His dancing is quite fluid in some places, but wholly awkward and cringe-worthy in others. The singing is impressive, but in a “wow, yeah, I guess Daniel Radcliffe can sing” kind of way, and not in a “why, yes, it is worth shelling out $$$ for Broadway tickets” way. In fact, his voice is clearly not wholly supported in some bits, especially the big, belty pieces – can he really sing through 9 shows a week?

Like with Equus, surely he’ll grow into the role, but seeing this clip I’m just not sure it’s worth making an expensive trip across the country to see it, now that I live in L.A. Worth a Boston to NYC? Yes. L.A. to NYC? No.

Oh, my darling DRad. I’m afraid you are just another celebrity headlining a Broadway show. This makes me sadface.

Also, I love you Daniel (really), but you will ALWAYS be super awkward kissing women.

About two years ago, the Facebook newsfeed algorithm decided that Louis and I needed to be friends. I started seeing him post links to his very funny — and helpful — TV reviews, and since he joined Twitter & Tumblr and began to cross-post updates to his Facebook wall I discovered that Louis and I had so. much. in. common. He lives in San Francisco and I live in L.A., but he comes down here sometimes for work. A spontaneous Facebook wall comment thread chat lead to the discovery that — hey! — Louis thought I was pretty amusing, too, actually remembered how we met, and reads my blog. We decided to have lunch.

Oh, Internet and Social Media, how you have changed the way we make, interact with and perceive friendship. Louis and I are friends because of the Facebook newsfeed. Go figure.  I met one of my best friends because I sat next to her on a bus at a Harry Potter conference in 2005… which I found out about on the Internet. I developed a relationship with my half-sister thousands of miles away (on another continent), because of the advent of email in my life in the late 90s. Of the regrettably few romantic entanglements I have had, ALL of them originated from online dating or interaction (no, not Craigslists’ women seeking men! XD).

Some of my closest friendships are with people I met on the Internet. The idea has become more normalized and accepted in society, but the issue of navigating this complex and slightly surreal world is ever-changing. As much as online relationships have been the making of me socially, I am concerned that it has  conversely and simultaneously brought about the ruination of as many friendships/relationships as it has created. The Internet and Social Media gives us more, more, more and sometimes we actually accomplish less, less, less — and communicate less often, less effectively or not at all.

Every once and a while, it strikes me that I’ve not been in contact with a good friend for a long time — sometimes more than a year (or two). I retreat to my email Inbox (one of the eight that I keep) or my Facebook messages to read their last, unanswered missive, feel like a horrible human being for not responding, poise myself to compose a response… then find due to the exceedingly long interim that to say all the things that need to be said and to proper catch up, I’d have to write an essay PLUS apologize for being a horrible person and friend, and I just collapse in a heap and give up. Perhaps I am just a miserable friend, or perhaps that old adage that one can never truly maintain more than five or six proper, good friends at a time is sadly true. I have a small circle of close friends, who for the most part are geographically nearby and/or on the same social networking & chat platforms as I am — a huge factor.

The thing is, in this wacky, crazy modern world, and for a nerd-type such as myself, the term “friend” is broad and the avenues by which one makes and interacts with these friends is often digital, based on social media, passing interests and brief locational stints. Americans are known for flitting about between various friends groups, as well as moving around far more than our European counterparts, but add to that a proclivity for taking a deep-dive into Internet communities AND the rise of social media, and you  have potential for a large, broad, far-flung sets of friends. I’ve lived in not one or two, but SIX different geographic locations for a year or more, PLUS I’ve played in the Internet sandboxes of several fandoms, over the last fifteen years. Lately, I’ve discovered odd and unexpected friendships with like-minded individuals via Facebook and Twitter, bound only by a random add/follow and a discovered appreciation of similar thoughts. That is something that wouldn’t have been possible ten, fifteen years ago, outside of the (select few) who engaged in fandoms. The new social (media) revolution of friendship.

Then, there’s Facebook. Facebook has COMPLETELY changed the way in which we connect with our “friends,” and who we consider friends. I have no doubt that I am close to certain individuals by sheer default of their frequent Facebook updates and the site’s algorithm that decides to feature them in my newsfeed. I also know that several friendships have fallen by the wayside in terms of actual, real contact and conversation, because I feel — and they must too — that everything I could possibly need to know I can check on their page!  It seems redundant to email with them, or chat or talk on the phone, because you/they have covered everything on their Info page/latest wall posts. I do this with my own siblings, for Christ’s sake. That is just WRONG.

Who or what do you even consider a friend nowadays, when many people have 700, 1000 or more of them on Facebook? Language is a powerful thing, and calling your social connections “friends” (on Facebook, Livejournal and other sites) implies a deeper connection that is often there. People who use Facebook strictly for a LinkedIn/Twitter hybrid — branding and business — may not be bothered by the term, but anyone who started out on Facebook as a real friends network and gradually branched out to broader social and networking applications can get confused. Are these really my “friends”? Which ones are friends, and consider me their friend, and which are vaguely tenable networking connections/followers? I’m hovering at a steady 400 and even that seems ridiculous — I know I do NOT realistically have that many “friends.” I have that many personal connections on Facebook (though some of them were impulse adds that I’m now questioning), but I’d say fewer than 30 of them are “real” friends. And from that number I only speak to or see on a regular basis 10-15 of them (if I’m lucky). Yet through the tetchy newsfeed algorithm I’ve become acquainted and feel “closer” and “more in the know” about a random subset of “friends” and feel less “connected” to real friends who simply don’t update a lot.

It’s easy to be spread thin — LiveJournal, Facebook, Twitter, Tumblr, Gmail, AIM, MSN, Yahoo! Messenger, Blogger, WordPress, etc. etc. etc. — so many social media platforms, so little time. My closest friendships, without a doubt, are not only with those friends who are geographically close at any given time, but with those who frequent the same social media and chat platforms. My friends who have the same proclivity for GChat I talk to on a daily basis, and that tool has bridged the gap of distance with those friends who are thousands of miles away. But the friends who preferred MSN or Yahoo messenger? We simply stopped talking. Because I use GChat and AIM. My friends who don’t/can’t/won’t text? Hear from me less. Those who maintain active Facebooks and Twitter feeds I feel even more interconnected with — we operate in the same space, are on the same page.

From being spread thin also comes overload and shut-down. We are bombarded with so much information and demands for our attention – large friend’s networks, work, tv, news (feeds), social media, chatting, Smartphone apps, family, relationships, etc. etc. Even the most adept multi-tasker is apt to shutdown when the noise becomes unbearable. I am prone to this — sometimes the only way to stay sane, grounded and not whirl into yet another (quarter?) life crisis is to stop, focus and ignore. If I can’t juggle AIM + GChat + 8 email Inboxes + Facebook + Twitter + LiveJournal + blogging PLUS work/family/relationships, I have to drop some, and I have. But with that comes losing the friends and connections and oftentimes progress (branding or otherwise) you’ve made in those spaces. The Internet has an incredibly short memory — if you’re not there, in it, active all the time, the it Internet moves on. Reintegrating, especially into networks such as Twitter and LiveJournal, takes so much energy and time, it’s often easier to stay cold turkey, and write off that part of your life/past.

This brings me to the complex social workings of online fandoms, which have lead to the sharpest and most painful truncations of friendship. For many years I was heavily and happily entrenched in Harry Potter fandom, spending hours each day on LiveJournal, updating my own LJ and constantly scrolling & refreshing my friends’ list. For nearly five years I was intimately acquainted with the every day lives of a large circle of friends — thoughts, feelings, and, yes, a lot of Harry Potter blather. From LJ came long chat sessions, group chats, email chains, comment threads, love memes, debates and eventually real-life epic all-night parties at HP conventions.

Then I left. The dirty thing about fandom is once you leave — whether it’s because you’re no longer interested in the topic, or you’re sick of the drama or your real life simply gets busy and exciting — 95% of your “friends” forget about you. If you’re not actively involved, you’re not friends. Sometimes this isn’t even intentional, but similar to the “if you’re not on my preferred chat program, we probably won’t talk” conundrum. Updating an LJ regularly takes a lot of precious time and effort, as does keeping up with a friend’s list. Many expect that if you want to keep up, you’ll read their LJ. If you’re not on LJ, you’re not getting their life updates (and you’re not commenting to show that you’re reading), and you miss big news and happenings. People that I’m close to and even real life Facebook friends only update their LJ and NOT their Facebook, so I’ve missed many a life happening. And once I cottoned on to it, I felt like a bad friend for commenting months later. So I wouldn’t say anything at all. From the sphere I reached a deeper lever of friendship with several people — Harry Potter was something we happened to have in common but rarely talked about — and it’s those few that I have maintained a friendship with. If they’re on GChat, Facebook and Twitter :/

More and more lately I am feeling disconnected from certain aspects of my life and my past, and am questioning how social media and the Internet has both evolved and devolved my ability to create and maintain meaningful connections with people. Some of the most important people in my life are only there because of modern doodads and my online social habits. Conversely, I’ve lost touch or feel myself losing touch with key individuals and feel hopeless to stop it — how do I write that embarrassing email, what do I do if they just won’t chat or text (and I really want to communicate that way), do they think I don’t care about them because we’ve lost touch? There are natural ebbs and flows to relationships, but modern tech and means have skewed what qualifies as “natural.” Anyone over the age of, say, forty likely thinks its crazy to lose touch with someone because they don’t have a GChat account or active Facebook. In my world, that’s just the way it is.

When did it get like this? I used to write letters and talk on the phone. Now I rarely do either (and the only person I ever call is my mother). Perhaps much of my disconnection is from moving so often and far-flung (friends being first five, then eight time zones away impedes steady communication), and is merely compounded by the connected/disconnected contradictory nature of the Internet. My experiences with fandom and Facebook are not universal, but neither are they unique. The more noise there is, the harder it is to focus and listen. And there’s a LOT of noise out there, especially for the Millennial generation (and our cousins, the X-ers).

The world has never seemed closer, yet a tangible concept of “friendship” never seemed so far away.

Better yet, both sensations have inspired pretty good comedic responses — UCLA girl mostly videos, and Ms. Rebecca many, MANY Facebook events & memes. Normally, I don’t find viral sensations blog worthy (though they may go on the Tumblr), but this post is so the wonderful response vids have a unifed home. Let’s start with the UCLA girl who posted a rant about Asians in the library, which the Internet inevitably found and went to town on.

The original racist rant:

Awesome comedic rebuttal:

And an amazing SONG:

I have to say I do find it sad that people have figured out the girl’s identity and may have gone after her. She’s an idiot, but that’s not cool. :/

Then there’s Rebecca Black, who has exploded to such a degree that it seems redundant to post her video. I will anyway. In less than a week, Friday has over 15 MILLION hits. Monday morning the blogosphere exploded not only with the video, but with the story: Rebecca is the product of the vanity publishing arm of the music industry, Ark Music Factory, which charges rich folks & the severely delusional $$$ for a “record deal” which is basically a song, studio production, SEVERE auto-tune and a professional music video. It’s pretty much churning out cheese-tastic 3rd rate pop songs by 13-year-olds. I have to say, I would have EATEN THIS SHIT UP when I was 13. If I’d had rich parents.

Friday by Rebecca Black

It doesn’t seem *that* funny at first… until you get to the random black rapper breakdown and the bridge wherein Rebecca informs us in which order the days of the week fall. Deep stuff.

There are SO MANY FREAKING PARODIES. Thus far I haven’t seen a *really* good one (just wait), but I did really enjoy this acoustic cover/summary:

“Obligatory black rapper time.” TOUCHE.

A fairly decent cover, actually:

And another one, just posted this morning:

All songs need a dubstep remix

And this gif makes me gigglesnort every time

Allegedly this is pink dancing girl’s Tumblr…

I feel bad for Rebecca Black, actually. I would have LOVED the whole “make a record/video!” thing at her age, and I give her props for choosing to sing something she could actually relate to (even with dumb lyrics) over a love song she felt she was too young for. Read this interview with her and her mother in The Daily Beast.

Update: Rebecca performing “acoustic” has just hit YouTube:

She’s a little pitchy, but not as God awful a singer as the auto-tune would have you think.

That’s right: Lena is following up her hoppy-boppy Liza Doolittle number with a down-tempo (but not a ballad) jazzy lyrical story piece, Taken By a Stranger. I can’t help but be struck by how NOT a Eurovision song it is. I can see myself tapping along to the cool jazz tones as I cruise down the Autobahn… but not live in the Eurovision grand finale. It doesn’t improve live:

Surely Germany had better options? I think so:

My vote would have been for “Maybe” or “I Like You’ or “I Never Thought It’d Start Again” (are these even the titles?). Basically anything but Taken By a Stranger. The thing is, it looks like Lena’s performance of that song was simply one of the better ones, even if it’s not a “Eurovisiony” song. As a piece of pop, I like it. But not for Eurovision.

Former Kentuckian & Oscar nominee Jennifer Lawrence will play Katniss

Huge news on The Hunger Games movie front: according to The Wrap’s exclusive report, we have our Katniss! She is 20-year-old Oscar nominee Jennifer Lawrence, and according to Variety, she beat out younger actresses Abigail Breslin & Hailee Steinfeld for the role.

Predictably, some people are upset, with Jezebel going to far as to cry white-washing. Considering the weight that The Hunger Games has in the YA community (and it’s potential to be the Second Coming of Harry Potter/Twilight as a film franchise), it’s understandable that people are super attached to the idea of “perfect casting.” Heck, I am too. But I have trouble taking issue with Lawrence’s casting, though I certainly understand the criticism.

Point One: her age. Jennifer is admittedly a bit old to play 16-year-old Katniss (17 in Catching Fire & Mockingjay), especially given the time it will take to film three movies — she’ll be close to 24 by the end. I’m pretty annoyed by 20-somethings playing teenagers, especially on TV high school dramas, and Lawrence’s age may throw people off. Part of the horror of The Hunger Games is that it’s children being thrown into the arenas and killing each other. The shock value would be higher if, say, 14-year-old Hailee Steinfeld were cast.

According to Variety, an older Katniss was of particular consideration due to how it would affect the casting of Peeta and Gale. It’s simply easier to find 20-something males to play opposite a 20-year-old female. Too true — it can’t be easy to find not one, but TWO 14-16-year-old boys of considerable talent and attractiveness (cause let’s be honest — Gale needs to be hot XD) to star opposite a younger actress. Plus, there’s the icky factor: if you cast an actor who is 17 or 18 (but can pass for younger), will people be creeped out by him macking on a 14-year-old?

Then, there are child labor laws to consider: my guess is Lion’s Gate will want to get The Hunger Games off the ground and finished rather swiftly, in time for a Spring 2012 release. Underage actors simply cannot work the same schedule as an over-18, and the nature of The Hunger Games — lots of actions, stunts, elaborate set-ups — will make for a lot of crazy work hours. If you cast not one, but THREE underage actors, you’re pretty much shooting your production schedule in the foot. Necessary if you’re filming Harry Potter (where it would have been obscene NOT to cast 11-year-olds in the first film), but in the industry it’s common to find 20-somethings playing 16.

Point Two: Jennifer Lawrence is too white/blonde. This is Jezebel’s issue, not mine, but since it’s come up, it’s worth discussing. Well, first of all: hair can be died. I will be PISSED if they keep Lawrence blonde, but hopefully they won’t be that daft, and will give her appropriately dark locks. I haven’t seen Winter’s Bone but from the brief scenes I have seen, she can definitely play a rough-around-the-edges kind of girl. We’ve all seen from the Oscars how stunningly gorgeous she is, so she can definitely handle Katniss’ big reveal. (that said, so could Hailee Steinfeld, who was *my* running favorite since I saw True Grit)

But Jezebel thinks that the casting of Lawrence is “white-washing” The Hunger Games. I disagree. They note the casting call notes for Katniss: “She should be Caucasian, between ages 15 and 20, who could portray someone ‘underfed but strong,’ and ‘naturally pretty underneath her tomboyishness,’” counter to the description of Katniss: “olive” skin, grey eyes, and dark hair.

Having olive skin doesn’t exclude you from being Caucasian! There are many cultures denoted as Caucasian who have an olive complexion — Greece comes to mind (and a Greek commenter on Jezebel spoke up about this, too). Now, does it stand to reason that in this murky future setting that our melting pot society would lead to a more multi-racial society? Sure. Hopefully! But that doesn’t mean that by NOT casting a multi-racial actress (as Jezebel would insist) that The Hunger Games are being “white-washed.” I’m pretty into figuring out where the Districts are, and the one District whose location is pretty indisputable is District 12, Katniss’ home. It’s in Appalachia, in a coal mining town, and can pretty much only be West Virginia or Kentucky. This is a VERY “Caucasian” region, and while Katniss likely has darker “olive” skin from her father, her mom and sister are described as fair and blond. Even if it’s 100, 200 years in the future, Jennifer Lawrence as Katniss from this area is NOT that far-fetched, or “white-washing” the story.

Point three: Lawrence is from Kentucky. Point three is in FAVOR of Lawrence, and following on the last point. Jennifer Lawrence is from Louisville. Aka: approximately 100-ish miles (or less) from District 12/Katniss’s home. Talk about casting an actress who will make the geography believable — not only will she be able to pull of a regional accent, but as a girl who grew up in Kentucky, you can bet Lawrence has a frame of reference for Appalachia and the coal mines that will lend an authenticity to the character. Frankly, this is probably why Lawrence was on the producer’s radar to begin with: Winter’s Bone has a similar setting, and her Oscar nomination shows that she can certainly handle the dramatic material.

14-year-old Hailee Steinfeld is a fan favorite for Katniss

Point Four: but I wanted them to cast Hailee Steinfeld! (and other casting speculation) Me too. Hailee has been getting substantial buzz since True Grit came out, and the 14-year-old impressed everybody (including heavyweight co-star Matt Damon) with her acting chops. She’s age appropriate for Katniss (she should be pushing 15 by the time production is under way), and has the look — dark hair, hazel eyes (close to enough to gray) and she has the “grittiness” (ha) the role demands. Steinfeld also had a Cinderella moments at the Oscars — she was arguably the best dressed female, and proved she can pull off stunning beauty AND tom-boyishness. The perfect Katniss!

To be honest, I’m still slightly disappointed that she wasn’t selected… BUT Hailee may not have been ready for Katniss. She was really excellent in True Grit, and a real casting find for the Coen brothers, but if an older actress has played the same character the same way, would they have received such accolades? The notable aspect of Steinfeld’s performance was how good it was for a young teenager. Hailee could have grown into Katniss, but with the casting of Lawrence, The Hunger Games producers are saying they want polish, right out of the gate. They don’t want to slow production down with under-age stars, or take a chance on an actress with just one, albeit fantastic role under her belt.

On the bright side, just because she’s not Katniss, doesn’t mean Hailee won’t be in the movie. Chloe Moretz (Kick Ass; Let Me In) was also considered for the role, and despite my abject fangirling of her and her talent, she wouldn’t have been right for Katniss either. BUT how good would Chloe be as one of other tributes? The long list of talented actresses who read for Katniss would all be good candidates for other tributes: Kaya Scodelario (UK Skins), Malese Jow (The Vampire Diaries), Saoirse Ronan (Atonement), Emily Browning (A Series of Unfortunate Events), Lynsey Fonseca (Nikita).

I would love to see Saoirse Ronan, Chloe Moretz or Malese Jow (need she be a redhead?) as Foxface, and I think Emily Browning would make a good Glimmer (w/ a blond wig). Also, if they’re aging Katniss up, Primrose may be aged up, as well — Ronan would be a good fit for her, if that were the case. Thinking ahead to Catching Fire & Mockingjay, Lynsey Fonseca or Kaya Scodelario would make good Johannas — especially Kaya, who I could see pretending to be weak and then kicking *ss in the end. Hopefully they will find a talented, age-appropriate unknown to play Rue — one part where I hope they don’t white-wash.

***

But let’s move on from any disappointment and embrace our new Katniss. The producers have shown with her casting that they want to make a real movie, not a teen flick (can we just agree that casting Abigail Breslin would have been a catastrophic disaster?), with an accomplished, Oscar-nominated actress.This is no KStew/RPatz ala Twilight.

The more important matter at hand: buzz says Alex Pettyfer might be cast as Peeta. Let’s rally behind how TERRIBLE this idea is, and give Jennifer a break. Alex for Gale, *maybe*, but sweet, loveable Peeta cannot be played by a British heartthrob who reportedly is a giant d-bag IRL.

Who is your ideal Peeta? Gale? Who would you cast as the other Tributes?

That’s right, the X Factor duo who killed Under Pressure (with Ice Ice Baby, no less) are representing Ireland with the track “Lipstick.” If you’ll recall from X Factor, Jedward have a ridiculous name, negligible singing talent and a helluva lot of stage presence and likeability. They’re twins, they have crazy hair and they are so ridiculous, they are amusing.

“Am I headed for a car crash?” Um, possibly.

It’s got all the hallmarks of a crap Eurovision song: twin gimmick, talk-singing/shouting, over-blown backing track, talented backing singers to cover Jedward’s voices and the huge potential to be the act that Europe Just Doesn’t Get. Jedward is a household name in the UK, but elsewhere…? On the other hand, if they pull off a really entertaining live show, it could break them out into the larger European market.

The song itself is mediocre. On the plus side, it sounds like a Girls Aloud track, but to the negative, the live performance of it is the equivalent of ramming your head against a concrete wall repeatedly. STOP SHOUTING AT ME JEDWARD!

Slovakia has also got on the twin train, with the aptly titled duo TWiiNS, performing I’m Still Alive.

TWiiNS surprisingly rise above the gimmick, and I’m Still Alive is a catchy, singable power ballad. I can see this one flying past the semis and placing well in the grand final, with massive potential for playback during every “triumphant/sad” montage on a competition reality show in the future. Top Model franchise: take note.  Thus far, it’s my favorite ballad-y song. The “yay Slovakia!” & “yay babies!” footage in the official video are a nice touch.

That said, I can’t find any live clips of the song, which can often be the true test of a Eurovision entry — a polished single & video doesn’t guarantee a good live rendering of a song. Am keen to see the twins perform it live.

Twins gimmick score: TWiiNS: 1; Jedward: 0.

Well, it’s TOTAL BULLSHIT.

A LOT of things taste as good as thin feels, and better. (hellooooo bacon) This is how I know my new Weight Watchers leader is the one for me – she feels the same way. She even threw in the same “bullshit.” SOULMATES.

The thing is, when you have food issues, mantras like Ms. Moss’s ode to anorexic chain smokers do nothing but make us feel out of control, guilty and fatter than ever. The gorgeous supermodel is telling me I shouldn’t be enjoying this slice of cheesecake more than being a size six (or four, or two). WHAT’S WRONG WITH ME?!?! Nothing – you enjoy food. How else do you think you ended up overweight, and Moss ended up an underweight poster child of the size zero revolution?

Yet we see this phrase pop up in different iterations, over and over again. Celebrity loses 80 pounds. NOTHING TASTES AS GOOD AS BEING IN SHAPE FEELS! You’re feeling discouraged after binge-eating Indian curry and naan/ice cream/burger & fries, etc., and someone “helpfully” intones: NOTHING TASTES AS GOOD AS THIN FEELS (this one makes you want to gorge your eyes out with a spork from guilt). Fitness guru tries to inspire you to work harder (whether in real life on on reality TV *coughbiggestloser*). NO FOOD IS WORTH WHAT IT FEELS TO BE THIN.

The people saying this can’t possibly have ever been an overweight food obsessive. We fat people (and formerly fat people!) know. We commiserate with each other over how FREAKING GOOD some things taste. They tempt us. Lure us in. Make us lose control. Leave us with equal parts intense guilt and glib satisfaction after the fact. The “Others” think that fat people are lazy and weak, ugly labels that makes us even less apt to admit that we are out of control when it comes to food. We embrace guilt-making mantras like Moss’ and in turn feel really bad about ourselves when we, inevitably, give in.

Food guilt just makes it worse

I say, let’s embrace our dark side and shout, loudly: SOME THINGS TASTE WAY BETTER THAN SKINNY FEELS. Let’s put it out there, and let people know what they’re missing! Is it totally embarrassing that we let food control us? Yes. But the longer you stay in denial about the power — and allure — food holds over you, the longer you’ll stay fat and/or on a perpetual diet and/or end up THIN but completely miserable.

This is perhaps one of the most challenging aspects of weight loss transformation for many of us — admitting that you are out of control of your situation, and that the sheer will power everyone expects you to have over yourself and food because — look! they do! — doesn’t exist. We like to pretend it does, and can often manage it for long periods of time, or in certain challenging situations. But the second there’s a set-back — a midnight cupcake binge, a Superbowl chicken wing extravaganza, skipping the gym for weeks or months at a time — we chastise ourselves, bemoan our lack of SHEER WILL POWER! and feel like failures. Then we emotionally eat our unhappiness, most often with NON-TASTY but convenient food, which makes us feel even worse. The dark cycle of fat begins a new, diet abandoned.

One of the biggest challenges — and breakthroughs — for me was to STOP FEELING GUILTY ABOUT EATING. Yes, I have will power to a certain extent, but the moments where it fails me doesn’t make me a failure. A certain self-awareness about eating is necessary – you can’t let yourself off the hook indulging all the time. But in the “everything in moderation” moments where you indulge and — God forbid! –  actually enjoy the taste of something MORE THAN YOU WANT TO BE THIN — if you guilt trip yourself? It becomes a negative-feedback loop of doom. Trying to police yourself on eating culminates in your eating more than you ever would if you had a healthier, less-guilty attitude towards food. It’s difficult to accept. It seems so wrong. Counter-intuitive. What do you mean, I shouldn’t feel guilty about eating ice cream? Ice cream is… bad.

Reprogram yourself. Eating ice cream is not bad. Eating a pint of ice cream in one sitting? Yeah, that’s probably bad (but even that you should be able to let go of, in time). But if you let go of the guilt of eating a normal serving, heck – maybe even TWO, of your favorite, super delicious “better than thin feels” ice cream and then actually eat that – normal serving size – on a regular basis, you may find your overwhelming, emotional need to devour an entire carton diminishes.

Then again, you also have to know yourself, and realize we don’t have an automatic reset button. You’re not going to go from being a Ben & Jerry’s pint-devouring monster to daintily eating four spoonfuls overnight. Sometimes you need to completely go cold turkey on a “red light” item/trigger food whilst you reprogram your guilt feelings away from the food. It works differently for everyone, but the fact remains: guilt over eating usually leads to MORE EATING.

Most importantly, once you admit to yourself that, dammit, some food IS worth it, it becomes easier to define how much food is NOT worth it. All food is not created equal, and the guilt complex that is foisted upon the unhappy fats for eating leads to this reverse landslide where you consume any and all food, desperately, because you’re bad anyway, so who cares what it tastes like? Though it may feel counter-intuitive, trust me on this: admit that you like eating some things more than the illustrious idea of being thin, deal with it, and then begin the long and arduous journey to dropping your food guilt. We may never approach food “normally,” but we sure as hell can approach it with less guilt.

First up Norway, going in a very different musical direction than in year’s past, with “Haba Haba”:

At first I was appalled — there was no melody! She was talk-singing! But as the song developed, so did the tune and the flavor. The “Haba Haba” chorus is toe-tappingly catchy, easy to learn and had me singing along quickly.

It’s lovely to see Norway celebrating diverse culture — singer Stella Mwangi is Norwegian-Kenyan (her family moved to Norway in 1991, when she was 5). The African-vibe of the song will bring something fresh and different to the Eurovision precedings, and I can see the song being a real crowd pleaser.

Despite early buzz that Red One was producing one of the Swedish song hopefuls, the golden ticket went to Eric Saade with his dancefloor ready tune “Popular”:

First of all, Eric looks like a Swedish Taylor Lautner, with more hair, no? After last year’s folky-soulful song “This Is My Life” failed to make it past the semis, Sweden decided to play it safe with an uptempo number targeted towards teen girls. Popular is full of inane lyrics & messaging, but has a very catchy trilling electropop chorus line. I’m a sucker for minor chord progressions, and the shift between the first chorus to the second verse was aurally most excellent. Against my better judgement: I like it.

And who doesn’t love a vaguely homoerotic dance crew & an overly dramatic “mirror/glass breaking” breakdown? Right?

Finland is going for soft and strummy… and ecofriendly? Well, THAT’S slightly unexpected. Da Da Daam by Paradise Oskar:

I am sadly underwhelmed, Finland. It’s slow, generic and kind of confusing. Is the world ready for/interested in an ecofriendly love song to the planet? I’ve been wrong before, but this doesn’t sound like a semi-final cracker to me.

Denmark had a real corker last year, one of my top two — Denmark or Romania should have won (sorry Germany, but no Liza Doolittle pronunciation for me).  This year they’ve selected “A Friend In London” to perform New Tomorrow. Apt band title, because it sounds like a mid-90s British boyband/indie band number:

It’s cute, but doesn’t particularly excite me. It’s a perfect song choice for a romcom “the boy and girl get together” montage, but they’ll have to beef up their acoustics and live performance to make a dent at Eurovision.

I think Norway and Sweden have potential top-ten placers, with Norway possibly sneaking in for another victory.

This year’s Eurovision theme seems to be “srs pop bzns.” After a pretty embarrassing showing last year with “That Sounds Good To Me,” the UK has ditched the idea of getting song-writers who were big in the 80s and unknown TV talent show finds. Instead, they’ve got the “weren’t they once a boyband?” group Blue to perform for them — Americans you might “know” them from their brief cameo in Love, Actually. Apparently Take That and Westlife were unavailable, so we’ve got Blue singing a techno-lite pop song thing called “I Can.” Here is the group performing on the Graham Norton show this past weekend:

It’s somewhere between “not total shit” and “maybe it will grow on me?” At the very least, it’s not being sung by a group with the personality of a wet dishrag, so that’s something. The vocals are a bit pitchy in places, but the general vibe is undeniably “Eurovisiony.”

But I don’t know, Blue. You’re all like “I Can” and I’m all like “yeahhhh, I’m not sure.”

Bonus: official video

link: Tumblr post (if you’re on Tumblr, follow/reblog me! Not all updates will end up on Mavenity)