followed The Common Ills. That's the community C.I. created and she did it by being smart and being aware. We've got Betty with a site, Cedric with a site, Marcia with a site, Stan with a site and Ann with a site. That's five African-American sites that sprang up because of this community.

But what I've learned in seven years is that people don't want to help out Black bloggers, they don't want to assist them. They just don't want to be called a racist. That's why so much of the web communities remain segregated today.

Stop the destruction of the postal service (Workers World)

Repost from Workers World:


Stop the destruction of the postal service

Published Feb 24, 2012 9:07 PM

Community Labor United to Save Postal Jobs & Services issued the following media release on Feb. 18 after newspaper, TV and radio media barraged the public that same day with reports that the postal service is broke. The group is organizing a rally on March 17 to protest attempts to lay off postal workers and close post offices.


“The spin is in full swing,” said Johnnie Stevens, coordinator of Community Labor United to Save Postal Jobs & Services, “to spread lies that the [U.S. Postal Service] is broke in order to justify layoffs, post office closings and union busting when the current moratorium expires May 15.”

“Any reporter spending two minutes to research the claim that USPS is broke should honestly report this is a lie,” said Anne Pruden, retired Service Employees 1199 member and coalition organizer. “Instead, they are parroting USPS lies. Raising stamps to 50 cents is meant to falsely convey that USPS has no money. Meanwhile, they are not raising the very low corporate [postal] rates.”

In a Feb. 6 letter to Rep. Bernie Sanders, USPS Postal Inspector David C. Williams wrote that the USPS “has built a war chest of more than $326 billion to address future liabilities.” He states that no other private or public entity has been required to pre-fund their retiree and health funds, as Congress has demanded of USPS. Williams says there are billions of dollars in overfunding that could be returned to the USPS now, without requiring future payments to these funds for 21 years.

“This is really about taking the people’s postal service and turning over its technology and business to private communications companies that wine and dine Congress,” explained Charlie Twist, a letter carrier whose union is backing a March 17 protest. “We have already lost more than 100,000 jobs. We are going to fight layoffs of 200,000 more. We know that their real intention is to destroy the entire postal service, bust our unions and deprive communities of critical service.”

President Barack Obama’s “compromise” to end Saturday delivery is unnecessary. Along with all the other proposals, it is calculated to make the postal service inoperable, and then claim private companies are needed.

“Privatization of the postal service will increase customer costs, lower wages, and deprive seniors, communities of color and rural communities of services and jobs,” says community activist Rosa Maria del Torres. “In New York City and around the country we will fight this all the way.”


Highlights

This piece is written by Rebecca of Sex and Politics and Screeds and Attitude, Cedric of Cedric's Big Mix, Kat of Kat's Korner, Betty of Thomas Friedman is a Great Man, Mike of Mikey Likes It!, Elaine of Like Maria Said Paz, Ruth of Ruth's Report, Marcia of SICKOFITRADLZ, Stan of Oh Boy It Never Ends, Ann of Ann's Mega Dub, Isaiah of The World Today Just Nuts and Wally of The Daily Jot. Unless otherwise noted, we picked all highlights.

"At least 62 dead, hundreds injured" and "Chasing 'al Qaeda'" -- C.I.'s two al Qaeda pieces from last week were the most requested highlights by readers of this site according to Ty.


Isaiah's The World Today Just Nuts "Scaling Back The Years" -- Isaiah's latest comic presents Barack's campaign problems.

"Kat's Korner: Absorb the Graffiti" -- Kat reviews the new album by Graffiti6.




"Whitney," "Whitney,""revenge," "Cougar Town,""Whitney," "Is Peter home on Fringe?," "Nikita," "Unforgettable," "Body of Proof," "Desperate Housewives," "Unforgettable," "The Good Wife," "Smash" and "Fringe, Isaiah, Third" -- TV coverage from Betty, Ann, Rebecca, Ruth, Marcia, Mike, Stan and Elaine.


"The little punk from the playground" and "THIS JUST IN! PLAYGROUND POUTER!" -- Cedric and Wally on the dish-it-out-but-not-take-it cry baby.



"The Airhead Speaks" -- Ann on a 'writer' who shouldn't be a speaker either.


"Ben Smith is a damn liar" -- Ruth calls out Ben Smith.


"Booze" -- Kat on a topic we can all relate to.




"The Softer Side of Narcissicm" -- Isaiah digs into the archives for this one.


"The little punk from the playground"
"THIS JUST IN! PLAYGROUND POUTER!"

"Unemployment at 9%" -- Trina on the real unemployment number.

"drones" -- Rebecca covers drones.


"THIS JUST IN! CARNEY BREAKS IT DOWN!" & "Half an excuse? Try full on offensive!" and "In Black History Month?" -- Wally, Cedric and Ann on offensive Barack.


"The economy" -- Trina zooms in.

"Roemer who?" -- Kat offering a basic tip to POLITICO.

"Phyllis Scherrer" -- Elaine on public education.





Sunday, February 19, 2012

Truest statement of the week

Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch are swigging the ale with their fellow buccaneers. These “human rights” warriors, headquartered in the bellies of empires past and present, their chests shiny with medals of propagandistic service to superpower aggression in Libya, contribute “left” legitimacy to the imperial project. London-based Amnesty International held a global “day of action” to rail against Syria for “crimes against humanity” and to accuse Russia and China of using their Security Council vetoes to “betray” the Syrian people – echoing the war hysteria out of Washington, Paris, London and the royal pigsties of Riyadh and Doha. New York-based Human Rights Watch denounced Moscow and Beijing’s actions as “incendiary” – as if it were not the empire and its allies who were setting the Middle East and Africa on fire, arming and financing jihadis – including hundreds of veteran
Libyan Salafists now operating in Syria. Under Obama’s “intelligent” (as opposed to “dumb”) imperial tutelage, colonial like France now propose creation of “humanitarian corridors” inside Syria “to allow NGOs to reach the zones where there are scandalous massacres.” NATO flatly rejected such a corridor in Libya when sub-Saharan Africans and black Libyans were being massacred by militias armed and financed by the same “Friends” that now besiege Syria.


-- Glen Ford, "'Human Rights' Warriors for Empire" (Black Agenda Report).

Truest statement of the week II

So the problem here is that we are not working with a friendly government. Maliki is not our friend. He's a puppet of the Iranians. And he's a big problem for us.

-- Howard Dean, speaking to Ellen Ratner on Talk Radio News Service Friday.

A note to our readers

Hey --
Another Sunday.

First up, we thank all who participated this edition which includes Dallas and the following:

The Third Estate Sunday Review's Jim, Dona, Ty, Jess and Ava,
Rebecca of Sex and Politics and Screeds and Attitude,
Betty of Thomas Friedman Is a Great Man,
C.I. of The Common Ills and The Third Estate Sunday Review,
Kat of Kat's Korner (of The Common Ills),
Mike of Mikey Likes It!,
Elaine of Like Maria Said Paz),
Cedric of Cedric's Big Mix,
Ruth of Ruth's Report,
Wally of The Daily Jot,
Trina of Trina's Kitchen,
Marcia of SICKOFITRDLZ,
Stan of Oh Boy It Never Ends,
Isaiah of The World Today Just Nuts,
and Ann of Ann's Mega Dub.


What did we come up with?

Glen Ford. No, we didn't mean for words to be underlined. The whole thing messed up. If links don't work, use the link to Ford's article at BAR (which you should anyway to read the article in full).
Howard Dean on Nouri al-Maliki.


Technical issues and other things ended up putting us behind. We had already agreed that we'd use this piece C.I. wrote somewhere. Dona's the one who decided to make it an editorial.

Ava and C.I. praise Revenge again and take on the Water Cooler Set.

When so much was falling apart this edition, I (Jim) mentioned how much I enjoyed the third season of The Bionic Woman on DVD which led to us b.s.-ing about our favorite super hero TV shows which eventually led to this article.

We sample two kinds of snacks.

This may be it for Diane Rehm. Ann is sick of the show (we don't blame her). So she joins Ava and C.I. for a 10 month look.

A UN diplomat is supposed to conduct themselves in a diplomatic manner.

Press release from Senator Patty Murray's office.

Repost from Workers World.

Press release from Senator Patty Murray's office.

Mike and the gang wrote this and we thank them for it.





That's it for this week.


Peace.

-- Jim, Dona, Ty, Jess, Ava and C.I.

Editorial: Tareq al-Hashemi was right

IRAQI VICE PRESIDENT PROVEN CORRECT

After many claims that he could not receive a fair trial, Tareq al-Hashemi's
assertions were backed up today by the Iraqi judiciary.

1 tareq al-hashemi

BAGHDAD -- Today a nine-member Iraqi judiciary panel released results of an investigation they conducted which found the Sunni Vice President of Iraq was guilty of terrorism. Monday, December 19th, Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki swore out an arrest warrant for Vice President Tareq al-Hashemi (above) who had arrived in the KRG the previous day. Mr. al-Hashemi refused to return to Baghdad insisting he would not receive a fair trial. Instead, he was the guest of Iraqi President Jalal Talabani and KRG President Massoud Barzani.

During the weeks since the arrest warrant was issued, Mr. al-Hashemi has repeatedly attempted to get the trial moved to another venue stating that Prime Minister al-Maliki controlled the Baghdad judiciary. Mr. al-Maliki insisted that the vice president return and that he would get a fair trial.

Today's events demonstrate that Mr. al-Hashemi was correct and there is no chance of a fair trial in Baghdad. This was made clear by the judiciary's announcement today.

A judiciary hears charges in a trial and determines guilt; however, what the Baghdad judiciary did today was to declare Tareq al-Hashemi guilt of the charges and to do so before a trial was held.

Not only do the events offer a frightening glimpse at the realities of the Iraqi legal system, they also back up the claims Mr. al-Hashemi has long made.




---------------

C.I. wrote the above in Thursday's snapshot to illustrate how the press should have reported on the news. We agree it's how it should have been reported and we're making it our editorial.

TV: Bypassing the Boiz Club

Amanda hopped in a car with Satoshi Takeda after Jack insisted she run when he discovered her on the beach over a dead body. Jack was attempting to drag the body off but had to run for cover when his brother Declan and Charlotte came running down the beach to go skinny dipping. Victoria would lead the engagement party in running down the beach to the corpse, she'd cry out for her son Daniel only to discover the corpse was Tyler. And Tyler would emerge from the dunes, covered in blood and start to speak only to have Victoria caution him not to say anything. And that was just 15 minutes of ABC's best hour long drama Revenge.


111


If you've never heard of Revenge, you most likely listen to Fresh Air. That's where TV 'critic' David Bianculli is forever humping the leg of some man. He's the primary TV critic for Terry Gross' bad show. He's been doing TV criticism since 1975 so his sexism is already well and widely known. In reviewing 2011, he had to attack Snooki, a personality on the 'reality' TV show Jersey Shore.

Snooki?

That's the worst thing about television?

Or did David forget to zip up and did his sexism get exposed yet again. Snooki didn't create Jersey Shore. If you loathe the show that much, one would assume you'd feel that the creators or the network (MTV) were the worst things about TV in 2011. So when you instead attack Snooki, you're really just exposing your own sexism.

And sexism isn't considered a bad thing on NPR or Fresh Air. In 2010, women made up only 18.546% of the guests on Fresh Air. One of NBC's hit sitcoms from the fall is Up All Night. It stars Christina Applegate, Will Arnett and Maya Rudolph. This is Christina's third successful sitcom and Maya's first. It's Will's attempt to recover from the disaster that was Running Wilde. So two women and one man in the cast, who did Terry interview from the show?

If you were stumped, you are obviously very smart and demonstrate this by refusing to listen to Fresh Air. Will Arnett. Of course it was Will Arnett. He's a man.

Which isn't to say that that Terry and David can't mention women at all. Come on like a stereotypical lesbian in a fifties women prison drama but do it in a minor role on a TV show -- giving the exact same performance you gave in that bit part you had in Practical Magic -- and Terry wants to interview you! And David wants to rave over you! But the honest truth is, you give the same non-performance in every role you play -- bit part or supporting -- and it was the writing that put the character over the top, not your 'minimalist' acting.

Time and again, the interviewed and the raved are men. And that's not just an issue for Fresh Air. Morning Edition, for example, manages to reach new levels of sexism every time their (male) TV critic feels the need to try to 'understand' women. (Which usually requires -- as with his review of Oprah's network -- his spending some air time vouching for his own manliness.) Men and masculinist women made up the '00s Water Cooler. And that's why women were reduced to nothing on the small screen over and over until a number of women and men began fighting back. The Water Cooler Set can't deliver ratings, never has been able to pick out a hit. They like wordy. Overly wordy. And male casts with few or no women.

And so time and again, shows that actually are quality shows and/or enjoyable ones are left without champions while the Water Cooler Set works overtime to explain to you why Mad Men really isn't sexist and why Louis CK really isn't a homophobe. Sometimes, as Terry did, they'll 'prove' Louis is not a homophobe by playing a clip of his show where a gay man is at a poker game . . . and called the f-word . . . repeatedly by Louis and friends. And they'll laugh at the clip, Louis and Terry.

And no one's ever supposed to object or call it out.

Just like you're supposed to nod along and pretend it's normal for David to pick The Colbert Report and The Daily Show with Jon Stewart for his "Top 10" news programs of 2011. No, that's not acceptable. The shows may be entertaining and may even provide commentary that reaches levels of satire, but the news reports. Ideally, that includes investigative reporting. News is supposed to be things that matter and effect our lives. Though those Comedy Central programs may make you chuckle, if you mistake them for news, you are a Fan Boi, but you're not a TV critic.

A TV critic would be all over Revenge. "But it's like a soap opera!" Do you not pay attention to the Water Cooler Set? The Water Cooler Set is all about the soap opera -- as long as the show's cast is mainly men. It's as though HBO's Oz birthed this crowd back in 1997.

Emily VanCamp plays Emily Thorne who's really Amanda Clarke. When she was a little girl, she saw her single father David carrying on with Victoria Grayson (Madeleine Stowe) and then saw Victoria turn on David. Though she'd promised David he would be free, Victoria stood with her husband Conrad Grayson in framing David for terrorism. While her father went to prison, she went to foster homes and then to juvenile detention. Victoria didn't lose touch completely, she paid off a prison psychiatrist to torment Amanda.

The television series is loosely based on The Count of Monte Cristo. In the Alexandre Dumas classic, Dantes is imprisoned falsely and could be consumed with despair were it not for Abbe Faria befriending him. In Revenge, it's not a fellow prisoner that steers Amanda out of despair, it's Warden Sharon Stiles (CCH Pounder). It's Stiles who points out she can keep fighting with Emily (Margarita Levieva) or make a friend of her and then be in control.

Upon her release from juvie, Amanda learns her father is dead and he's left her his estate. She also learns something she knew as a little girl but was forced to let go of (forced by, among others, the psychiatrist Victoria controlled): Her father was innocent.

Now she wants revenge. She flips identies with Emily. And she begins trailing her targets to learn about them. Then she moves to the Hamptons, first renting then purchasing the beach house next to the Graysons' summer home. When Daniel (Joshua Bowman) falls for Emily, she's back on Victoria's radar. There's something about this Emily that she doesn't trust and she certainly doesn't want her around her precious son.

And maybe Victoria could do something to stop Emily . . . if Victoria wasn't constantly dealing with upsets. First up, Victoria learns that Conrad (Henry Czerny) is having an affair with her best friend Lydia (Amber Valletta). This discovery, part of Emily's handiwork, not only upsets Victoria and Conrad, it also takes on Lydia who betrayed David Clarke and had been his secretary. Emily's working from her enemies list and, time and again, people (or pawns) around Victoria keep getting taken out.

Only one person believed in David while he was in prison, Nolan Ross (Gabriel Mann). They were business partners and Nolan visited him every week. He's the one who tells Emily (as she emerges from juvie) that her father was innocent. He's the closest thing she has to an ally. His affair with Tyler (Ashton Holmes) demonstrated he wasn't her puppet.

Nolan worries about Jack (Nick Wechsler) who has been in love with Amanda since they were both kids, taken her dog Sammy when she was forced into foster care and still wonders what happened to Amanda. He feels like he knows Emily. (Sammy knows who she is.) And he can't understand the attraction to this woman seeing and then engaged to Daniel Grayson. That attraction's momentarily forgotten when Amanda Clarke (really Emily -- remember they switched identities when both became adults) comes to town. She's not quite the way Jack thought she'd turn out but with everything that's happened . . .

Jack is the only way Emily can be hurt. Thus far, she's even willing to sacrifice Nolan. But she forever attempts to ensure that Jack is safe.

That's not always easy to do because her plans to take out certain targets often also result in harming bystanders. For example, a reporter visited her as a little girl in juvie. He told her he would prove her father was innocent. She trusted him and let him videotape their interviews (he videotaped all of his interviews). She told him about Victoria visiting the house. When he confronted Victoria and Conrad, he made it clear that money was sorely missing in his life. The Graysons were happy to find money for him. Years later, he's on the enemies list. He shows Nolan and Emily his home and brags about how he writes his books on an old typewriter, not a computer, and doesn't even keep carbon copies. Later, Emily will bust into his home, steal all the videotapes he made while interviewing people about her father and then torch his home -- ensuring that the only draft of his almost-finished book went up in flames.

That was the plan and he's crying and screaming as she expected.

But she didn't expect that Victoria, assuming 'Amanda Clarke' did the break in and torching, would send thugs over to Jack's and Jack would get beat up. She didn't expect that she'd watch a video of her father explaining he could prove his affair with Victoria because Charlotte Grayson is actually his daughter.

All these surprises and many more make it hard for Emily to stay focused on just revenge. And Nolan's always appealing to her to give up this quest. But his most recent attempt fell apart when Daniel returned from confronting Victoria about Charlotte's father being David Clarke.

Daniel told Emily that Victoria admitted it but that she got pregnant as a result of David raping her. Emily had been willing to send Daniel away, to let him out of her plans, but hearing him repeating the lie that her father raped Victoria is too much.

It's a show with many twists and turns, so many that Rebecca's called it the "omg" show. It's fiercely crafted, immensely enjoyable and highly addictive. Madeleine Stowe and Emily VanCamp are giving breakout performances. For the fall season, there were no other actors who could touch them. Only the cast of NBC's Smash can match Stowe and VanCamp. Yet this is a show that viewers share with other viewers. No one goes on Fresh Air and talks about the talented performances or the intricate plots. Had Emily/Amanda really been Eric/Allen, the show would have Water Cooler buzz. Especially if Eric/Allen could have been forty-ish. Forty-ish is really important to the Water Cooler Set -- not as important as a penis, but important still.

As if to prove that reality, over the next two weeks you're going to hear that a new show called Awake is amazing. It's not. It's crap. Not even adding Laura Innes to the cast in the second episode improves it. It stars an actor eleven years older than the woman playing his wife, though he looks 25 years older than her. Trophy wives aren't anything new on TV. But the man's a police officer, not a wealthy executive. Maybe he started out, in his 20s, as a crossing guard and met her when she was starting pre-K?

By the way, his wife, she's dead. Sometimes. He switches back and forth between alternating worlds. In one, the craggy man and his wife emerge alive from a car crash that takes their son's life, in the other world, the son survived but the wife died.

NBC's airing it, just like they aired the earlier one-man-two-lives bomb My Own Worst Enemy. The Water Cooler Set raved over that 2008 show and managed to prop it up for its first episode but approximately half of the viewers left in subsequent weeks.

The Water Cooler Set loves these little conceits and tricks. Audiences? Not really. Take a look at Fringe which no longer altnerates between World 1 and World 2, but this season has taken Peter (Joshua Jackson) to Worlds 3 and 4 and, in the process, run off the bulk of the audience. All the audience wants is Peter back with World 1 Olivia. They're not oooh-ing and aaaaw-ing over the conceit.

Time and again, in the last 12 years, the Water Cooler Set has hyped crap and ignored quality. They've jaw boned and gas bagged over every episode of the lamest and most retrograde TV shows in the world. And hyping these bad TV shows has left them no time to champion the shows that needed it. While they gas bagged over a lot of useless and derivative crap, shows that could have used the buzz, most noticeable with The New Adventures of Old Christine, were left buzz-less and easy pickings for a network uncomfortable with leading actresses. That the Water Cooler Set hasn't used each week to buzz over Revenge is only surprising if you haven't grasped that Boiz Club exists to propagate and promulgate itself.
Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 Unported License.
 
Poll1 { display:none; }