Tonight you get a phone-written after-wine blog. Blame @RuthBarnett .
Essentially, I will flick through a magazine while on the train and make comments about it. You get to sit next to me and listen to my ramblings. If that doesn’t appeal, stop now.
I was offered copy of Grazia today with a few words along the lines of “no offence if you don’t want it”.
It is in general a sad day for women’s magazines when one might be offended by the acceptance or rejection of “do you want to read this?”. Why do we have to think that someone not sharing our taste in reading material means they are judging us? Maybe they just have different taste.
Anyway, I digress. I might digress a bit tonight. I responded with a joke about how maybe the offence should lie in the offering – how dare she suggest that I read trashy fashion magazines! – but I was told quite firmly “I know you read these things I read your blog”.
This is probably the first instance of blogging intersecting with real life. I think I can manage it. Unless you think that twitter is real life, that is. I rather feel that any conversation that happens on Twitter, even if it involves real life people, is not a part of real life.
So, one of my colleagues knows that I read magazines. Generally only if there are good freebies, but hey.
Grazia this week (is it week? Or month?)
Style Queen? The great Kate debate: which side are you on?
Brad, Angelina & the $10m snaps the world wants
Victoria: join me ( & Harper) on tour
Hot looks alert
Real life: I can’t afford to leave my boyfriend
They like their ampersands.
Grazia in the first few pages is clearly a fashion magazine more than a celeb magazine. Ugly printed tops that cost £395 are near to sensible-looking sandals from Clarks for £29.99.
I don’t really follow news of models at fashion festivals, but Natalia Vodianiva apparently said “C’mon guys, you know it’s better to be skinny than fat” when some other models talked about non-model body shapes. Grazia is apparently “not sure if we’re terrified or impressed by her honesty”. How about disappointed at her lack of understanding and general naivety/stupidity? It’s rather more complicated than that and if she really thinks that the choice is “super-skinny” (Grazia’s words) or “fat” then I pity her.
A 5-page spread with fake photos of what a Brangelina wedding might look like. Why?
Rihanna tweeted a picture of herself without makeup. She looks cute and a bit more fun than she does when she is being “sexy”.
Chart of lust. Who we love, want to tweet, and, yes, even actually be.
Ok, comma overkill. I can see why you’d want to tweet a famous person, even why you might think you want to be their friend, but not why you’d want to actually be them. Also “because a picture of them naked in 1990 just sold for £5,000” is really not a good reason to want to be a person.
A page on Twitter trolling and Ched Evans’ victim. Slightly undermined by the “we asked you” feature on the side of the page (presumably they asked on Twitter) starting with a question about hair dye. If you’re going to raise a serious issue about bullying and anonymity it’s probably best to give it its own page. One very good line which always bears repeating (although I’ll be very happy to see the day when it doesn’t need to be said) “it doesn’t matter if a woman likes a drink, if she wears short skirts, whether she’s a virgin or has had a thousand sexual partners: rape is rape”.
This is pretty long already. Kate Middleton (not actually sure what last name she uses now) may or may not be a style icon. It depends what you like. There are a lot of pictures of her wearing dresses.
Does your jacket hack it? Maybe not, but I like rhyming headlines (my parents used to get the Sun).
Painful product placement on the Victoria Beckham story. Doubt very much that the featured food is really her “fave snack”.
My train is nearly home and I’ve hardly done any reading at all, mostly just bitching. It’s been fun. Hope you enjoyed it. Like I said, blame Ruth for giving me the magazine and reminding me that I blog about this kind of thing.