Saturday, May 8, 2010

Don't Be That Bitch, Comrade Y! She Gets Weird Press!

Recently reviewing Comrade Y's post about Kelly Wearstler (5/2/10), apparently her arch-enemy and fantasy doppelganger, Comrade X decided to view the readers' comments on that particular article, as he often finds clues to the cracks in the ideological superstructure which he can exploit in service of the coming Revolution (by the way, he also looked at the accompanying slide-show, which was, to say the least, absolutely self-serving and ridiculous AND showed a boot -- yes, a BOOT! -- that she wants, like ANYONE fucking cares!). Well, usually: instead, he found only four (see, Comrade Y, she's not THAT fabulous) comments:

"Now I know who the pretty one who wore the weird dresses is. I liked her."

Torturous syntax aside, this particular reader is being, seemingly, intentionally opaque. Where exactly did this reader see the putatively fabulous Ms. Wearstler wearing "weird dresses"? At the International Weird Dress Bienniale? And is this comment supposed to mean something to someone? Aren't comments supposed to INVITE readers to respond or think about them, rather than absolutely STOPPING them from doing so? And who the fuck cares if you liked her or not, retard? We here at Irritable Blog Syndrome hate her, and, by extension, all who like -- or liked (apparently this reader might not like her anymore -- watch your verb tenses!) -- her.

And then there's this utterly incomprehensible encomium to something Ms. Wearstler did in some place Comrade X has never heard of and will never go to (what it was is unclear -- apparently it is de rigeur to avoid clarity at all costs when commenting about this woman):
"Wearstler's work at the Viceroy in Anguilla is truly remarkable. The clean lines, the intriguing gnarled distractions from clean lines, the sense of openness, of fresh sea air in the spaces, and finally, the luminous enchantment of relaxing within a work of art; I can't wait to return."

So there's clean lines and then a DISTRACTION (and a gnarled distraction at that, like that matters) from clean lines? She does something and then distracts you from it? What the fuck? Openness and sea air and blah blah blah -- glad you get to go back and see it again, you bourgeois asswipe. Keep us updated. Try not to masturbate on anything while you're there.

Now for a more level-headed analysis of the phenomenon that is Kelly Wearstler:

"Now tell who really wants to admire a pretty rich successful woman who seems to have it all. Maybe I am just not a nice person, but I don't. If I see Kelly's several million dollar home, beautiful sons and the good life in L.A, in one more magazine....I promise to pray she gets a zit on the tip of her nose which lasts for a full two weeks."

Who wants to admire her? (Well, Comrade Y does, sadly [get over it, Comrade!]). But this particular reader's hatred of Ms. Wearstler allows Comrade X to forgive him/her his/her syntactical and punctuation errors. But you know that some bourgeois fatass somewhere is sitting in his/her chair at the country club thinking, "Ha! See what a public school education gets you? Bad grammar and jealousy! Ho! Jose, another martini, if you will. Hurry now!" And seriously -- a zit? I can think of far more insidious tortures for this bourgeois waste of space.

(Although Comrade X IS rather bothered that the only negative comment was written by a semi-literate writer.)


And of course, there's always the frat boy whose arrested adolescence leads him to embarrass himself publicly and seemingly unselfconsciously:

"Among all the photographs in this story, it would have been nice to see her glorious Playboy spread."

Oh, come on. And: did she really do a Playboy spread? Now THAT is the sign of a good mother! No, not self-obsessed at all ...

Bitch.

2 comments: