Not In Kansas Anymore...

Click your heels, and see if home is where you hang your hat, or somewhere else inside yourself as this simple, postmodern girl takes on L.A.

Wednesday, June 21, 2006

And then this impending event has me nine kinds of twitterpated. Oh, I know, I said I'm happy for them. Yes, at the time I meant it. That was when it was all still speculative ( I know, I know: ring. And I know I know: confirmation of an engagement. Still time to back the fuck out, though. ) Now that it's real, I just want to throw up. And I'll bet you think you know why. But you'd be wrong, wrong, wrong.

I'll bet you, Dear Reader, are sitting there thinking, "ah, she's just jealous. Ruined her fantasy life, which was never going to happen anyway." Yeah, there's that, but frankly, I'm not 17, and I am not delusional. I have a life of my own, cha cha. My fantasy life isn't the only thing I've got going!

Or, you're thinking, "well, it could have been ANY GIRL, and she'd be all bitter." Yeah, along with all the rest of his female fans, any girl betrothed to our Guy would have been suspect, and possibly a good candidate for throwing under a bus. But being a rational person ( shut up!) , I would have gotten over it. Again, life of my own, yadda yadda, not delusional, yadda yadda, and really like his music anyway.

No, what's got me all pissed off is that it's THIS girl. This girl in particular, who, while a decent competent actress, a true star in every sense of the word and by all reports, a very nice, down-to-earth gal, just fits that stereotype profile of The Impossibly Beautiful and Famous In Her Own Right, But Fairly Submissive Woman. That Musicians Always Marry. It's distressing. It's disheartening. It's disappointing.


Because every musician I have ever known ends up playing out this cultural script, whether they ever get famous or not: "I'm the creative stud in this relationship, and while you've Got Your Own Thing Going, I need someone who isn't going to be too demanding on my time, be too needy or clingy, and who will Be There when I need to come home to kids and a house. Oh, and hopefully, Hot, Hot, Hot, baby." I SWEAR it. Seen it, watched it, fled from it myself. It's a dynamic that I find offensive to my little feminist self, and ridiculously adolescent, to say the least. And it's truly disappointing to see someone you respect so much walk into the role with such enthusiasm.

Clearly,I admit, I'm making a few assumptions here. Firstly about Nicole, who might very well be holding Keith's balls in her hot little fist in this partnership, for all I know. Still, I doubt it. She was married to TOM CRUISE for 10 years, remember? Do you really think that control freak would have handed over anything to her in terms of personal power in a realtionship? After all, her career practically disappeared when she was married to him, sadly. And didn't she think everything was fine and dandy untill the day she got served papers? WHAT KIND OF WOMAN a.) gets involved with THAT, and b.) doesn't see the lawyers circling overhead??? A woman who, I assert, doesn't mind being fairly submissive and a little overly-maternal in her intimate relationships, and a woman who isn't neccessarily in touch with anything other than her fantasy projection of what's going on in them. Someone who may be instinctive and bright, but not really hitting all the balls outta the park in Setting Boundaries and Making Her Needs Equal departments. That's all I'm saying. It doesn't make her a good person or a bad person. It just makes her an Excellent Candidate for the Aforementioned Dynamic.

Secondly, I'm assuming a few things about him, too: that he doesn't want more than that, contrary to everything he's ever said or sung. He may very well want that Girl Who Is 100% His Peer and Keeps Things In Balance. But again I argue: look who he picked!!! The One Woman Every Guy Wants To Have ( Hot, Hot, Hot, baby!!). What a coup, huh? Maybe he sees all that 100% Partner in her- the True Love- I suspect he has at least convinced himself that he has. I just don't know if I buy it totally. Again, not a good or a bad person, it just reeks of that Stereotype I'm asserting as the thesis here.

Additionally, and unfortunately, I am also assuming so more ugly things about the both of them:

For Keith, I ponder if part of this choice comes from his being constantly guilty in his head about being an addict and having a womanizing past. A theory: he thinks by choosing The Most Beautiful Girl in The World Who's Going To Give Him Everything and Yet Is Moral and A Tad Icy By Imperative ( she's a devout Catholic, say no more; not to mention I've yet to see the woman radiate anything other than Unattainable and Untouchable in any love scene EVER) he'll be good to go, safe, and in control. Again, not a good person or a bad person; everyone has issues. Still, I'd be lying if I didn't find it a bit fucked-up and upsetting.

For Miss K, let's face it: she might be nice. And talented, and blah dee blah blah blah. She certainly handled that public divorce with dignity and class and for that alone she deserves a medal! I won't even say she's undeserving of happiness, because isn't everyone? Of course. It's just that she appears to be the kind of person who trades on her looks a great deal. I don't know if she's fully conscious of it; in this business, things like that get a little shady, so I doubt if she wants to even deal with that idea (who would?). But those looks get her ALOT of attention, not to mention that $5mil contract with Chanel. It must be very tempting to use those looks to get a man's attention and subsequent adoration in a manipulative way, a childish, giggling girlish way. To use them to get EXACTLY what you want, in a passive-aggressive way, which to me, very much fits her persona. I find that kind of thing annoying at best, but men seem to find it irresisitable ( I've seen versions of this in my personal experience). Why, I have no clue. I have no problems with women using their feminine wiles, mind you. If you've got it, well, shake it, sister! What I have a problem with is certain women using those in a competative, I'm-The-Prettiest-Girl-In-The-Room,-Bitch, kind of way. I'm equally appalled at men so stupid to fall for that, even if she is, indeed, the Prettiest Girl. Ugh. If he's THAT man, well, even worse. That's shallow. On both of their parts.

I could be wrong about it all. What do I know? I'm a keen observer of human behavior and an ardent watcher of celebrities ( my guilty sin in this life). And don't misunderstand: I'm not doubting the love or the feelings involved in this particular relationship or any of the ones I've actually witnessed. They are usually quite sincere and fairly ardent, at least at the outset. Nope; they look happy. I'm sure they are happy. Maybe they'll be luckier than most people and get to stay that way, despite any harbingers of doom.

And I admit it: some of this is just plain old Sour Grapes ( happy I admit to at least a tad of that?). In the end, I admire Keith and really thought him to be a man of much meaning, on so many levels. Simoultanously, I have been bothered by Nicole's ridiculous double-play of "Look at me! Look at me!"/"I'm so demure and unaffected" for awhile, on so many levels. So with this wedding happening, I think, OF ALL THE PEOPLE, you two had to end up together??? . Of course! So I get to watch the Guy I Thought Was Admirable and Hot marry The Actress I Cannot Cope With. Ugh. Ugh. Ugh!

Not fair? In my estimation, you bet it's not! That still doesn't mean anybody needs to thrown under a bus ( that would be super bad karma, anyway). I suppose I just need to keep holding out for my own Cowboy to show up, anyway.

But I think I'll avoid the tabloids for any photo spreads of the Happy Couple for awhile, just for my stomach's sake.