Work in the library again tonight, and as per usual, nobody has any reference questions. Knowing that it would be a long slow night (things have just been dragging me down in general lately), I went to the school store and bought a magazine to keep me company. On the cover of my old stand-by (Nylon), is none other than Paris Hilton. Yes, they have sunk to a new low, but I don't mean that as a jibe at Hilton. Let me qualify that statement.
Nylon has had cover girls in the past that I have been a little miffed about. For example: Chloe Sevigny. I don't get it. She's a decent actress, but the strange obsession with her that exists in the world of hipsters and alternative fashion magazines irritates me to no end. She's not outrageously attractive, juts average. Her sense of style isn't all that astonishing, just slighty less mainstream than the rest of Hollywood. On and on and on. And then there was also Rachel Bilson. Ugh. Another person I do not understand, especially because she doesn't even have anything near Chloe's acting chops. I mean, let's be serious. The OC? Jumper? Those are great achievements in entertainment? I think not. And all she does concerning clothing is throw on a bunch of Marc Jacobs and date Adam Brody for the cameras. Honestly. That low, I am more than used to. I can handle minor head-scratching. But Paris is a completely different story.
The article takes the angle that she is misunderstood, that her dumb blonde persona is a routine she plays into because that's what the media makes her out to be, that she is really a business genius who has feelings too. That may be all well and good, and I don't know her, so I am not going to comment on her level of intelligence or what I think of her strange relationship with the media. What I will ask is, why, when doing a story on how the media pays so much negative attention to her, does the article not really care about her at all? I mean, if you're going to attempt to change the common perception on a public figure, you don't do it by talking about the public perception of them for 90% of the article. She has a movie coming out that they mention in passing, one that she has apparently gotten good critical buzz for. The writer spends less than a paragraph on that. Anything positive they could have said about her is lost in riffs on how sad it is that the world doesn't know the real Paris. You aren't helping with that Nylon. I wag my finger at your hypocrisy.