Tumgik
#rip alison but I’m built different
spineless-lobster · 9 months
Text
OKAY OKAY I JUST WATCHED THE CHRISTMAS EP HERE ARE MY THOUGHTS:
I didn’t cry but I did feel wildly nauseous sooooo… I think I’m gonna cry like a week from now when it hits me lmao
I think the ending is nice. Like I like how in s1 they wanted mike and alison out because they hated them but now they wanted them to leave because they love them. And I think the ghosts will be able to cope with a hotel, I mean they’ve had NOTHING to do for decades and centuries, having a bustling hotel (and presumably their own dedicated area where they can chill) will be good for them. Pat can come up with so many new club ideas, cap and fanny can gossip about the people, thomas and kitty and trail behind people, julian and robin can still mess around. Who knows, maybe pat’s family or maybe rachel come and stay for a few nights for whatever reason.
Of course they’ll miss alison but she’ll visit them often, they’re family, that’s what you do. Do I wish alison stayed? Of course I do, but I think every party involved is happy with their lives/afterlives.
Someone mentioned that it was a very mature way to end the show, and I agree. It’s very bittersweet and I completely understand why most people are upset with it, but I think it really shows how the ghosts grew from very selfish people to committing an extremely selfless act.
I’ll make more posts about certain moments and so on but right now I’m off to listen to the podcast episode!
21 notes · View notes
honeybee-babe · 5 years
Text
Press Conference Part 4
Part 4 of my collab fic with @hargreevesstyles featuring allergic Klaus snz and Luther snz!!!!
Twenty minutes later, Klaus sauntered into the break room, looking very disheveled, yet very content.
“Klaus, where the hell have you been?” Diego demanded.
Klaus just winked at him and sat back down in his spot on the couch next to Luther, and leaned back with his legs spread far apart. Diego got his answer when Maya came in from the other door with her hair down and her blouse no longer tucked into her skirt. But still smiling from ear to ear.
“Sorry about the delay! Technical difficulties.” She cleared her throat; did her voice sound a little hoarse? “Okay, Vanya, you’re up next! Are you ready?”
The smallest Hargreeves nodded and wordlessly followed her out of the room.
“Whoo!” Klaus leaned back in his chair. “That was a -hih!-hihh’enNGTshiehh! snf! That was a good interview!”
Luther turned to face Klaus. “What the hell took you so long?” He demanded.
Alison scoffed, “Isn’t it obvious. He fucked her!”
“Hey! Watch your crude language! We m-hih! HhheNXTshyuu! Hh’nkgt-n’kt! We made love,” Klaus grinned, earning a high five from Diego.
“Whatever you did you reek of her perfume, can you please move over there?”
Klaus joked, “If I have to suffer then you have to suffer with me.”
“You’re the one who made the conscious decision to fuck her! I don’t want her or that perfume anywhere near me!” Luther was beginning to get pissed off with his brother again. He knew how badly this stupid perfume was affecting the both of them yet he went out of his way to get coated in it.
Allison said, “Seriously, Klaus, out of all of the girls here you decided to fuck the one covered in perfume?”
“There were some cute boys here too, might have to take another break with one of them. There was a really cute brunette working the coffee station,” Klaus noted. He ripped a tissue out of the box on the table and stifled five sneezes into it. He groaned afterward. “This sucks.”
Luther snapped, “You don’t get to complain! You put this on yourself, now can you please move away from me like I asked you to!”
“But I’m so comfy-”
“Jesus fucking Christ, I’ll move then-”
Suddenly, Allison’s voice interrupted him. “Klaus, I heard a rumor, that you really want to sit on the other side of the room and stop antagonizing Luther.”
Klaus’ eyes washed blue and he stood up wordlessly, moving himself to a chair far away from Luther. He seemed to have nothing to say now.
“Hh’eNGXTshiew! HhhiNGK’shuh!” Luther sneezed into his elbow. He was running out of tissues from Allison’s travel pack and he really didn’t want to deal with any flack from Klaus if he had to take some from his box. Although, Klaus had offered them kindly earlier when they were waiting outside.
Part of him wanted to be annoyed with Klaus just because that’s what he was used to during his whole entire childhood, but he understood Klaus more now. Luther didn’t feel as far away from Number Four as he used to when they were kids. He couldn’t say the same for Klaus, but he thought there was at least some level of it between the two of them. They seemed to be on opposite teams, growing up. Klaus went against anything and everything that Reginald said, and Luther took every word that came from their dear old dad to heart.
It was no wonder they were so different several years later. Still, there were odd things that made them the same. Like how they were both allergic to the same perfume and other oddities of the sort.
Luther was pulled out of his thoughts by the sound of Klaus sneezing again. Luther was better off because he had been without Maya for quite a while and the leftover perfume on Klaus wasn’t enough to give him too bad of a tickle, but he was still irritated. He could feel the congestion in his head thicken, the pressure was still getting worse. His head also hurt from how strong the perfume was, it was overly floral and Luther could feel the chemicals fuzzing up his brain.
The twenty minutes for Vanya’s interview felt like an hour to him, but to the others, it felt like five minutes.
But no, it had taken exactly twenty minutes for Vanya and Maya to return, only for Maya to beckon them back to the big set. Luther was complaining about his headache to Allison when Klaus overheard.
Klaus didn’t have a headache. He was high enough that every sneeze felt a little better than normal but he wasn’t feeling the other symptoms yet. He didn’t mind the congestion and he loved how relieved he felt when he blew his nose.
“Hihihh'engtshieww! God, don’t you guys just love sneezing?” He asked. He had popped another pill while no one was paying attention in the break room. “It feels so good to just get it out of your body.”
Luther rolled his eyes. “Only you would say that right now.”
“I’m serious! Just…gasping for breath and some sort of relief and you literally lose control as it comes out of you. Yeah, it can get a little annoying but it just feels so satisfying and boy am I one for satisfaction,” Klaus ranted.
Over in the middle, Vanya looked uncomfortable as ever. She had her head down and she was trying her hardest not to listen to her brother talk about the thing she was most attracted to.  And Luther looked agitated. He hated sneezing, and not just because it often made his congestion worse rather than giving him any sort of relief. From his perspective, not only was it a moment of weakness, but it was a temporary loss of control over his body which, given his abilities, gave him a lot of anxiety.
“Why have you two been sneezing so much? The pollen’s not too bad around here,” Maya asked.
Diego rolled his eyes at her ignorance. “It’s your fuckin’ perfume!” He spoke firmly.
Klaus gasped. “Is it? I had no idea!” He lied through his teeth.
Maya had a delayed reaction. She brought her hands up to her mouth. “Is that why you’ve been sneezing more when you’re closer to me? Oh my god! That’s so funny, I can’t believe it. Who would’ve thought!”
“Is she–are you fuckin’ serious right now?” Diego asked. “You did not notice at all? Nothing seemed a little odd to you?”
“Diego’s right, how could you have missed that? It’s not like your perfume isn’t noticeable?” Allison’s voice had a dark tone. She was very angry.
Luther begged, “Please, Allison, let it go. It’s okay. We’ll be fine, let’s just wrap this up so we can all–hih! Hh’eTSHiew! Hhhn’gxt–go home.”
At this, Allison rolled her eyes but stayed silent. Diego scoffed a bit at how easy it was to dissuade her. “Wow.”
“Diego, it’s okay,” Klaus said. He gave Diego a calming look and a small nod toward the camera.
Surprisingly, Diego took it well. He cooled off. He most likely knew that the cameras were rolling and everything he said was being captured. Ever since a young age when The Umbrella Academy had first started, Reginald had always taught them to be poised and professional on camera. They had to hide emotions after missions when they were featured on the news. They had to keep themselves contained when Five disappeared, and when Ben died. They were always in the public’s eye and they knew when to draw the line.
“I’m sorry, I was really distracted, I was so starstruck. I didn’t even think about it,” Maya said, sounding sincere for maybe the first time since Diego had spoken to her.
He was about to respond but a sharp sneeze aimed into Klaus’ elbow cut him off.
“Sorry…about that,” Klaus murmured. “didn’t mean to ruin the moment.”
“There was no moment to ruin,” Diego answered quickly, and Maya shifted uncomfortably in her seat. “What are we even back here for anyway?”
“Just closing thoughts! Any last things you wanted to say, it’ll only take a few minutes,” Maya assured, a little bit of her bubbly personality coming back now. “It might be nice if you all left a message for Five. You know, so he might see it if he’s still out there.”
“You think we haven’t tried that?” Diego sneered.
“That’s a great idea!” Klaus clapped his hands. “hhn’inxtshiehh! I’ll start.” He proceeded to give what was essentially a very “heartfelt” plea for their missing brother to please reach out to him, whether he was still alive or not. He had to restart three times. The first time he turned to the side to stifle an itchy trio. The second time Luther turned to his side to stifle a congested double, amplifying the pressure in his head and also ruining the take. The third time, everyone laughed at Klaus’ terrible acting. Except for Luther, who squinted his eyes shut tight at the loud noise. But the final product ended up pretty convincing, and Klaus’ leaned back in his seat with a grin and a very liquid sniffle.
Maya decided it would be easiest to go down the line in the opposite order since they’d started with Klaus. Klaus was now too high to stifle his sneezes, and Luther’s stifles were getting progressively less successful. Which meant a lot of ruined takes.
It took about twenty minutes for them to get through their three siblings’ messages for their brother. Diego’s was cold and stoic, Vanya’s was gentle and genuine, and Allison’s was grandiose and just as overly emotional as Klaus’ (though hers was actually pretty well-acted).
The last person to go was Luther. His head was so clogged up that every sneeze just built more and more pressure. He felt like he was suffocating in the cloud of perfume as he sat down next to Maya, who didn’t seem to care or feel any sympathy for him (it was all reserved for Klaus). She gestured to the camera and Luther let out two hard sneezes into his elbow. He sniffled and then started to speak.
“Snf, Five, if you’re out there we need you back. We worked well together as a team, but even more than that you’re our family,” Luther started strong but his words were clouded by congestion, while his throat was starting to host a dull ache. “You didn’t deserve to go completely off of the grid when you were just a curious kid trying to figure something out.” His voice cracked on the last word. He gave another sniffle and pressed his finger against his nose to try and quell the tickle until he finished.
“You’re a little stuffed up there, bud,” Klaus said. “It’s kinda hard to understand.”
Diego gave a quick laugh. “You’re one to talk there, Klaus.”
At Klaus’ words, Luther’s cheeks turned pink. He asked, “Do I have to start over? Should I?”
Maya shook her head, “We can clip different pieces together if you want. Don’t worry, you weren’t completely unintelligible.”
Her phrasing made it hard for Luther to tell if she was comforting him or delivering a cleverly disguised insult.
He blew his nose, cleared his throat, and continued, “Five, you deserved to experience the world with us as we grew up and figured it out. I would say that if I could go back and convince you to stay I would, but time travel is what messed this all up in the first place.”
That was about all he could give while being completely meaningful yet not making an utter fool of himself even more than he felt he already had.
He nodded at Maya to let her know he was done and he ducked down into a tissue. “Hh’ngksHIEW!” He tried to stifle the first one but the pain that seared through his skull instantaneously was enough to convince him to let it out. “Hhh’ehhKSHIEW!”
“Bless you,” chorused Allison, Maya, and Vanya.
Klaus was in his own world and Diego didn’t really feel like talking.
“If you don’t like it, we can always scrap your parts and leave them out. Only if you think it’s too hard to understand,” Maya said.
Allison rolled her eyes. “Remind me, what was the reason why they keep sneezing?”
That shut Maya up and slapped an embarrassed blush onto her cheeks.
“Hey, stop being rude to Maya! It’s not hihhh! It’s not her fault!” Klaus defended his hookup, then immediately snapped forward into a tissue. “HihhihhiECKshyuu! Hihheh'ingxtshiew! Heh'atshyuehh!”
The fact that he said it wasn’t her fault absolutely sent Diego over the edge. He laughed coldly, “Seriously, Klaus? Are you hearing yourself right now?”
“She didn’t know! How was she supposed to know?!”
“Stop yelling!” Luther commanded from the other side of the couch
“No one’s fucking yelling,” Diego hissed back, and then abruptly raised his voice. “THIS IS YELLING.” Vanya flinched next to him in response. Luther winced and pinched the bridge of his nose.
“Really, Diego?” Vanya spoke up for the first time since her goodbye to Five, though her voice was still just a fraction of everyone else’s volume. Allison reached across her and slapped Diego on the arm.
“That was so uncalled for. Grow up.” Then she turned her attention back to Luther. “Are you okay?” He started to nod, but the gesture was cut off by a stifled sneeze, which seemed to push him over the edge. With a small sigh of defeat, he shook his head “no” instead.
Allison turned back to the group. “Are we good to go? I think he needs to get out of here.” She stood up beside Luther and gestured for him to follow suit before anyone could respond.
“Oh, yeah, you’re good to go!” Maya piped up.
“Sorry,” Luther smiled sheepishly, though he was still squinting, “Thanks for having us.”
“Oh, thank you two for sharing your stories with me! It was touching and I really enjoyed talking with you!”
“That makes one of us,” Diego grumbled under his breath, then yelped slightly when Klaus pinched him on the arm.
“I’d give you a goodbye hug but I don’t think that’s such a good idea for you, Luther. Allison, do you-” she cut herself off when she realized Allison had started leading Luther out the door without turning back.
The door slammed audibly, just as Klaus’ breath hitched wildly.
“Hih..hih…hiehehhEDSchiew-nxgt-hi'ishyuu! Hihhheng'ktshiuu! Hihhihenhh….ihh? Hihihh'iGKTshyuu! Whoo, my nose just won’t quit today!” He was out of breath after all of them.
“Klaus, it’s getting bad again” Diego condemned. “I think it’s time for you to-”
“Wait!” Diego held a finger out to Diego, his other hand still hovering in front of his face. His breath hitched as if he wasn’t already out of breath already. “Hihh..? Ihh? HAH!… Oh fuck, the tickle won’t go away. You know when you can feel it -heh!- right there but it just won’t go over the edge?” Vanya suddenly shot up.
“I think it’s time for me to go, too,” she said quietly, and shot Maya a quick wave. “Thanks for having us.” And then she bolted out of the room. Diego ignored her.
“Bye Van! Love you!” Klaus called out hoarsely, wheezing in between words.
“Klaus,” Diego’s tone was stern. “It’s time to go.”
Klaus frowned, “I don’t want to go yet.”
“We have a shower downstairs!” Maya blurted.
“And?”
“Shush, Diego! I think I know what she’s getting at,” Klaus grinned.
Diego rolled his eyes and crossed his arms. “No way. I’m not waiting here while you two have shower sex. Come on, Klaus we’re going back to my place.”
Before Diego could grab Klaus and yank him out of the building Klaus flashed him his puppy dog eyes. He begged, “Please, I-I think it would help if I showered now, too. Your place isn’t the closest and my lungs are feeling kind of tight…”
“Fine. But hurry!” Diego gave in. He always gave in.
“Goody!” Klaus clapped. “We’ll be back soon!”
They were not, in fact, back soon. Klaus came upstairs an hour later, giggly, relaxed and exhausted (yet finally sneeze-free). If Diego hadn’t fallen asleep waiting for him, he would have read him the riot act. Instead, they walked back to Diego’s place, both yawning and rubbing their eyes the whole way.
13 notes · View notes
spamzineglasgow · 5 years
Text
Bon Iver’s hauntological i,i (William Fleming)
Tumblr media
Image Copyright: Bon Iver / Jagjaguwar 
In this essay, William Fleming takes a detailed look at bon iver’s new album, i,i: through acid communist hauntology to oedipal melancholia and the future’s cybernetic fracture. 
> This week I’ve been reading Mark Fisher and listening to Bon Iver’s new album on repeat so I combined the two.
-
> Mark Fisher, in his Ghosts of My Life (2014), laments the dearth of creativity in popular music after the turn of the century, the loss of experimentation and of hearing something New and Radical, and the persistent replication of past methods, sounds and images. Fisher was no Adorno though (I don’t think anyway?). His essays are emotive and developed from a deep desire for a compassionate politics; Ghosts evokes the pathos of his seminal Capitalist Realism (2009). One of the key themes associated with his work on pop culture, is the use of the Derridean term ‘Hauntology’: the haunted ontology of futures that never came to be, the spectral disturbance of time and place as the possibility of political becoming dissipates. As he details in Ghosts, Fisher initially used hauntology as a genre-defining term for music. He identified artists which were 'suffused with an overwhelming melancholy; and they were preoccupied with the way in which technology materialised memory', this results in us being made 'conscious of the playback systems’ and of ‘the difference between analogue and digital’, 'hovering' out of reach behind the media’. Fisher uses this conceptual framework to analyse a raft of musicians and their work but there is a consistent emphasis on the political narratives of class and race which shape these cultural offshoots.
> Despite being one of the biggest records of this summer – and thus perhaps a bit bait for me to discuss? – Bon Iver’s i,i bares all the hallmarks of the hauntological genre: melancholia, the clash of digital and analogue, anachronism, the suggestion of political solidarity, artistic experimentation.
-
> First a confession: I first listened to Bon Iver because, in 2011, there was a girl on twitter I fancied who posted a video to Birdy’s Skinny Love. Birdy’s rendition is a wisp of a song, sad and grasping and completely lost on a shallow sixteen-year old and probably rightfully so. Failing to select the next song, I’m guessing Bon Iver’s original version played. For the first time I felt I’d discovered adult Sad Music. None of the ghd straightened, dip-died, angst-ridden emo tunes I’d gotten into a few years prior to impress my first girlfriend; or the one ballad acting as the penultimate track on one of the indie-rock albums from my older brother’s excessive collection. (- Does anyone know how to recycle these properly?). I would wallow in performative sadness playing immediately gratuitous and instantly gratifying XBOX games, quickly repeating the heartbeating guitar of Lump Sum on For Emma, Forever Ago or the wails of Holocene from Bon Iver, Bon Iver as I pined for my yet-to-be second girlfriend.
> I went off Bon Iver for a few years: these days, the quiet acoustic melancholia of these first two albums doesn’t fit with any aspirational sense of masculinity of mine. Being a man and being non-toxically emotional isn’t about listening to acoustic guitars and barely audible snares whilst you lie sulking in your room or on the drizzled walk to the library or job you hate. Instead it’s about communication, solidarity and empathy – ‘I’d be happy as hell, if you stayed for tea’. And so, when 22, A Million came out I was into it. Everyone thought it was a bit shit the first time few times they listened to it but this gave me cover to pretentiously purvey that they just didn’t get it and listen to it over and over. It was still the same anguished voice of Justin Vernon – but it was finally coming to life. Revived through stretched synthesizers, neologisms which made you question the contributors on A-Z Lyrics, and deconstructed bass. The piano riff on 33 “God” interrupted by alien helium-infused voices and the stammering, looping saxophone of 45 are still highlights. Listening now, 22, A Million initiated the hauntology of Bon Iver.
-
> At times, i,i feels like Bon Iver’s latest album is a playback of their first album, but one done through a signal sent by an analogue walkie-talkie found on the abandoned spaceship from Alien: Isolation – itself maybe the most harrowing video-game I’ve ever played, one which is played in constant anticipation of being found. Listen to the intermittent signal of Holyfields,: the bleeps and radio fuzz a beacon we sent out into space, only for it to sporadically and hauntingly talk back at us – a cultural SOS signal.  
> i,i is the same guitar riffs from albums one and two but cybernetically fractured through time. The same syncopated kick drum but ripped out from the mid noughties and dumped in a Iain M. Banks novel or an episode in Love, Death + Robots. Fisher, quoting Derrida, quoting Hamlet: ‘the time is out of joint’. In these time fractures, it’s not just the music’s original location which is torn into the future, but also objective fragments of past culture: the sax (Sh’Diah) and violin strings (Faith) torn from eras when politics and music were still intertwined.
> The first track on the album, Yi, is garbage. But it is orbital astro-garbage – a notable anthropocenic feedback loop! – sitting uncomfortably at the stratosphere of an album which explicitly reflects on ecological destruction. Yi’s inaudible conversation and the ‘Are you recording, Trevor?’ set it up as a soundcheck for the album too. Including a soundcheck evokes Vernon’s emphasis on the album as a performance piece in the accompanying mini-documentary Autumn. In the doc, Vernon mentions the problem of ‘How is it going to be played live?’. Immediately, we are forced to imagine i,i as more than just another album on Spotify.
> Yi bleeds into iMi, a psychedelic echo of a track built from interspersing a melancholic vocals/arpeggio combo and an encroaching synth/dub beat combo. We is similarly eclectic, digitalised vocals juxtaposing with endearing, major-key sax. Following is Holyfields,, perhaps the most alien but most beautiful song on the album.
-
> Hey, Ma is the headline single from the album. An ode to Vernon’s mother and a sense of the sunrise walk home after the summer party (I’ll try and avoid further seasonal references: the four albums are set up to represent the four seasons, i,i being autumn, but IMO this is pretty naff).
> There is a sense of time passing in Hey, Ma, a nostalgia for the yet to be – ‘Well you wanted it your whole life’ – but with this passing is a sense of desire – ‘I wanted all that mind, sugar / I want it all mine’ – and of becoming or evolving – ‘You’re back and forth with light’. Becoming is the famous Deleuzean postmodern motif; i.e. being is constantly flowing and reforming. Bon Iver’s becoming, however, is not a flow, but a hauntological wrench into the future state. The entire album feels as though you’re experiencing the tech-enhanced evolution of Bon Iver’s music. That skipping between soft indie and futuristic synth reminiscent of the OG Pokemon games when your Pokemon was evolving and it would flicker between its past and future states. But becoming is never complete. As Fisher highlights, ‘futuristic’ no longer refers to a time/space but is now merely an adjective. We’ll never hear the Bon Iver made entirely on digital tech.
> For Fisher, melancholia is a productive force of political resistance. He distances his ‘hauntological melancholia’ from that of Wendy Brown’s ‘left melancholia’ which ‘seems to exemplify the transition from desire (which in Lacanian terms is the desire to desire) to drive (an enjoyment of failure)’. Fisher’s melancholia, ‘by contrast, consists not in giving up on desire but in refusing to yield'. Under scrutiny, Bon Iver’s first two albums fail this melan-test – they are a spectacular, self-pitying self-indulgence. Self-pity as a common form of masochism. For Deleuze, thinking through Jung, thinking through Bergson (yeap, I know), masochism is always regressive, flipping the Oedipal on its head as a form of un-becoming.
> Is Vernon’s song to his mother a masochistic form of melancholia; a self-pitying reversal of the Oedipal? ‘I wanted a bath / “Tell the story or he goes”’; ‘Tall time to call your Ma / Hey Ma, hey Ma’. The type captured by Maggie Nelson in The Argonauts (2015) when reflecting on Ginsberg’s poem Kaddish, which is dripping in, in Nelson’s words, ‘misogynistic repulsion’. Or is Bon Iver’s a hauntological melancholia? One of stubborn resistance. The type of mother-son relationship photographed by Donald Weber in his response to Alison Sperling and Anna Volkmar’s conversation on the post-atomic (Kuntslicht, 39: 3/4). Weber’s photographs were taken over two years in Chernobyl. The, now fetishised, explosion in Chernobyl perhaps the example of the nuclear, a hauntological theme post-WWII, made material. The bursting of a political, biological and biopolitical reality which was never meant to be. Weber’s photo of a middle-aged man and his elderly mother is captioned: ‘Mothers sought to be photographed sitting close to their sons, in domestic scenes of proud companionability. Their eyes signal an unalterable communion. And more – elevation. A man’s mother transcends the material order, and rises easily above even the most squalid circumstances. It is the frank declaration of her biological supremacy: This is my child’. If it is this relationship captured in Hey, Ma, it may promise a spectre which can be made material. An artefact which can continue its evolution, its becoming. ‘Let me talk to em / Let me talk to ‘em all’.
> Finally, that Hey, Ma’s nostalgia is a culturally productive one is suggested by one of its more memorable lines: ‘I waited outside / I was tokin’ on dope / I hoped it all won’t go in a minute’. In Fisher’s posthumously published Unfinished Introduction to Acid Communism, he, when imagining the process of resistance and a new politics whilst citing Jefferson Cowie, writes 'these new kinds of workers – who “smoked dope, socialised interracially, and dreamed of a world in which work had some meaning” – wanted democratic control of both their workplace and their trade unions’. The curious, outdated use of ‘dope' in Vernon’s lyrics then mirrors Cowie’s use of 'dope', echoing Cowie’s nostalgia for a lost working-class culture of 1970s America. Fisher uses Cowie’s argument to piece together an acid communism, which I will return to, but this, surely consequential, similarity further constructs i,i as a contemporary hauntological album.  
-
> Following Hey, Ma comes the Sunday-school piano of U (Man Like). Raising an image of a crisply ironed, white America, like that depicted in Robert Putnam’s Bowling Alone (2000), which acts as a reminder that nostalgia isn’t always productive. However, the nostalgia is continued with Naeem ‘Oh, my mind, our kids got bigger/ … / You take me out to pasture now’. Fisher asks ‘is hauntology, as many of its critics have maintained, simply a name for nostalgia?’. However, he argues that it is not a ‘formal nostalgia’ but one of solidarity and of a longing for the process of social improvement. Naeem, despite its nostalgia, continues the flickering between hope and despair. The joyful ‘More love / More love / More love’ and ‘I can hear, I can hear’; the anguished ‘I can hear crying’ and ‘What’s there to pontificate on now? / There’s someone in my head’. The latent and angelic child-like choir on Naeem another hauntological theme. As Fisher declares, ‘no doubt there comes a point when every generation starts pining for the artefacts of its childhood’. However, Vernon’s evoking of childhood is one perhaps linked to the, at times damaging, trope of ‘future generations’ in environmentalism. It is still a political longing though – ‘I’d Occupy that’. Occupy: that great post-2008 political uprising which dissipated into a mere exemplar in an undergraduate geography textbook.
> Next, Faith brings back the aliens from 33 “God” but this time, for attention, they’ve brought their clean guitar and slowly morph into the catholic choir we began to hear on Naeem. God died and, despite the sexy, liquidity of our modernity, we miss him.
> Marion momentarily brings us back from the cybernetically fractured semi-future. Back to the £3-coffee coffee-shop where you’re telling your friend that you think you and that girl will probably get back together but you need the time to be right. The hope is sucked back out; we’re back in capitalist realism and Arctic Monkey’s fourth (fifth?) album. Luckily, Salem restarts the signal to bring us back from our self-pity, dragging us to the obfuscation we were enjoying. Salem’s witches are still here and they’re pretty good at Ableton.
> Next, Sh’Diah grows from an autotuned prayer – ‘Just calm down (calm down) / And she’ll find time for the Lord’ - into a yearning saxophone riff/rift. But, alas, RABi, the album’s final song, returns us to a blues guitar and Vernon’s vocals. If the oscillation between past and future throughout i,i was a dialectic, the depressing outcome is ‘consumer capitalism’s model of ordinariness' (Fisher) of the neoliberal present. As in Fisher’s hauntology, the technologically-infused creativity of i,i is a lost future. Watching Vernon being interviewed feels like this. He’s got the Pacific-North-West hipster look: vegan but drives a V6 truck. Goes to the craft brewer’s bar and talks about that latest public health campaign to encourage men to talk about mental health over a pint but refrains from actually talking about depression. (Maybe serving beer in 2/3rd schooners means you never end up getting to the important part of the conversation?)
-
> But why does it matter? Because it’s about political and cultural (and creative) imagination. Fisher’s last big, and tragically but appropriately unfinished, philosophy is that of Acid Communism. Maybe there is a future !
> Fisher mourned not only the flattening of pop music, but also the ‘culture constellated around music (fashion, discourse, cover art)’. In contrast to a digital album which you never perceive in any physical manner, Bon Iver have emphasised various forms of art in their work, ensuring a communal creativity. There are multiple iterations of the album cover art on public posters and on social media. More excitingly though, is the collaboration with WHITEvoid, a Berlin-based sculpture group/company, which is discussed on Autumn. Prepared for live performances, WHITEvoid have constructed an ensemble of floating mirrors and kinetic lighting made from ‘space-age metal’ and motion tracking sensors. An artistic contribution as ethereal and tech-enhanced as the accompanying music and one which aestheticises our material sciences. The lighting provided by WHITEvoid in collaboration with the experimentation in sound system, similarly shown on Autumn, constructs the performance of i,i as an ongoing innovation and experimentation. The effort put into the upcoming live performances of i,i ensure that it is a music to be experienced not merely consumed. In another discussion on Autumn, Michael Brown, Bon Iver’s Artistic Director, says ‘you have to be in the moment with other people, you have to be able to know that the person next to you is having the same communal experience’.
> In Krisis (2018:2), Matt Colquhoun sees acid communism as a “project beyond the pleasure principle” (2) and of an “experimental” politics. If the sounds of i,i are hauntological, then the spectre it suggests is one of acid communism. The acid is provided by its accompanying artistic experimentation and the communism is its emphasis on the political and the communal.
~
Text: William Fleming
Published 30/8/19
8 notes · View notes
milady-milord-lj · 8 years
Text
Community Re-Watch Season 1: Introduction to Statistics and Home Economics
Community Re-Watch:  Season 1 Rahr! I thought I posted this on Friday! But I did not. Explains the lack of comments in my inbox. Here it is, better late than never, I guess. You'll notice that these commentaries are shorter. That's because the in-jokes are starting and less information is actually being relayed. So, I'm doing my best.
Introduction to Statistics Commentary by Dan Harmon, Joel McHale, Chevy Chase, and Joe Russo Joe says this was a watershed episode because it was experimental and ambitious. He says “Modern Warfare” is a direct descendant of this episode. Joel jokes that both episodes had the same director (Justin Lin). Joe mentions that he and Justin Lin were college buddies and have remained friends throughout the years. He said Justin brought a unique visual look to the series. Joel mentioned the Justin cares about every single shot. Dan adds that he hopes that Justin doesn’t get pigeonholed as an action director because he’s gifted at comedy as well. Joe says it’s because Justin is a storyteller. Joel introduces Lauren Stamile as “the beautiful and awesome Lauren Stamile.” He also confirms that in “Pascal’s Triangle Revisited” Jeff did not want to go back to being Slater’s boyfriend after she had dumped him a few episodes before. (Side note:  It’s an interesting comment, because it seems that, as far as Joel was concerned, the Slater-Jeff-Britta love triangle in “Pascal’s” was only in the minds of Slater and Britta.) Joel adds that Lauren is also the only woman in the cast who is taller that 5’6”. Chevy says that the women are the best actors in the cast. Joel agrees. Then Chevy adds that the men are the clowns. Dan remarks that Chevy is saying that women aren’t funny. Chevy protests that he wasn’t saying that at all. Dan says that he’d go out on a limb and say Gillian is funny. Everyone points out Leonard in the scene where Slater shoots Jeff down and remark that they just started using him in almost every episode going forward. Dan said that Leonard’s role in the scene was to be the stand-in for a sitcom audience. Chevy remarks that he thinks Alison Brie is hugely talented, and beautiful. He adds that he thinks she could be a huge movie star. He adds that she’s a lovely girl and huge talented, before quickly adding that all three women (he initially said “both of them” so I assume he forgot to include Yvette before he corrected himself) are. But he adds that Alison has a Liz Taylor vibe. Joel adds that Alison has a very good head on her shoulders and is a very down-to-earth person. Dan adds that Alison is very good at walking the tightrope of being over-the-top while still being very grounded. Dan adds that Alison is a “comedic weapon” because she’ll do a double-take then start crying as a joke. Chevy adds that she can do that because she’s very secure in herself. He adds, “And she’s very good-looking and she knows it.” Joel adds that Gillian in the chipmunk costume is maybe the cutest thing to happen on television. Dan says the chipmunk costume was Gillian’s idea. Chevy calls Danny Pudi’s performance “brilliant.” Dan says the Internet lit up like a Christmas tree after this episode aired about the give-and-take between Troy and Abed. Dan encourages everyone to watch the outtakes to see every iteration of their initial exchange in the episode. “This is what happens when you just let Donald (Glover) go.” Joel thinks that Chevy in the Beastmaster costume was really funny. Joel then points out that Chevy’s costume has no pectoral muscles. It’s all abs all the way down. Chevy ads that it has no connection to any actual humans. Dan can’t remember who came up with the Urkel/Harry Potter jokes for Yvette’s Harry Potter get-up. Dan remarks that while filming this episode, Dino (Starburns) texted him from the set to say, “I’m doing a scene with Chevy Chase. What the hell happened to us?” Dan confirms that the pill Starburns gives Pierce is ecstasy. He wasn’t sure if NBC would let them use the name, so they don’t state it outright in the episode. Chevy adds that it really doesn’t matter, because anything like that is just poison. Although Dan likes Chevy’s ecstasy acting, he adds that the best depiction of an ecstacy trip on-screen is in season one of Spaced. Even though you don’t see the characters taking ecstasy on-screen, he said the depiction was so dead-on that you knew what was going on. Joel agrees with Dan. Everyone takes a moment to praise Justin’s blocking of the Halloween party scene in the study room as the cameras move around the study group (sans Jeff since he’s crashing the teachers’ party) and the study group moves around the room. Joe says that Donald is one of the most gifted improvisers that he’s ever seen. It’s very difficult to improvise in-story, but Donald has a writers’ brain and he can just make it work so that he can insert himself into a scene, advance the story, while still getting a joke out of it. Dan repeats that Gillian wanted the squirrel costume and came to him about it. He said that normally “you don’t listen to actors because they’re crazy people,” so when someone comes up to him and says “this is what I think my character should wear for Halloween” you’re not sure. But when he saw Gillian on the set, he was, “Oh! I get it!” He adds that he learned a lot about Britta in this episode because he let Gillian choose the costume and watching her get activated in it. They once again encourage people to watch the extras so they can see all the different lines Donald used to tell Jeff that Pierce was pretty much tripping balls at the student party. Dan says it’s fun to shoot party episodes because you can bop around in different groups. Chevy points out that when Jeff tells the study group members to get out of the cafetorium where the teachers are having their Halloween party, Joel is in a gunslinger stance like he’s about to draw his gun. Dan commenting on the Britta-Shirley scene in Slater’s office:  Yvette went up to his office because the scene, as originally written, had Shirley basically taking a dump in one of Slater’s desk drawers. They ended up having a very long conversation where Yvette basically talked Dan out of that version. It got switched to her trying to use a hose to fill up Slater’s desk with water. Everyone jokes about Britta ripping the head off Slater’s trophy. Because obviously she’d have to be bionically strong to do it. Joe says that a camera was strapped strapped to Chevy’s chest during his full-on ecstasy trip to get that distorted effect. Dan says they fed Alison her lines while she stood in front of a green screen. During that session, they were doing a ton of old person jokes. Unfortunately, Chevy overheard them, came into the room, and said, “I knew the Beatles, I was at Woodstock, and you can all go fuck yourselves.” What made it really funny is that he said it while still wearing the Beastmaster costume. Chevy confesses that he doesn’t even know who Beastmaster is. Joel explains it’s a Mark Singer movie from the 1980s. Dan says that they had problems with Ken Jeong in the scene where Chang gives Jeff advice on how to get Slater. He kept doing all these hand gestures that were rude and Dan had to tell him to not do that because his role was to set up the next joke. They all comment that after the episode aired “Mexican Halloween” was trending on Google. Dan confesses that it’s something he made up. Dan says that Donald is a very funny guy and a very smart guy, but he doesn’t interject his own comedy unasked. He said that’s why Troy gets funnier and funnier as the season progresses because he was getting more and more permission from the writers to do his own thing. Joel says that Chevy was awesome in the chairfort scene. Joe says that the chairfort was built and tested on the construction stage. Dan says the chairfort rig gave him the idea to do “Modern Warfare.” As he was inspecting the rig and talking to Justin about how it would work. He said he began to wonder if they could do an action episode, rather than a comedy episode with action elements. Chevy apparently told Justin Lin on the set that he didn’t know anything about comedy. Joe says that “Introduction to Statistics” was the first time they had “stepped out of the show.” Because it was a Halloween episode, they felt they had permission to push the boundaries, like, for example, having a chairfort collapse, having Abed swoop in like a superhero to save Jeff and Pierce, and “acting like it was a normal part of the world of the show.” Dan says that the Batman voiceover at the end of the episode was entirely improvised by Danny Pudi in a recording booth. They basically used the improve uncut. It was meant to be a placeholder until they wrote something. Dan says he kept telling Danny to keep babbling about darkness and get your dichotomies all mixed up. Dan answers the Twitter question, “When did you start considering Jeff and Annie as an option?” Dan answers it was the shot at the end of the episode where Jeff silently asks Annie to dance by holding out his hand and she becomes giddy because she’s dancing with him. He says there was a nice romantic undertone to the scene. Joel says the scene with Abed/Batman on the roof of the school was shot just as day was about to break. The tag scene between Abed and Troy was all improvised by Danny and Donald. Dan says that Abed and Troy are the Cheech and Chong of the show.
Home Economics Commentary by Dan Harmon, Joel McHale, Danny Pudi, and Lauren Pomerantz (writer) Joel says that he almost chocked to death in the opening scene. Chevy would throw the paper balls into his mouth and it would get into his throat. Danny says that the opening scene where Jeff is woken up wasn’t really acting. Joel actually was tired. He adds, “Joel can also nap anywhere.” Dan starts a runner joke (that lasts throughout the whole commentary) that Yvette Nicole Brown has a drinking problem, which causes everyone to start laughing. Joel explains that Yvette is waiting outside the recording booth and can hear everything they say, but she’s powerless to do anything about it. Dan admits that Yvette is actually a teetotaler. Joel jokes that she doesn’t drink, but smokes a ton of pot. Dan adds, “No, she doesn’t smoke pot, either.” Dan says that Lauren (the writer) is no longer on the show, but he’s glad she’s back for the commentary. He adds that she’s a very quiet person who doesn’t talk a lot. Dan praises her and says that she turned out a really good draft. He adds that he likes this episode a lot. Dan adds that one of the things that a lot of male writers would shy away from is a scene like Shirley ogling Jeff while he does his homeless man cleanup. Dan mentions that she’s working for Ellen Degeneres, but that if she’s ever back on the market, some should snatch her up because she’s an excellent draft writer. Everyone starts making fun of Gillian’s costuming in the study room scene. They’re not sure if it’s “Mad Max” or “Legend of Billie Jean.” Dan remarks that Chevy and Britta a costumed in a similar manner (side note: they’re both wearing vests). Dan says this episode got shuffled around in the order. Dan says that he and Gillian talked about what happened with her character from her perspective in this episode. He said that Gillian said Britta was basically still policing Jeff at this point. Dan says that they really don’t need a single policeman for Jeff. Jeff himself is a fairly self-destructive character, so everyone in the study group winds up policing him at some point. Because of that, it opened things up to allow them to dump on Britta. But at this point in the series they’re still using her as the voice of practicality and reason, and she’s pompus. Joel says when he jumped over the bushes to stop Jeff’s car from being towed he almost broke his ankle. There was apparently a deep hole on the other side that he landed in. During the scene where Abed is eating cereal and Jeff is losing his mind, Joel and Danny apparently ate “thousands” of bowls. Joel says it was like that SNL commercial about Colon Blow. Danny says that the state of Joel’s clothes and hair is the result of the amount of cereal they ate that day. Lauren wrote the lyrics for Vaughn’s song about Britta. Joel says that “she’s a GDB” became something the cast latched onto and they kept saying it to each other all season. Joel says at one point they switched he and Danny to an organic version of Lucky Charms. Danny comments that it was a horrible. Joel says that Lucky Charms is wonderful to eat, but after a box-and-a-half you begin to feel terrible. They both began to feel hot and flushed. “It’s like you’ve eaten an entire cake.” Danny points out Pavel. He says that actor really is Polish. Danny says that he really likes what the art department did with Abed’s room and the movie posters. Everyone then switches to talking about the posters in the rehearsal space for Vaughn’s band. Dan says he makes fun of Chevy a lot, but he really brings it to all of his scenes. Dan claims someone called him at home (“you know who you are”) and said that the Troy-Annie storyline in the episode should be pulled. He says that they should know they were wrong. Joel points out that Patton Oswald makes his first appearance on the show. Joel remarks that Patton’s bones must be hollow, because “they are filled with funny.” Dan says that Patton’s “I’m the Hawkeye around here” was improvised by him on the set. Danny says watching Joel make his sundae was hilarious. Joel says spaying the whipped cream into his mouth was a joy. Dan says the conversation between Britta and Abed is the reveal that Abed has “his eye on the ball.” There were several holes in the boxer shorts Joel was wearing, including one at his butt. Danny says he laughed out loud when he saw Joel sprawled on the couch during the Jeff-Britta scene. He points out that Joel doesn’t really change position though most of the scene until Britta tosses the sack on him. Dan said it took a three-hour brainstorming session to come up with Jeff marking his expensive Italian faucets for the optimal temperature for his skin. They were trying to come up with a way for Jeff to figure out that it was his faucet. Another one they considered was a dent from the belt buckle of the mayor’s daughter. Danny says that Abed’s dorm room is three times the size of his actual college dorm room. Dan is apparently stuck on the fact that Britta is wearing heels. “What would be the worst that would happen if Britta didn’t wear stilts?” Joel’s answer is, “You wouldn’t be able to frame the shots.” Dan says that the camera catches a little bit of “Annie butt” in the scene where she takes back her courting quilt. “We walk a very, very dangerous tightrope with that character.” Danny says that the final scene between Shirley and Annie is very sweet. Joel says that they rehearsed a brief Polish conversation for the closing scene between Jeff, Abed, and Britta. He adds that he really enjoyed it. Dan says that he gets emotional over Abed calling Jeff “a huge nerd.” Dan says that Pierce enjoying the attention of Vaughn’s diss song is great. That a lack of redemption and an unwillingness to change can be kind of heroic in the face of bad luck or even justice.
17 notes · View notes
Text
The 'Bon Appétit' Test Kitchen and the Myth of the Happy Workplace
The Bon Appétit Test Kitchen and its so-called "cinematic universe" has been described as follows: a "bright spot" in a "sea of garbage," the "internet's favorite cooking show," a form of "Sunday therapy," "an unstoppable force," "meme gods," and even "a Green New Deal fantasy," whatever that means.
Every night, "I check in with the chefs at Bon Appétit like I’m catching up with old friends," Louis Peitzman wrote for Buzzfeed in 2018. Another piece from earlier this year claimed the secret to Bon Appétit's YouTube success was that "everyone is just so damn likable." And having been graced with the crew's presence at the company's "Best Weekend Ever" late last year, writer and Who? Weekly host Bobby Finger recalled, "I felt not just starstruck but crazy. I mean actually deranged!"
Those are just the fawning articles. The Test Kitchen also has fan-run meme pages, an official merch store, two subreddits, and two more devoted specifically to personality Brad Leone and Gourmet Makes star Claire Saffitz. Saffitz, the kitchen's most beloved host, has been described as "the internet's collective crush," about whom people say things like "I would die for Claire" and imitate for Halloween or TikTok fame.
Man Repeller reported late last year that the channel was the fastest-growing in YouTube's food space, with more than 40 million views per month and over 5 billion total minutes watched. It currently has 6 million subscribers. As its hordes of doting fans propped the Bon Appétit Test Kitchen on the highest pedestal, the magazine's staff turned into micro-celebrities, their interpersonal dynamics became objects of obsession, and overall, the workplace was seen as a wholesome culinary ideal. What the Test Kitchen's cult of celebrity obfuscated, however, is that the Test Kitchen is just that: a workplace, like that of any other large—and therefore likely imperfect, if not problematic—institution. So honestly, what did any of us expect?
twitter
As the world found out in industry-shaking fashion this week, the reality of the Test Kitchen isn't the bastion of good that its stans have willed it to be. Last weekend, writer Illyanna Maisonet posted an exchange with Editor-in-Chief Adam Rapoport in which he effectively told her that Puerto Rican food wasn't trendy enough for the magazine to cover, and it read as another example of the brand's diversity problem. On Monday, after writer Tammie Teclemariam posted an old photo of Rapoport and his wife Simone Shubuck dressed in costumes centered on Puerto Rican stereotypes (in the photo, which Shubuck captioned "#TBT me and my papi #boricua," Rapoport wears a silver chain and durag), staffers blew open the door on the company's toxic culture, which has been emotionally and financially unsupportive of people of color. Rapoport—who, amid claims of brownface, maintains that he did not color his skin for the image—resigned the same day.
As assistant food editor Sohla El-Waylly wrote on Instagram on Monday, not only was she hired for her role at the rate of $50,000 per year despite her 15 years of experience (and the high cost of living in New York, where the company is located), but she was "pushed in front of video as a display of diversity" and not even paid for those appearances. Per Buzzfeed, El-Waylly and other hosts of color weren't paid for their video work, which is arranged through contracts with Condé Nast Entertainment, while white video stars were compensated. As the floodgates burst open, Twitter users soon dug up drinks editor Alex Delany's old internet history, which included a 2013 Vine of him saying the F-slur, a Confederate flag cake he'd posted to Tumblr, and a series of sexist tweets.
A damning report from Business Insider on Wednesday showed how far the brand's problems extended. From conversations with 14 former and current staffers, writer Rachel Premack concluded that BA was a "locus for exclusion and toxicity." Ryan Walker-Hartshorn, Rapoport's assistant for close to three years and the only Black woman on staff, was repeatedly denied raises from her $35,300 base salary and treated by Rapoport like "the help," in her words. "There is a big difference in terms of how they monetarily value the white employees versus the people of color," El-Waylly told BI.
On YouTube, BA's channel landed at exactly the right time. Compared to other food channels, which increasingly felt over-produced, the Test Kitchen videos were less polished; they had more personality; and they made the filming and editing processes clear. BA's videos resonated philosophically as well. Saffitz's Gourmet Makes, in which she attempts to recreate popular processed foods, is visibly an arduous and frustrating multi-day process, and at Mashable, Morgan Sung described Saffitz's series as an example of "probably the healthiest, most productive way to approach issues," while Quartz called her the "ultimate life coach."
Though the Test Kitchen's transformation into a celebrity force has been good for business, it's also set things up for exactly the reckoning that's happening now.
As with the recent situation involving Alison Roman (who got her start at BA), Chrissy Teigen, and Marie Kondo, the Test Kitchen's growing popularity and prestige outside the insular food world has complicated our ability to talk about its issues with clarity. Just as the bigger conversation about Roman and who tends to profit from cooking global food (the answer: white cooks) was largely portrayed as just a celebrity "Twitter feud," the changes at BA have been framed as the oversimplified result of a "brown face photo sparking anger" or the resurfacing of a "racially insensitive photo." The celebrity culture of the Test Kitchen begets the treatment celebrities get at gossip rags: reductive, lacking in nuance, and sounding the alarm for critics of "cancel culture." It's more than that, though.
The Test Kitchen's gargantuan online presence overrode its offline truth, as it projected and leaned into what people wanted to see, which was an Office-esque sitcom in which a friendly band of coworkers snickers behind the bumbling boss's back. As writer James Factora suggested in a tweet preceding all of this, perhaps the Test Kitchen's popularity is related to the widespread obsession with The Office. While Factora's tweet reads tongue-in-cheek, it's not wrong, and the love for the show perpetuated the illusion that a toxic workplace can be laughed at and lived with.
The Office has funny moments, but in a way, it led society astray. It suggested that a bad boss who makes clumsy, insensitive comments and makes life hard for employees can be a point of humor, instead of a toxic presence that could be booted. Who does that benefit except bosses? As BA turned the Test Kitchen into essentially its own sitcom, with each cooking star becoming an Office-esque talking head, it furthered the false notion of the perfect workplace, and people online were quick to gobble it up. The interactions between co-workers, even when off-putting, became meme fodder and pushed stans to throw their support behind their chosen star.
The idea that everything gets bad once it gets big sounds like a line ripped from Portlandia, but it is a maxim that applies to everything from emo bands to hashtags to dog breeds to cooking hosts. The higher the platform we give something, the more it can fall, and the discourse around the Test Kitchen seemed unprecedented in its fawning, at least within the food sphere. (Though we might have learned from situations like the downfall of Mario Batali.)
When we laud any product or person to this extent and make it an object of cultural obsession, it becomes easier to ignore the flaws and the parts of the conversation that don't fit what we want to see. This is true for the Test Kitchen, which could never really have met the inflated expectations of goodness that stan culture built up around it; people saw the perfect workplace because they wanted a perfect workplace. The problems at BA are institutional, but stan culture allowed people to compartmentalize the Test Kitchen as something separate and authentic.
In response to all of this, BA's parent company Condé Nast—a 111-year-old company with 6,000 employees globally at the start of this year—has announced that it will be "accelerating" its first ever diversity and inclusion report. On Tuesday, Amanda Shapiro, the editor of BA's Healthyish spinoff, became the brand's acting deputy director, and on Wednesday, the editors of BA said in a statement, "We want to be transparent, accountable, and active as we begin to dismantle racism at our brands."
Still, former staffers have identified Shapiro and other remaining BA employees as complicit in "toxic" behaviors. Despite calls for Matt Duckor, Condé Nast's head of programming for lifestyle and style, to step down over the unfair pay system and his mocking tweets about the gay community, he remains employed, as does Alex Delany. Both of them have issued social media apologies. With this new context, though, the joking tweets and fawning memes about the Test Kitchen don't hold up as well.
No surprise, Test Kitchen stans have responded to this all with even more memes and lionizing statements: "Update: we went to war for Sohla from the Bon Appétit test kitchen," reads one popular tweet. The height of the pedestal hasn't changed, though who's on the pedestal has. But as Bon Appétit changes, will its fan culture change also? To grapple with all of this new knowledge, it should.
Follow Bettina Makalintal on Twitter.
via VICE US - undefined US VICE US - undefined US via Mom's Kitchen Recipe Network Mom's Kitchen Recipe Network
0 notes
cyberpoetryballoon · 4 years
Text
The 'Bon Appétit' Test Kitchen and the Myth of the Happy Workplace
The Bon Appétit Test Kitchen and its so-called "cinematic universe" has been described as follows: a "bright spot" in a "sea of garbage," the "internet's favorite cooking show," a form of "Sunday therapy," "an unstoppable force," "meme gods," and even "a Green New Deal fantasy," whatever that means.
Every night, "I check in with the chefs at Bon Appétit like I’m catching up with old friends," Louis Peitzman wrote for Buzzfeed in 2018. Another piece from earlier this year claimed the secret to Bon Appétit's YouTube success was that "everyone is just so damn likable." And having been graced with the crew's presence at the company's "Best Weekend Ever" late last year, writer and Who? Weekly host Bobby Finger recalled, "I felt not just starstruck but crazy. I mean actually deranged!"
Those are just the fawning articles. The Test Kitchen also has fan-run meme pages, an official merch store, two subreddits, and two more devoted specifically to personality Brad Leone and Gourmet Makes star Claire Saffitz. Saffitz, the kitchen's most beloved host, has been described as "the internet's collective crush," about whom people say things like "I would die for Claire" and imitate for Halloween or TikTok fame.
Man Repeller reported late last year that the channel was the fastest-growing in YouTube's food space, with more than 40 million views per month and over 5 billion total minutes watched. It currently has 6 million subscribers. As its hordes of doting fans propped the Bon Appétit Test Kitchen on the highest pedestal, the magazine's staff turned into micro-celebrities, their interpersonal dynamics became objects of obsession, and overall, the workplace was seen as a wholesome culinary ideal. What the Test Kitchen's cult of celebrity obfuscated, however, is that the Test Kitchen is just that: a workplace, like that of any other large—and therefore likely imperfect, if not problematic—institution. So honestly, what did any of us expect?
twitter
As the world found out in industry-shaking fashion this week, the reality of the Test Kitchen isn't the bastion of good that its stans have willed it to be. Last weekend, writer Illyanna Maisonet posted an exchange with Editor-in-Chief Adam Rapoport in which he effectively told her that Puerto Rican food wasn't trendy enough for the magazine to cover, and it read as another example of the brand's diversity problem. On Monday, after writer Tammie Teclemariam posted an old photo of Rapoport and his wife Simone Shubuck dressed in costumes centered on Puerto Rican stereotypes (in the photo, which Shubuck captioned "#TBT me and my papi #boricua," Rapoport wears a silver chain and durag), staffers blew open the door on the company's toxic culture, which has been emotionally and financially unsupportive of people of color. Rapoport—who, amid claims of brownface, maintains that he did not color his skin for the image—resigned the same day.
As assistant food editor Sohla El-Waylly wrote on Instagram on Monday, not only was she hired for her role at the rate of $50,000 per year despite her 15 years of experience (and the high cost of living in New York, where the company is located), but she was "pushed in front of video as a display of diversity" and not even paid for those appearances. Per Buzzfeed, El-Waylly and other hosts of color weren't paid for their video work, which is arranged through contracts with Condé Nast Entertainment, while white video stars were compensated. As the floodgates burst open, Twitter users soon dug up drinks editor Alex Delany's old internet history, which included a 2013 Vine of him saying the F-slur, a Confederate flag cake he'd posted to Tumblr, and a series of sexist tweets.
A damning report from Business Insider on Wednesday showed how far the brand's problems extended. From conversations with 14 former and current staffers, writer Rachel Premack concluded that BA was a "locus for exclusion and toxicity." Ryan Walker-Hartshorn, Rapoport's assistant for close to three years and the only Black woman on staff, was repeatedly denied raises from her $35,300 base salary and treated by Rapoport like "the help," in her words. "There is a big difference in terms of how they monetarily value the white employees versus the people of color," El-Waylly told BI.
On YouTube, BA's channel landed at exactly the right time. Compared to other food channels, which increasingly felt over-produced, the Test Kitchen videos were less polished; they had more personality; and they made the filming and editing processes clear. BA's videos resonated philosophically as well. Saffitz's Gourmet Makes, in which she attempts to recreate popular processed foods, is visibly an arduous and frustrating multi-day process, and at Mashable, Morgan Sung described Saffitz's series as an example of "probably the healthiest, most productive way to approach issues," while Quartz called her the "ultimate life coach."
Though the Test Kitchen's transformation into a celebrity force has been good for business, it's also set things up for exactly the reckoning that's happening now.
As with the recent situation involving Alison Roman (who got her start at BA), Chrissy Teigen, and Marie Kondo, the Test Kitchen's growing popularity and prestige outside the insular food world has complicated our ability to talk about its issues with clarity. Just as the bigger conversation about Roman and who tends to profit from cooking global food (the answer: white cooks) was largely portrayed as just a celebrity "Twitter feud," the changes at BA have been framed as the oversimplified result of a "brown face photo sparking anger" or the resurfacing of a "racially insensitive photo." The celebrity culture of the Test Kitchen begets the treatment celebrities get at gossip rags: reductive, lacking in nuance, and sounding the alarm for critics of "cancel culture." It's more than that, though.
The Test Kitchen's gargantuan online presence overrode its offline truth, as it projected and leaned into what people wanted to see, which was an Office-esque sitcom in which a friendly band of coworkers snickers behind the bumbling boss's back. As writer James Factora suggested in a tweet preceding all of this, perhaps the Test Kitchen's popularity is related to the widespread obsession with The Office. While Factora's tweet reads tongue-in-cheek, it's not wrong, and the love for the show perpetuated the illusion that a toxic workplace can be laughed at and lived with.
The Office has funny moments, but in a way, it led society astray. It suggested that a bad boss who makes clumsy, insensitive comments and makes life hard for employees can be a point of humor, instead of a toxic presence that could be booted. Who does that benefit except bosses? As BA turned the Test Kitchen into essentially its own sitcom, with each cooking star becoming an Office-esque talking head, it furthered the false notion of the perfect workplace, and people online were quick to gobble it up. The interactions between co-workers, even when off-putting, became meme fodder and pushed stans to throw their support behind their chosen star.
The idea that everything gets bad once it gets big sounds like a line ripped from Portlandia, but it is a maxim that applies to everything from emo bands to hashtags to dog breeds to cooking hosts. The higher the platform we give something, the more it can fall, and the discourse around the Test Kitchen seemed unprecedented in its fawning, at least within the food sphere. (Though we might have learned from situations like the downfall of Mario Batali.)
When we laud any product or person to this extent and make it an object of cultural obsession, it becomes easier to ignore the flaws and the parts of the conversation that don't fit what we want to see. This is true for the Test Kitchen, which could never really have met the inflated expectations of goodness that stan culture built up around it; people saw the perfect workplace because they wanted a perfect workplace. The problems at BA are institutional, but stan culture allowed people to compartmentalize the Test Kitchen as something separate and authentic.
In response to all of this, BA's parent company Condé Nast—a 111-year-old company with 6,000 employees globally at the start of this year—has announced that it will be "accelerating" its first ever diversity and inclusion report. On Tuesday, Amanda Shapiro, the editor of BA's Healthyish spinoff, became the brand's acting deputy director, and on Wednesday, the editors of BA said in a statement, "We want to be transparent, accountable, and active as we begin to dismantle racism at our brands."
Still, former staffers have identified Shapiro and other remaining BA employees as complicit in "toxic" behaviors. Despite calls for Matt Duckor, Condé Nast's head of programming for lifestyle and style, to step down over the unfair pay system and his mocking tweets about the gay community, he remains employed, as does Alex Delany. Both of them have issued social media apologies. With this new context, though, the joking tweets and fawning memes about the Test Kitchen don't hold up as well.
No surprise, Test Kitchen stans have responded to this all with even more memes and lionizing statements: "Update: we went to war for Sohla from the Bon Appétit test kitchen," reads one popular tweet. The height of the pedestal hasn't changed, though who's on the pedestal has. But as Bon Appétit changes, will its fan culture change also? To grapple with all of this new knowledge, it should.
Follow Bettina Makalintal on Twitter.
via VICE US - undefined US VICE US - undefined US via Mom's Kitchen Recipe Network Mom's Kitchen Recipe Network
0 notes
carolrhackett85282 · 4 years
Text
The 'Bon Appétit' Test Kitchen and the Myth of the Happy Workplace
The Bon Appétit Test Kitchen and its so-called "cinematic universe" has been described as follows: a "bright spot" in a "sea of garbage," the "internet's favorite cooking show," a form of "Sunday therapy," "an unstoppable force," "meme gods," and even "a Green New Deal fantasy," whatever that means.
Every night, "I check in with the chefs at Bon Appétit like I’m catching up with old friends," Louis Peitzman wrote for Buzzfeed in 2018. Another piece from earlier this year claimed the secret to Bon Appétit's YouTube success was that "everyone is just so damn likable." And having been graced with the crew's presence at the company's "Best Weekend Ever" late last year, writer and Who? Weekly host Bobby Finger recalled, "I felt not just starstruck but crazy. I mean actually deranged!"
Those are just the fawning articles. The Test Kitchen also has fan-run meme pages, an official merch store, two subreddits, and two more devoted specifically to personality Brad Leone and Gourmet Makes star Claire Saffitz. Saffitz, the kitchen's most beloved host, has been described as "the internet's collective crush," about whom people say things like "I would die for Claire" and imitate for Halloween or TikTok fame.
Man Repeller reported late last year that the channel was the fastest-growing in YouTube's food space, with more than 40 million views per month and over 5 billion total minutes watched. It currently has 6 million subscribers. As its hordes of doting fans propped the Bon Appétit Test Kitchen on the highest pedestal, the magazine's staff turned into micro-celebrities, their interpersonal dynamics became objects of obsession, and overall, the workplace was seen as a wholesome culinary ideal. What the Test Kitchen's cult of celebrity obfuscated, however, is that the Test Kitchen is just that: a workplace, like that of any other large—and therefore likely imperfect, if not problematic—institution. So honestly, what did any of us expect?
twitter
As the world found out in industry-shaking fashion this week, the reality of the Test Kitchen isn't the bastion of good that its stans have willed it to be. Last weekend, writer Illyanna Maisonet posted an exchange with Editor-in-Chief Adam Rapoport in which he effectively told her that Puerto Rican food wasn't trendy enough for the magazine to cover, and it read as another example of the brand's diversity problem. On Monday, after writer Tammie Teclemariam posted an old photo of Rapoport and his wife Simone Shubuck dressed in costumes centered on Puerto Rican stereotypes (in the photo, which Shubuck captioned "#TBT me and my papi #boricua," Rapoport wears a silver chain and durag), staffers blew open the door on the company's toxic culture, which has been emotionally and financially unsupportive of people of color. Rapoport—who, amid claims of brownface, maintains that he did not color his skin for the image—resigned the same day.
As assistant food editor Sohla El-Waylly wrote on Instagram on Monday, not only was she hired for her role at the rate of $50,000 per year despite her 15 years of experience (and the high cost of living in New York, where the company is located), but she was "pushed in front of video as a display of diversity" and not even paid for those appearances. Per Buzzfeed, El-Waylly and other hosts of color weren't paid for their video work, which is arranged through contracts with Condé Nast Entertainment, while white video stars were compensated. As the floodgates burst open, Twitter users soon dug up drinks editor Alex Delany's old internet history, which included a 2013 Vine of him saying the F-slur, a Confederate flag cake he'd posted to Tumblr, and a series of sexist tweets.
A damning report from Business Insider on Wednesday showed how far the brand's problems extended. From conversations with 14 former and current staffers, writer Rachel Premack concluded that BA was a "locus for exclusion and toxicity." Ryan Walker-Hartshorn, Rapoport's assistant for close to three years and the only Black woman on staff, was repeatedly denied raises from her $35,300 base salary and treated by Rapoport like "the help," in her words. "There is a big difference in terms of how they monetarily value the white employees versus the people of color," El-Waylly told BI.
On YouTube, BA's channel landed at exactly the right time. Compared to other food channels, which increasingly felt over-produced, the Test Kitchen videos were less polished; they had more personality; and they made the filming and editing processes clear. BA's videos resonated philosophically as well. Saffitz's Gourmet Makes, in which she attempts to recreate popular processed foods, is visibly an arduous and frustrating multi-day process, and at Mashable, Morgan Sung described Saffitz's series as an example of "probably the healthiest, most productive way to approach issues," while Quartz called her the "ultimate life coach."
Though the Test Kitchen's transformation into a celebrity force has been good for business, it's also set things up for exactly the reckoning that's happening now.
As with the recent situation involving Alison Roman (who got her start at BA), Chrissy Teigen, and Marie Kondo, the Test Kitchen's growing popularity and prestige outside the insular food world has complicated our ability to talk about its issues with clarity. Just as the bigger conversation about Roman and who tends to profit from cooking global food (the answer: white cooks) was largely portrayed as just a celebrity "Twitter feud," the changes at BA have been framed as the oversimplified result of a "brown face photo sparking anger" or the resurfacing of a "racially insensitive photo." The celebrity culture of the Test Kitchen begets the treatment celebrities get at gossip rags: reductive, lacking in nuance, and sounding the alarm for critics of "cancel culture." It's more than that, though.
The Test Kitchen's gargantuan online presence overrode its offline truth, as it projected and leaned into what people wanted to see, which was an Office-esque sitcom in which a friendly band of coworkers snickers behind the bumbling boss's back. As writer James Factora suggested in a tweet preceding all of this, perhaps the Test Kitchen's popularity is related to the widespread obsession with The Office. While Factora's tweet reads tongue-in-cheek, it's not wrong, and the love for the show perpetuated the illusion that a toxic workplace can be laughed at and lived with.
The Office has funny moments, but in a way, it led society astray. It suggested that a bad boss who makes clumsy, insensitive comments and makes life hard for employees can be a point of humor, instead of a toxic presence that could be booted. Who does that benefit except bosses? As BA turned the Test Kitchen into essentially its own sitcom, with each cooking star becoming an Office-esque talking head, it furthered the false notion of the perfect workplace, and people online were quick to gobble it up. The interactions between co-workers, even when off-putting, became meme fodder and pushed stans to throw their support behind their chosen star.
The idea that everything gets bad once it gets big sounds like a line ripped from Portlandia, but it is a maxim that applies to everything from emo bands to hashtags to dog breeds to cooking hosts. The higher the platform we give something, the more it can fall, and the discourse around the Test Kitchen seemed unprecedented in its fawning, at least within the food sphere. (Though we might have learned from situations like the downfall of Mario Batali.)
When we laud any product or person to this extent and make it an object of cultural obsession, it becomes easier to ignore the flaws and the parts of the conversation that don't fit what we want to see. This is true for the Test Kitchen, which could never really have met the inflated expectations of goodness that stan culture built up around it; people saw the perfect workplace because they wanted a perfect workplace. The problems at BA are institutional, but stan culture allowed people to compartmentalize the Test Kitchen as something separate and authentic.
In response to all of this, BA's parent company Condé Nast—a 111-year-old company with 6,000 employees globally at the start of this year—has announced that it will be "accelerating" its first ever diversity and inclusion report. On Tuesday, Amanda Shapiro, the editor of BA's Healthyish spinoff, became the brand's acting deputy director, and on Wednesday, the editors of BA said in a statement, "We want to be transparent, accountable, and active as we begin to dismantle racism at our brands."
Still, former staffers have identified Shapiro and other remaining BA employees as complicit in "toxic" behaviors. Despite calls for Matt Duckor, Condé Nast's head of programming for lifestyle and style, to step down over the unfair pay system and his mocking tweets about the gay community, he remains employed, as does Alex Delany. Both of them have issued social media apologies. With this new context, though, the joking tweets and fawning memes about the Test Kitchen don't hold up as well.
No surprise, Test Kitchen stans have responded to this all with even more memes and lionizing statements: "Update: we went to war for Sohla from the Bon Appétit test kitchen," reads one popular tweet. The height of the pedestal hasn't changed, though who's on the pedestal has. But as Bon Appétit changes, will its fan culture change also? To grapple with all of this new knowledge, it should.
Follow Bettina Makalintal on Twitter.
via VICE US - undefined US VICE US - undefined US via Mom's Kitchen Recipe Network Mom's Kitchen Recipe Network
0 notes
melodymgill49801 · 4 years
Text
The 'Bon Appétit' Test Kitchen and the Myth of the Happy Workplace
The Bon Appétit Test Kitchen and its so-called "cinematic universe" has been described as follows: a "bright spot" in a "sea of garbage," the "internet's favorite cooking show," a form of "Sunday therapy," "an unstoppable force," "meme gods," and even "a Green New Deal fantasy," whatever that means.
Every night, "I check in with the chefs at Bon Appétit like I’m catching up with old friends," Louis Peitzman wrote for Buzzfeed in 2018. Another piece from earlier this year claimed the secret to Bon Appétit's YouTube success was that "everyone is just so damn likable." And having been graced with the crew's presence at the company's "Best Weekend Ever" late last year, writer and Who? Weekly host Bobby Finger recalled, "I felt not just starstruck but crazy. I mean actually deranged!"
Those are just the fawning articles. The Test Kitchen also has fan-run meme pages, an official merch store, two subreddits, and two more devoted specifically to personality Brad Leone and Gourmet Makes star Claire Saffitz. Saffitz, the kitchen's most beloved host, has been described as "the internet's collective crush," about whom people say things like "I would die for Claire" and imitate for Halloween or TikTok fame.
Man Repeller reported late last year that the channel was the fastest-growing in YouTube's food space, with more than 40 million views per month and over 5 billion total minutes watched. It currently has 6 million subscribers. As its hordes of doting fans propped the Bon Appétit Test Kitchen on the highest pedestal, the magazine's staff turned into micro-celebrities, their interpersonal dynamics became objects of obsession, and overall, the workplace was seen as a wholesome culinary ideal. What the Test Kitchen's cult of celebrity obfuscated, however, is that the Test Kitchen is just that: a workplace, like that of any other large—and therefore likely imperfect, if not problematic—institution. So honestly, what did any of us expect?
twitter
As the world found out in industry-shaking fashion this week, the reality of the Test Kitchen isn't the bastion of good that its stans have willed it to be. Last weekend, writer Illyanna Maisonet posted an exchange with Editor-in-Chief Adam Rapoport in which he effectively told her that Puerto Rican food wasn't trendy enough for the magazine to cover, and it read as another example of the brand's diversity problem. On Monday, after writer Tammie Teclemariam posted an old photo of Rapoport and his wife Simone Shubuck dressed in costumes centered on Puerto Rican stereotypes (in the photo, which Shubuck captioned "#TBT me and my papi #boricua," Rapoport wears a silver chain and durag), staffers blew open the door on the company's toxic culture, which has been emotionally and financially unsupportive of people of color. Rapoport—who, amid claims of brownface, maintains that he did not color his skin for the image—resigned the same day.
As assistant food editor Sohla El-Waylly wrote on Instagram on Monday, not only was she hired for her role at the rate of $50,000 per year despite her 15 years of experience (and the high cost of living in New York, where the company is located), but she was "pushed in front of video as a display of diversity" and not even paid for those appearances. Per Buzzfeed, El-Waylly and other hosts of color weren't paid for their video work, which is arranged through contracts with Condé Nast Entertainment, while white video stars were compensated. As the floodgates burst open, Twitter users soon dug up drinks editor Alex Delany's old internet history, which included a 2013 Vine of him saying the F-slur, a Confederate flag cake he'd posted to Tumblr, and a series of sexist tweets.
A damning report from Business Insider on Wednesday showed how far the brand's problems extended. From conversations with 14 former and current staffers, writer Rachel Premack concluded that BA was a "locus for exclusion and toxicity." Ryan Walker-Hartshorn, Rapoport's assistant for close to three years and the only Black woman on staff, was repeatedly denied raises from her $35,300 base salary and treated by Rapoport like "the help," in her words. "There is a big difference in terms of how they monetarily value the white employees versus the people of color," El-Waylly told BI.
On YouTube, BA's channel landed at exactly the right time. Compared to other food channels, which increasingly felt over-produced, the Test Kitchen videos were less polished; they had more personality; and they made the filming and editing processes clear. BA's videos resonated philosophically as well. Saffitz's Gourmet Makes, in which she attempts to recreate popular processed foods, is visibly an arduous and frustrating multi-day process, and at Mashable, Morgan Sung described Saffitz's series as an example of "probably the healthiest, most productive way to approach issues," while Quartz called her the "ultimate life coach."
Though the Test Kitchen's transformation into a celebrity force has been good for business, it's also set things up for exactly the reckoning that's happening now.
As with the recent situation involving Alison Roman (who got her start at BA), Chrissy Teigen, and Marie Kondo, the Test Kitchen's growing popularity and prestige outside the insular food world has complicated our ability to talk about its issues with clarity. Just as the bigger conversation about Roman and who tends to profit from cooking global food (the answer: white cooks) was largely portrayed as just a celebrity "Twitter feud," the changes at BA have been framed as the oversimplified result of a "brown face photo sparking anger" or the resurfacing of a "racially insensitive photo." The celebrity culture of the Test Kitchen begets the treatment celebrities get at gossip rags: reductive, lacking in nuance, and sounding the alarm for critics of "cancel culture." It's more than that, though.
The Test Kitchen's gargantuan online presence overrode its offline truth, as it projected and leaned into what people wanted to see, which was an Office-esque sitcom in which a friendly band of coworkers snickers behind the bumbling boss's back. As writer James Factora suggested in a tweet preceding all of this, perhaps the Test Kitchen's popularity is related to the widespread obsession with The Office. While Factora's tweet reads tongue-in-cheek, it's not wrong, and the love for the show perpetuated the illusion that a toxic workplace can be laughed at and lived with.
The Office has funny moments, but in a way, it led society astray. It suggested that a bad boss who makes clumsy, insensitive comments and makes life hard for employees can be a point of humor, instead of a toxic presence that could be booted. Who does that benefit except bosses? As BA turned the Test Kitchen into essentially its own sitcom, with each cooking star becoming an Office-esque talking head, it furthered the false notion of the perfect workplace, and people online were quick to gobble it up. The interactions between co-workers, even when off-putting, became meme fodder and pushed stans to throw their support behind their chosen star.
The idea that everything gets bad once it gets big sounds like a line ripped from Portlandia, but it is a maxim that applies to everything from emo bands to hashtags to dog breeds to cooking hosts. The higher the platform we give something, the more it can fall, and the discourse around the Test Kitchen seemed unprecedented in its fawning, at least within the food sphere. (Though we might have learned from situations like the downfall of Mario Batali.)
When we laud any product or person to this extent and make it an object of cultural obsession, it becomes easier to ignore the flaws and the parts of the conversation that don't fit what we want to see. This is true for the Test Kitchen, which could never really have met the inflated expectations of goodness that stan culture built up around it; people saw the perfect workplace because they wanted a perfect workplace. The problems at BA are institutional, but stan culture allowed people to compartmentalize the Test Kitchen as something separate and authentic.
In response to all of this, BA's parent company Condé Nast—a 111-year-old company with 6,000 employees globally at the start of this year—has announced that it will be "accelerating" its first ever diversity and inclusion report. On Tuesday, Amanda Shapiro, the editor of BA's Healthyish spinoff, became the brand's acting deputy director, and on Wednesday, the editors of BA said in a statement, "We want to be transparent, accountable, and active as we begin to dismantle racism at our brands."
Still, former staffers have identified Shapiro and other remaining BA employees as complicit in "toxic" behaviors. Despite calls for Matt Duckor, Condé Nast's head of programming for lifestyle and style, to step down over the unfair pay system and his mocking tweets about the gay community, he remains employed, as does Alex Delany. Both of them have issued social media apologies. With this new context, though, the joking tweets and fawning memes about the Test Kitchen don't hold up as well.
No surprise, Test Kitchen stans have responded to this all with even more memes and lionizing statements: "Update: we went to war for Sohla from the Bon Appétit test kitchen," reads one popular tweet. The height of the pedestal hasn't changed, though who's on the pedestal has. But as Bon Appétit changes, will its fan culture change also? To grapple with all of this new knowledge, it should.
Follow Bettina Makalintal on Twitter.
via VICE US - undefined US VICE US - undefined US via Mom's Kitchen Recipe Network Mom's Kitchen Recipe Network
0 notes
Text
The 'Bon Appétit' Test Kitchen and the Myth of the Happy Workplace
The Bon Appétit Test Kitchen and its so-called "cinematic universe" has been described as follows: a "bright spot" in a "sea of garbage," the "internet's favorite cooking show," a form of "Sunday therapy," "an unstoppable force," "meme gods," and even "a Green New Deal fantasy," whatever that means.
Every night, "I check in with the chefs at Bon Appétit like I’m catching up with old friends," Louis Peitzman wrote for Buzzfeed in 2018. Another piece from earlier this year claimed the secret to Bon Appétit's YouTube success was that "everyone is just so damn likable." And having been graced with the crew's presence at the company's "Best Weekend Ever" late last year, writer and Who? Weekly host Bobby Finger recalled, "I felt not just starstruck but crazy. I mean actually deranged!"
Those are just the fawning articles. The Test Kitchen also has fan-run meme pages, an official merch store, two subreddits, and two more devoted specifically to personality Brad Leone and Gourmet Makes star Claire Saffitz. Saffitz, the kitchen's most beloved host, has been described as "the internet's collective crush," about whom people say things like "I would die for Claire" and imitate for Halloween or TikTok fame.
Man Repeller reported late last year that the channel was the fastest-growing in YouTube's food space, with more than 40 million views per month and over 5 billion total minutes watched. It currently has 6 million subscribers. As its hordes of doting fans propped the Bon Appétit Test Kitchen on the highest pedestal, the magazine's staff turned into micro-celebrities, their interpersonal dynamics became objects of obsession, and overall, the workplace was seen as a wholesome culinary ideal. What the Test Kitchen's cult of celebrity obfuscated, however, is that the Test Kitchen is just that: a workplace, like that of any other large—and therefore likely imperfect, if not problematic—institution. So honestly, what did any of us expect?
twitter
As the world found out in industry-shaking fashion this week, the reality of the Test Kitchen isn't the bastion of good that its stans have willed it to be. Last weekend, writer Illyanna Maisonet posted an exchange with Editor-in-Chief Adam Rapoport in which he effectively told her that Puerto Rican food wasn't trendy enough for the magazine to cover, and it read as another example of the brand's diversity problem. On Monday, after writer Tammie Teclemariam posted an old photo of Rapoport and his wife Simone Shubuck dressed in costumes centered on Puerto Rican stereotypes (in the photo, which Shubuck captioned "#TBT me and my papi #boricua," Rapoport wears a silver chain and durag), staffers blew open the door on the company's toxic culture, which has been emotionally and financially unsupportive of people of color. Rapoport—who, amid claims of brownface, maintains that he did not color his skin for the image—resigned the same day.
As assistant food editor Sohla El-Waylly wrote on Instagram on Monday, not only was she hired for her role at the rate of $50,000 per year despite her 15 years of experience (and the high cost of living in New York, where the company is located), but she was "pushed in front of video as a display of diversity" and not even paid for those appearances. Per Buzzfeed, El-Waylly and other hosts of color weren't paid for their video work, which is arranged through contracts with Condé Nast Entertainment, while white video stars were compensated. As the floodgates burst open, Twitter users soon dug up drinks editor Alex Delany's old internet history, which included a 2013 Vine of him saying the F-slur, a Confederate flag cake he'd posted to Tumblr, and a series of sexist tweets.
A damning report from Business Insider on Wednesday showed how far the brand's problems extended. From conversations with 14 former and current staffers, writer Rachel Premack concluded that BA was a "locus for exclusion and toxicity." Ryan Walker-Hartshorn, Rapoport's assistant for close to three years and the only Black woman on staff, was repeatedly denied raises from her $35,300 base salary and treated by Rapoport like "the help," in her words. "There is a big difference in terms of how they monetarily value the white employees versus the people of color," El-Waylly told BI.
On YouTube, BA's channel landed at exactly the right time. Compared to other food channels, which increasingly felt over-produced, the Test Kitchen videos were less polished; they had more personality; and they made the filming and editing processes clear. BA's videos resonated philosophically as well. Saffitz's Gourmet Makes, in which she attempts to recreate popular processed foods, is visibly an arduous and frustrating multi-day process, and at Mashable, Morgan Sung described Saffitz's series as an example of "probably the healthiest, most productive way to approach issues," while Quartz called her the "ultimate life coach."
Though the Test Kitchen's transformation into a celebrity force has been good for business, it's also set things up for exactly the reckoning that's happening now.
As with the recent situation involving Alison Roman (who got her start at BA), Chrissy Teigen, and Marie Kondo, the Test Kitchen's growing popularity and prestige outside the insular food world has complicated our ability to talk about its issues with clarity. Just as the bigger conversation about Roman and who tends to profit from cooking global food (the answer: white cooks) was largely portrayed as just a celebrity "Twitter feud," the changes at BA have been framed as the oversimplified result of a "brown face photo sparking anger" or the resurfacing of a "racially insensitive photo." The celebrity culture of the Test Kitchen begets the treatment celebrities get at gossip rags: reductive, lacking in nuance, and sounding the alarm for critics of "cancel culture." It's more than that, though.
The Test Kitchen's gargantuan online presence overrode its offline truth, as it projected and leaned into what people wanted to see, which was an Office-esque sitcom in which a friendly band of coworkers snickers behind the bumbling boss's back. As writer James Factora suggested in a tweet preceding all of this, perhaps the Test Kitchen's popularity is related to the widespread obsession with The Office. While Factora's tweet reads tongue-in-cheek, it's not wrong, and the love for the show perpetuated the illusion that a toxic workplace can be laughed at and lived with.
The Office has funny moments, but in a way, it led society astray. It suggested that a bad boss who makes clumsy, insensitive comments and makes life hard for employees can be a point of humor, instead of a toxic presence that could be booted. Who does that benefit except bosses? As BA turned the Test Kitchen into essentially its own sitcom, with each cooking star becoming an Office-esque talking head, it furthered the false notion of the perfect workplace, and people online were quick to gobble it up. The interactions between co-workers, even when off-putting, became meme fodder and pushed stans to throw their support behind their chosen star.
The idea that everything gets bad once it gets big sounds like a line ripped from Portlandia, but it is a maxim that applies to everything from emo bands to hashtags to dog breeds to cooking hosts. The higher the platform we give something, the more it can fall, and the discourse around the Test Kitchen seemed unprecedented in its fawning, at least within the food sphere. (Though we might have learned from situations like the downfall of Mario Batali.)
When we laud any product or person to this extent and make it an object of cultural obsession, it becomes easier to ignore the flaws and the parts of the conversation that don't fit what we want to see. This is true for the Test Kitchen, which could never really have met the inflated expectations of goodness that stan culture built up around it; people saw the perfect workplace because they wanted a perfect workplace. The problems at BA are institutional, but stan culture allowed people to compartmentalize the Test Kitchen as something separate and authentic.
In response to all of this, BA's parent company Condé Nast—a 111-year-old company with 6,000 employees globally at the start of this year—has announced that it will be "accelerating" its first ever diversity and inclusion report. On Tuesday, Amanda Shapiro, the editor of BA's Healthyish spinoff, became the brand's acting deputy director, and on Wednesday, the editors of BA said in a statement, "We want to be transparent, accountable, and active as we begin to dismantle racism at our brands."
Still, former staffers have identified Shapiro and other remaining BA employees as complicit in "toxic" behaviors. Despite calls for Matt Duckor, Condé Nast's head of programming for lifestyle and style, to step down over the unfair pay system and his mocking tweets about the gay community, he remains employed, as does Alex Delany. Both of them have issued social media apologies. With this new context, though, the joking tweets and fawning memes about the Test Kitchen don't hold up as well.
No surprise, Test Kitchen stans have responded to this all with even more memes and lionizing statements: "Update: we went to war for Sohla from the Bon Appétit test kitchen," reads one popular tweet. The height of the pedestal hasn't changed, though who's on the pedestal has. But as Bon Appétit changes, will its fan culture change also? To grapple with all of this new knowledge, it should.
Follow Bettina Makalintal on Twitter.
via VICE US - undefined US VICE US - undefined US via Mom's Kitchen Recipe Network Mom's Kitchen Recipe Network
0 notes
latoyajkelson70506 · 4 years
Text
The 'Bon Appétit' Test Kitchen and the Myth of the Happy Workplace
The Bon Appétit Test Kitchen and its so-called "cinematic universe" has been described as follows: a "bright spot" in a "sea of garbage," the "internet's favorite cooking show," a form of "Sunday therapy," "an unstoppable force," "meme gods," and even "a Green New Deal fantasy," whatever that means.
Every night, "I check in with the chefs at Bon Appétit like I’m catching up with old friends," Louis Peitzman wrote for Buzzfeed in 2018. Another piece from earlier this year claimed the secret to Bon Appétit's YouTube success was that "everyone is just so damn likable." And having been graced with the crew's presence at the company's "Best Weekend Ever" late last year, writer and Who? Weekly host Bobby Finger recalled, "I felt not just starstruck but crazy. I mean actually deranged!"
Those are just the fawning articles. The Test Kitchen also has fan-run meme pages, an official merch store, two subreddits, and two more devoted specifically to personality Brad Leone and Gourmet Makes star Claire Saffitz. Saffitz, the kitchen's most beloved host, has been described as "the internet's collective crush," about whom people say things like "I would die for Claire" and imitate for Halloween or TikTok fame.
Man Repeller reported late last year that the channel was the fastest-growing in YouTube's food space, with more than 40 million views per month and over 5 billion total minutes watched. It currently has 6 million subscribers. As its hordes of doting fans propped the Bon Appétit Test Kitchen on the highest pedestal, the magazine's staff turned into micro-celebrities, their interpersonal dynamics became objects of obsession, and overall, the workplace was seen as a wholesome culinary ideal. What the Test Kitchen's cult of celebrity obfuscated, however, is that the Test Kitchen is just that: a workplace, like that of any other large—and therefore likely imperfect, if not problematic—institution. So honestly, what did any of us expect?
twitter
As the world found out in industry-shaking fashion this week, the reality of the Test Kitchen isn't the bastion of good that its stans have willed it to be. Last weekend, writer Illyanna Maisonet posted an exchange with Editor-in-Chief Adam Rapoport in which he effectively told her that Puerto Rican food wasn't trendy enough for the magazine to cover, and it read as another example of the brand's diversity problem. On Monday, after writer Tammie Teclemariam posted an old photo of Rapoport and his wife Simone Shubuck dressed in costumes centered on Puerto Rican stereotypes (in the photo, which Shubuck captioned "#TBT me and my papi #boricua," Rapoport wears a silver chain and durag), staffers blew open the door on the company's toxic culture, which has been emotionally and financially unsupportive of people of color. Rapoport—who, amid claims of brownface, maintains that he did not color his skin for the image—resigned the same day.
As assistant food editor Sohla El-Waylly wrote on Instagram on Monday, not only was she hired for her role at the rate of $50,000 per year despite her 15 years of experience (and the high cost of living in New York, where the company is located), but she was "pushed in front of video as a display of diversity" and not even paid for those appearances. Per Buzzfeed, El-Waylly and other hosts of color weren't paid for their video work, which is arranged through contracts with Condé Nast Entertainment, while white video stars were compensated. As the floodgates burst open, Twitter users soon dug up drinks editor Alex Delany's old internet history, which included a 2013 Vine of him saying the F-slur, a Confederate flag cake he'd posted to Tumblr, and a series of sexist tweets.
A damning report from Business Insider on Wednesday showed how far the brand's problems extended. From conversations with 14 former and current staffers, writer Rachel Premack concluded that BA was a "locus for exclusion and toxicity." Ryan Walker-Hartshorn, Rapoport's assistant for close to three years and the only Black woman on staff, was repeatedly denied raises from her $35,300 base salary and treated by Rapoport like "the help," in her words. "There is a big difference in terms of how they monetarily value the white employees versus the people of color," El-Waylly told BI.
On YouTube, BA's channel landed at exactly the right time. Compared to other food channels, which increasingly felt over-produced, the Test Kitchen videos were less polished; they had more personality; and they made the filming and editing processes clear. BA's videos resonated philosophically as well. Saffitz's Gourmet Makes, in which she attempts to recreate popular processed foods, is visibly an arduous and frustrating multi-day process, and at Mashable, Morgan Sung described Saffitz's series as an example of "probably the healthiest, most productive way to approach issues," while Quartz called her the "ultimate life coach."
Though the Test Kitchen's transformation into a celebrity force has been good for business, it's also set things up for exactly the reckoning that's happening now.
As with the recent situation involving Alison Roman (who got her start at BA), Chrissy Teigen, and Marie Kondo, the Test Kitchen's growing popularity and prestige outside the insular food world has complicated our ability to talk about its issues with clarity. Just as the bigger conversation about Roman and who tends to profit from cooking global food (the answer: white cooks) was largely portrayed as just a celebrity "Twitter feud," the changes at BA have been framed as the oversimplified result of a "brown face photo sparking anger" or the resurfacing of a "racially insensitive photo." The celebrity culture of the Test Kitchen begets the treatment celebrities get at gossip rags: reductive, lacking in nuance, and sounding the alarm for critics of "cancel culture." It's more than that, though.
The Test Kitchen's gargantuan online presence overrode its offline truth, as it projected and leaned into what people wanted to see, which was an Office-esque sitcom in which a friendly band of coworkers snickers behind the bumbling boss's back. As writer James Factora suggested in a tweet preceding all of this, perhaps the Test Kitchen's popularity is related to the widespread obsession with The Office. While Factora's tweet reads tongue-in-cheek, it's not wrong, and the love for the show perpetuated the illusion that a toxic workplace can be laughed at and lived with.
The Office has funny moments, but in a way, it led society astray. It suggested that a bad boss who makes clumsy, insensitive comments and makes life hard for employees can be a point of humor, instead of a toxic presence that could be booted. Who does that benefit except bosses? As BA turned the Test Kitchen into essentially its own sitcom, with each cooking star becoming an Office-esque talking head, it furthered the false notion of the perfect workplace, and people online were quick to gobble it up. The interactions between co-workers, even when off-putting, became meme fodder and pushed stans to throw their support behind their chosen star.
The idea that everything gets bad once it gets big sounds like a line ripped from Portlandia, but it is a maxim that applies to everything from emo bands to hashtags to dog breeds to cooking hosts. The higher the platform we give something, the more it can fall, and the discourse around the Test Kitchen seemed unprecedented in its fawning, at least within the food sphere. (Though we might have learned from situations like the downfall of Mario Batali.)
When we laud any product or person to this extent and make it an object of cultural obsession, it becomes easier to ignore the flaws and the parts of the conversation that don't fit what we want to see. This is true for the Test Kitchen, which could never really have met the inflated expectations of goodness that stan culture built up around it; people saw the perfect workplace because they wanted a perfect workplace. The problems at BA are institutional, but stan culture allowed people to compartmentalize the Test Kitchen as something separate and authentic.
In response to all of this, BA's parent company Condé Nast—a 111-year-old company with 6,000 employees globally at the start of this year—has announced that it will be "accelerating" its first ever diversity and inclusion report. On Tuesday, Amanda Shapiro, the editor of BA's Healthyish spinoff, became the brand's acting deputy director, and on Wednesday, the editors of BA said in a statement, "We want to be transparent, accountable, and active as we begin to dismantle racism at our brands."
Still, former staffers have identified Shapiro and other remaining BA employees as complicit in "toxic" behaviors. Despite calls for Matt Duckor, Condé Nast's head of programming for lifestyle and style, to step down over the unfair pay system and his mocking tweets about the gay community, he remains employed, as does Alex Delany. Both of them have issued social media apologies. With this new context, though, the joking tweets and fawning memes about the Test Kitchen don't hold up as well.
No surprise, Test Kitchen stans have responded to this all with even more memes and lionizing statements: "Update: we went to war for Sohla from the Bon Appétit test kitchen," reads one popular tweet. The height of the pedestal hasn't changed, though who's on the pedestal has. But as Bon Appétit changes, will its fan culture change also? To grapple with all of this new knowledge, it should.
Follow Bettina Makalintal on Twitter.
via VICE US - undefined US VICE US - undefined US via Mom's Kitchen Recipe Network Mom's Kitchen Recipe Network
0 notes