Car Talk

[liveonearth]

The most astute diagnosticians I encounter on a regular (weekly) basis are "Click and Clack, the Tappitt brothers", on NPR. They are immediately assessing every variable for any possible cause the moment they begin talking to a person with a car problem. They are insightful and compassionate about the foibles of people. They know their shit

Comments

[leaves1]

The interview that mainly gave me the impression that GK was a jerk was when he was a guest on Al Franken's show (back when he had a show on Air America). Franken was being totally friendly and cool, and any time he said something funny (that GK could have easily picked up and ran with) GK just ignored it or changed the subject. I mean, maybe he was just really grumpy that day, but it felt more like he was refusing to let Al Franken have a joke, or more like share a joke. Franken was in now way putting him down, just trying have some fun.

TG - the first time in recent history I remember saying "wtf" was during her interview with James Cameron about Avatar. She was talking about (and I'm not really sure why she was making this connection anyway) cartoon characters, and how a lot of female cartoon characters have really big breasts, and then she commented that the Navi female protaganist had really small breasts and seemed to want Cameron to explain... it was just weird - I don't even know what her point was. Was she expecting that character to have really large breasts, because it reminded her of a cartoon? Cameron handled it well, stating the obvious that it makes more sense for a the whole Navi species that spends its time flying through the trees to be slender and athletic.... it was one of the stupidest things I've ever heard. I was embarrassed for her.

And there have been other interviews where I've cringed at how she handles topics around sexuality. The other one that really bugged me through and through was when she interview this woman who had worked as a dominatrix for 4 years to make money, and later got a PhD in anthropology, and had just written a book about the dominatrix experiences. It was clear from the guest's answers (I thought) that her main motive in working as a dominatrix was to make money, for her it was a job job, whereas anthropology was more what she wanted to do all along. But Terri kept spinning her questions in ways that implied that being a dominatrix, or being a client of a dominatrix, was something aberrant. No, she didn't come right out and say that, but it just became obvious that's what she thought. I've known people who do that kind of work and it is actually something they enjoy and don't do just for money, but for this guest, you knew it wasn't her favorite career, because she left it for something else she was more interested in. TG seemed fascinated by the whole thing, but it was sheltered-life kind of fascination. She kept asking questions about things the guest didn't like about the job (okay, that's fine - to a point) but it was almost as if she was baiting the guest to say, "yes, it is weird", which she eventually did. I wish she had interviewed a real dominatrix - someone who does it because they like it.

And she seems to be interrupting people more - today or yesterday ? can't remember, she interrupted the guest twice - while they were answering her question!! So... I don't know, I never noticed stuff like this before, so maybe I'm paying more attention or maybe I'm getting curmudgeony myself, but lately unless I she's interviewing a guest I'm more interested in, I don't listen.

[liveonearth]

You have a point there....I have noticed that she seems to have somewhat conservative ideas about sexuality--not that she directly expresses them, but that she questions hard around those topics and never seems fully satisfied when someone is far out of the main stream. There are other times when her line of questioning is....rather basic, really. I embrace her cluelessness, because I think it has the potential to bring in people who are similarly clueless. I mean, if she were totally hip with dominatrices, then anyone who was skeptical or turned off by that idea would simply turn off her show. But because she is skeptical or even judgmental by her implications, she welcomes people. I think that sometimes she asks questions that even to her are backward simply to make her program accessible to everyone. Perhaps I give her too much credit, and she is less aware and more insecure than I think.

About the big boobs on cartoon women...well, it's a fact, ma'am, that most cartoon babes are heavily boobed. And also that romantic leads in movies must be sexy to the maximum number of watchers. I would love to hear that program, though, to see if it hits buttons in me too. Can't know without listening.

Lately I haven't really listened much as school eats up my time. Here it is after 10pm and I gotta turn this machine off!!! Thanks for the report from your own honest perspective!! And G'nite.

[leaves1]

I think they archive shows for awhile so you may be able to find it. Yeah, I get it about the big boob thing, but the idea of the Avatar female protaganist having big boobs seems so ridiculous to me, I mean, the movie was a drama, you know? It wasn't Roger Rabbit. There's tons of other things to talk about in relation to that movie.

She just did an interview with John Waters recently - that was a good one, but mostly because Waters is hilarious and could carry an interview with probably anyone. She asked him a question that basically implied "so you have a shit fetish like Divine" which Waters knocked down, saying basically the movies are his creation and not him, and said "you don't assume Stephen King is a serial killer because he writes about serial killers"... so, that was another foible I thought, but in a way good because it allowed JW to make that point, which might help out the clueless, as you say... and you have a good point about connecting with the audience, I just wish/think TG could ultimately accomplish the same (of bringing up controversial topics and having her audience consider a different perspective than the norm) without inserting her judgement into it. In other areas she is good at that, but around sex not so much.

And I'm not sure how I feel about the idea of her bias being welcoming to people - I mean, some people are always going to be turned off, but I would like to give people more credit... what she could do is frame her questions in such a way that acknowledges that such-and-such is edgy subject matter, and then ask the question. I think the mark of a good interviewer is that there is no attention on the interviewer, but rather on the interviewee.

Thanks for the conversation - I've enjoyed it!

[liveonearth]

=-]

Me too (enjoyed the conversation). I'm glad to have you on my FL and hope that you post lots about your observations about the world!!

One last thought on the boob question: You can't leave sex appeal out of a movie if you want it to sell big. You just can't. Avatar is proof that 10 foot tall blue babes with small tits have sex appeal too. I have a 60+ year old male friend who went to see avatar 3x specifically for the "10 foot tall blue babes"...those are his words.