New York Times writer Cathy Horyn gives us a first person peek at the Met Gala from last night in her article entitled ‘Fashion Forward in Comfort at the Met Gala.’
Horyn gives us a look at what the fashion scene was like at the Gala last night. She pours every bit of sarcasm, personality and criticism into her writing about what the atmosphere was like and what all the celebrities were wearing.
Even though it is a personal and opinion based story of what she observed there, Horyn still manages to get in direct quotes from celebrities such as Emma Stone and designers such as Alber Elbaz of Lanvin. The quotes were just brief comments on what Stone was wearing and what it was made from but they still provide credibility no matter how brief.
Horyn continues to describe with great detail the stuffiness of the room and the tightly packed tables and how all the women and their big and lavish dresses were impossible to avoid and how one could spot the athletes in their dark tailored suits. Horyn’s great use of descriptive dialogue easily makes the reader visualize being there and is a great example of SHOWING and not TELLING.
New York Times writer Jon Pareles, gives us a review of Irish songwriter Julie Feeney in his article entitled “Theatrical on the shell, Intricate at the Core, Julie Feeney at the Irish Arts Center.”
Pareles does an examination of Feeney and her unique style of music. He starts the article out by comparing her appearance to that of eccentric performer’s like Lady Gaga but then diverges by pointing out that her look does not reflect her style.
Pareles goes on to elaborate through praiseful words of how Feeney uses the study of music and sound and psychoanalysis to write and sing music with philosophical meaning.
After attending Feeney’s show, Pareles lets the reader know the kinds of themes and inspirations Feeney uses in her work. He uses descriptiveness to show the readers how mesmerizing Feeney is on stage as well and describes her performance as a ‘blur of chamber concert and theater piece.’
Ultimately though, Pareles makes this article on Feeney news worthy because Feeney is playing a 10-night stand at the Irish Arts Center through May 6th.
I love Jimmy Kimmel. He is one of my favorite late night talk show hosts, so I was thrilled to hear that he was going to be the speaker at the White House Correspondents Dinner this year.
In The New York Times article entitled, “No Pressure: Just Make Obama Laugh,” writer Bill Carter talks to Kimmel about the upcoming dinner and how he is handling the pressure.
Carter also makes sure to cite dinners and hosts from the past, such as Seth Meyers and Steven Colbert, to provide a history to the event and to use as example for Kimmel to learn and stem from.
Kimmel talks about the pressure he feels but how he isn’t that nervous. Carter also included quotes from Meyers and Colbert after their respective dinners. Carter focuses on how Colbert had an awkward experience because he spoke during the Bush Administration and after the event many felt that he had been rude and overly critical of the administration. This information guided Kimmel to talk about what he was afraid the dinner would do to him if he slipped up.
Carter goes on to talk about how this dinner could launch Kimmel’s career. He cites Kimmel’s credible resume and explains why he is a perfect candidate for hosting the entertainment at this year’s event.
Overall the article was an interview and a bit of a preview for what is to come and how Kimmel is feeling about the event. As a fan of Kimmel myself, I don’t doubt that it will be entertaining.
New York Times staff writer, Janet Maslin, reviews a book for the NYTIMES section called ‘Books of the Time,” called ‘The Presidents Club.’
The book is writer by Time Magazine editors Nancy Gibbs and Michael Duffy. Maslin opens up the review with an analysis of the phrase, “the presidents club,” with a historical context. She cites jokes made about with the phrase by past presidents such as Hoover and Truman.
Maslin book review cleverly blends together the summary of the book with brief and broad statements of the general idea of the novel. She states that the book is generally an analysis of how the Presidents of this nation have a unique pass-the-baton type of relationship.
Maslin talks about how Gibbs and Duffy do a good job with the various pictures included in the novel and describing the how every president comes into office thinking he’ll do better and make right what was done before him, but in reality things never turn out as planned.
Maslin criticizes the novel though for focusing too much on specific president’s conundrums and being diffuse in general. Maslin criticizes how the subject matter being written about easy get tangled and says that even though the idea for the book is brilliant its delivery was just a tad flat.
Maslin did appreciate the animated knowledge Gibbs & Duffy displayed in regards to more recent presidents and as stated before Maslin did like the intimate photos shown within the book. But overall Maslin seems to give the book a positive-ish feedback but is critical of its delivery.
I have been a fan of the Hunger Games series long before it became a pop culture phenomenon, so I was surprised with the sudden explosion in popularity of the franchise with the release of the film.
According to the New York Times article entitled, “‘Hunger Games’ Tickets Sales Set Record, “writer Brooks Barnes reports on how the Hunger Games hit the box office jack pot its opening weekend.
Barnes doesn’t just discuss the financial box office success of the film, but delves deeper into WHY the film franchise is doing so well and receiving so much positive feedback. Barnes point out that with the end of a classic franchise like Harry Potter, audiences were looking for something new to delve into.
Barnes goes even further into highlighting the smart advertising and marketing tactics of the movie’s distributor, Lionsgate. Barnes clearly did research on people involved with the film Production Company and people on Wall Street who are all tied to why The Hunger Games was such a financial success. Barnes reveals that since the series has such a solid following Wall Street is looking to invest in it to earn back some revenue.
Barnes uses one direct quote within the article by a credible source who is an editor for a movie site, but aside from that she just mentions relevant people with valid information.
Overall, Barnes took a mundane article about the successful ticket sales of The Hunger Games and turned it into a analysis and report on what the future looks like for the franchise on a financial and cultural scale.