My first celebrity gossip post
Lohan assumes the pose: Monroe's Final Sitting
As the color in the flower maintains an identity marginalized by its use as a "censor," a cover for its coverage, a color whose transcendence is undermined by its lewd positioning. Her expression's relation to the automatic comparison to a precedent celebrity parallels the empowerment and objectification within beauty. While I could go on about the semiotic significance of symbolizing an iconic figure, or relate it to expressing a social condition, breast cancer awareness, state of a nation through a past pop culture/entertainment icon, but most importantly:
Why does the article demean her continuously? Doesn't the writer realize the terrifying implication of someone on their third time out of rehab taking photographs embodying a lady who later passed away of an overdose?
She's clasping the chiffon to her mouth as a compelling evocation of visual voice (add that to layers of "embodiment"), not "her nipples can be ogled through the thin triangle of pink chiffon she clasps with her mouth like a schnauzer" and of course the reporter shamelessly makes the "taut and soft" comment. The fact that her breasts are the photographic focal points anticipates media response, which anticipated the fact that this would "cause a ruckus in the blogosphere" and its dissemination speaks to Warhol's print-up (printmaking+pinup+makeup) while drawing awareness to tragic figures such as Eddie Sedgwick.
I very rarely write in this girly pink and it makes me sad that the color undermines the seriousness of the issue, just as Lohan's reputation invites ridicule (I, too, have ditz-ified her name).
(By the way, due to my recent depressing habit of reading the last sentences of books, I've also begun to write beginning from the last line of my posts. This worries me, but not as much as Lohan's work, an embodiment of a silently public outcry*.)
*A phrase which could be a title for a report on an innovation in expressing non-violent protest.
I do wonder, though, what the role and purpose of celebrity should be.
I'm worried enough to try to contact her, but I also don't just want to send a "fan-mail" especially if the photographs are not seriously self-expressions, in which case, it's the photographer's sadness, and I don't know what to do. Besides, why does she have to get all the criticism/bashing for the photographer's idea, in that case?
And to think I was just playing a bartending game where it was a "special power-up ability" to flash one's pink bikini clad boobs.
As the color in the flower maintains an identity marginalized by its use as a "censor," a cover for its coverage, a color whose transcendence is undermined by its lewd positioning. Her expression's relation to the automatic comparison to a precedent celebrity parallels the empowerment and objectification within beauty. While I could go on about the semiotic significance of symbolizing an iconic figure, or relate it to expressing a social condition, breast cancer awareness, state of a nation through a past pop culture/entertainment icon, but most importantly:
Why does the article demean her continuously? Doesn't the writer realize the terrifying implication of someone on their third time out of rehab taking photographs embodying a lady who later passed away of an overdose?
She's clasping the chiffon to her mouth as a compelling evocation of visual voice (add that to layers of "embodiment"), not "her nipples can be ogled through the thin triangle of pink chiffon she clasps with her mouth like a schnauzer" and of course the reporter shamelessly makes the "taut and soft" comment. The fact that her breasts are the photographic focal points anticipates media response, which anticipated the fact that this would "cause a ruckus in the blogosphere" and its dissemination speaks to Warhol's print-up (printmaking+pinup+makeup) while drawing awareness to tragic figures such as Eddie Sedgwick.
I very rarely write in this girly pink and it makes me sad that the color undermines the seriousness of the issue, just as Lohan's reputation invites ridicule (I, too, have ditz-ified her name).
(By the way, due to my recent depressing habit of reading the last sentences of books, I've also begun to write beginning from the last line of my posts. This worries me, but not as much as Lohan's work, an embodiment of a silently public outcry*.)
*A phrase which could be a title for a report on an innovation in expressing non-violent protest.
I do wonder, though, what the role and purpose of celebrity should be.
I'm worried enough to try to contact her, but I also don't just want to send a "fan-mail" especially if the photographs are not seriously self-expressions, in which case, it's the photographer's sadness, and I don't know what to do. Besides, why does she have to get all the criticism/bashing for the photographer's idea, in that case?
And to think I was just playing a bartending game where it was a "special power-up ability" to flash one's pink bikini clad boobs.