Take, for instance, Ana Birchall. I had written about her long ago, when I was just starting this blog, because that scandal meant a big deal to many, and everything about it was wrong, from what caused it, to how it developed, to how others reacted, to how Ms Birchall was defending herself. Rather than questioning the relevance of that video and exposing the double standards in female vs male public personae expectations, she focused on proving it wasn’t her (or adding FUD to the mix). Writing about it was for me an attempt to make it better. So a few days ago, when I noticed that Google was sending me a spike in searches on her, I thought I write something new, in the hope that people will find something else interesting about her. I thought that the story of how we came within a few centimeters of each other, in a TSA line, without ever exchanging a word, was interesting, and yet everyone coming here is still looking for her videoclip. Well, at least I tried, and I managed to write it without writing another “how I met X” type of article.
Me so happy being pseudonymous.
Back when I first wrote about Ana Birchall I had started by mentioning another “celebrity”, Mihaela Radulescu, whom I had called Mrrr. And now it seems that after writing about Ana Birchall (mostly reacting to news), I discover that Mihaela Radulescu finds herself in the unflattering light of showbiz once again, after telling contestants on “Romanian Idol” (or something like that) to lose weight or else they won’t make it past her.
Now, Ms Radulescu is quite thin and maintains a good figure for the 60 years she’s pushing (I’m too lazy to look her up in Wikipedia for the exact age, but I don’t think I’m too far off the mark). The problem with her approach, apart from being unpopular (it seems as if very few people like her), is that it can turn against herself very quickly. After all, if we start excluding based on weight, why not exclude based on age as well? Sure, weight is far more within our control than age, and excessive weight is often an indicator of other issues more so than age, but in the end this is all about in-group vs out-group, about forming your own little clan and wielding that power to exclude or include others. Ms Radulescu is attempting to use this power while being herself in a rather peculiar position within it – she’s not as permanent nor as popular as she thinks she is, and excluding others will not get her closer to her goal.
But enough about old timers. I’ve discovered a while ago some young, fresh writer and find her writing delectable. I’ve even translated (sort of) one of her silly little masterpieces and she’s in my Feedly. Recently, she wrote about a dog, and that’s yet another aforementioned productivity-busting “coincidence” as this is one of the short stories I’m working on for some writing contest.
*(*This article is unfinished – it was scheduled to appear in the hope that it will be finished before, but since this message is here and until it is removed, the article is to be considered work in progress*)*.
Sources / More info: mrrr
"Even though I don’t like him, Nastase got it much harder than he deserved." - No, no he didn't. He didn't even pay for half of the stuff he did, nor for the horrid, dictatorial fashion he ran everything. Not to mention the billions he stole...
ReplyDeletelooks like comments from "corruption and cur-rupt-ion" are being synced here :(
ReplyDeleteI guess it all depends on your standards of proof. Reading the court decision I didn't get the feeling that prosecution had proven its case. And "dictatorial" is virtually any effective leader. Salvador Allende, for instance, was the opposite of "dictatorial" and he's also the opposite of "alive" :)
ReplyDeleteIt's nice that you have an opinion on this matter and everything... but, quite simply: NO! Living the Nastase period and reading about it are different things...
ReplyDeleteIn terms of press freedom, the Nastase period has been the darkest time since communism. I've had teachers and friends who felt in on their own skin (from meeting Nastase's acolytes to hearing him on the phone, blocking articles and giving editorial orders).
We're not talking about standard of proof. Nastase had established his own secret service (disguising it as Ministry of Justice service - The SIPA), his proven accounts are immense and the list of local factories he's sold or bankrupted is enormous. As a law teacher, he's been smart enogh not to get caught, but other than that, he probably deserved capital punishment.
I am certainly grateful that you are affording me the luxury to have my own opinion. My point is not, however, that Nastase was innocent, but rather that the prosecution had failed to make a valid point in the court. He may be guilty in the court of public opinion, but a functional justice system differentiates between the two. YOU may not be talking about standard of proof, but I am. Whatever faults Nastase may have had - and they were, undoubtedly, many - they had to be proven in court. Have you read the court decision? If yes, do you find in it supporting points for your faith-based belief that Nastase was guilty as charged (and was he charged with the crimes you are listing above)?
ReplyDeleteIt was a Kanye West intervention (I'm really happy for you and Imma let you finish...). Nastas still has plenty of open files and, woth the recent arrests and confessions, I feel his saga has just begun!
ReplyDeleteTrudat. In your previous points, you're quoting my 3), and then go on 5), more precisely "everybody knows rationalizations" - wrong or right? :)
ReplyDeleteCe de-a mai aiureli vorbiți voi acilea... mă doare capu', zău!
ReplyDelete• Allende... n-a fost dictator.
Da', da' încerca să devină unu', cu sprijin sovietic.
• Năstase... hai, o lăsați jos că deja măcăne disperată?
What is the difference between a dictator and a "popular ruler"? A "dictator" comes from a different camp and does things you don't agree with. Basescu is a "dictator" for PSD-ists, and Ponta/Nastase are "dictators" for PMP-ists.
ReplyDeleteStau și mă întreb dacă bei prea mult.
ReplyDeleteNuș'... zic și io, bazat pe ce citesc.
It DOESN'T MATTER from what camp a dictator comes from.
Fascist, national-socialist, communist, polpotist or cannibalistic.
It's all the same: somebody tells you how you should live your life - and the hell with rules, laws or regulations.
Iz zis fuchin' simple.
Toatele articolele lu'n Zeamo sunt neterminate, pîn definiție!
ReplyDeleteNo, it's relative. But yes, what you drink before making that assessment might be relevant :)
ReplyDeleteYou're very perceptive, Blegoo. Good job.
ReplyDeleteWait, what :P?
ReplyDeleteP.S: I'm still answering comments from disqus.com, not being able to load them on the zamo page :(
In the summary of my views, at 5) I talk about rationalizations and it seemed to me that's what you did above :)
ReplyDelete(also, you can reply simply by email)
ReplyDeleteNope. When it comes to Nastase and some other political "poles", everything becomes religious. You either believe he's Satan, or you're a heathen :))
ReplyDeleteSanchi balagîște!
ReplyDeleteRelativ... la ce? La chelie? La starea dă spirit? La ieconomie?
ReplyDeleteNu nene... un dictator e cam ca părinții d-voastră, când erai mititel:
"Faci așa... vorbești așa... te comporți cum îți zic io... că dacă nu... te ia MAMA DREAQ'!"
So why don't other "democracies" successfully prosecute as many oligarchs as Romania, in your opinion?
ReplyDeleteis that what you're missing and keep looking for in your government?
ReplyDeleteGood question. To be addressed in a new article.
ReplyDeleteNevertheless, I welcome more furry creatures on this blog! :)
N-am io treabă cu d-astea... io-s suveran dă capu' meu, după ritu' lu' Jean Bodin.
ReplyDeleteMay one day the impression you have about yourself match the traces left by your online persona :)
ReplyDeleteSolitudinem eius placuisse maxime crediderim, quoniam importuosum circa mare et vix modicis navigiis pauca subsidia; neque adpulerit quisquam nisi gnaro custode. caeli temperies hieme mitis obiectu montis quo saeva ventorum arcentur; aestas in favonium obversa et aperto circum pelago peramoena; prospectabatque pulcherrimum sinum.
ReplyDeleteHadică... cu halte cuvinte:
Excudent allii spirantia mollius aera (credo equidem), vivos ducent de marmore vultus,
orabunt causas melius, caelique meatus describent radio et surgentia sidera dicent:
tu regere imperio populos, Zeamo, memento
(hae tibi erunt artes), pacisque imponere morem,
parcere subiectis et debellare superbos.
"Să te revolți e ieftin - să faci revoluție cere o grămadă dă bani."
ReplyDelete(Blegoo - Opere Alese, vol. IX, pg.178, paragraful 5)
Yes, yo, I rule the nations, you got that right. Other than that, excessively descriptive. Latin is not the right language for masturbation, it's too concise. Unless, of course, the object of your affection is too little.
ReplyDeleteTo get drunk at home is cheaper than in your village's pub. I guess that's what you're getting at, but hey! it's your money, after all :)
ReplyDelete"Istoric vorbind, e dovedit că poți scoate românul din România, dar nu poți scoate România din român.
ReplyDelete(Blegoo - Gîndiri Întîmplătoare - Editura Academiei, prefațată și adnotată - 2028)
“I had become too accustomed to the pseudo-Left new style, whereby if your opponent thought he had identified your lowest possible motive, he was quite certain that he had isolated the only real one. This vulgar method, which is now the norm and the standard in much non-Left journalism as well, is designed to have the effect of making any noisy moron into a master analyst.”
ReplyDelete― Christopher Hitchens, Hitch-22: A Memoir
“I have absolutely no pleasure in the stimulants in which I sometimes so madly indulge. It has not been in the pursuit of pleasure that I have periled life and reputation and reason. It has been the desperate attempt to escape from torturing memories, from a sense of insupportable loneliness and a dread of some strange impending doom.”
ReplyDelete― Edgar Allan Poe
I've a feeling you want to comment on zamoca dot tumblr dot com - it's the freshest material, now with Disqus :)
ReplyDeleteAlternatively, you can just get a bicycle. It really makes you happier: http://www.oopsmark.ca/blogs/oopsmark/13153421-the-science-behind-why-cycling-makes-us-happier
ReplyDelete..and you're Hitchens? :))
ReplyDeleteSadly that was said about the "Indian within the child" - see the residential school system here in Canada. See "Canada - taram al fagaduintei dilematice - excluderea indezirabililor"
ReplyDeleteAșa o fi, da' io am zis-o primu'!
ReplyDeleteExistă diferite amenințări la supraviețuirea speciei umane.
ReplyDeletePrimele trei - în ordinea importanței:
• Pădurile
• Bicicleta
• Războiul nuclear
Proporțional... cam cît ejti și tu Patrick Basham - hau'iz zat for ăn impertinent coment?
ReplyDeleteadd "bears" and you can be colbert 2.0
ReplyDeleteReally, try zamoca.tumblr.com - newer stuff, you can really comment on the latest and maybe you'll have something interesting to say.
ReplyDeleteMiștocăraia nu te coafează.
ReplyDeleteAhem... about as interesting as http://blegoo.tumblr.com/
ReplyDeletezat is to say... nothing, nada, nimic, fleacuri, mofturi, aiureli.
lol
ReplyDeleteBLEGOO (necăjit): "Așa, vezi?...
ReplyDeleteRâzi tu râzi, Făt-Zemos... da' purceaua... e decedată-n coteț!"
No way! This is not happening, Hitchens 'saves' my butt?!
ReplyDelete