Today's Hate Reading: Megan Fox Profile in Esquire


Wait, WHAT? What do they think is wrong with AMY ADAMS?
I think that purple prose from Stephen Marche has less to do with being a straight man (if he is) than being a capital-w Writer, and one with "a doctorate in early modern English drama from the University of Toronto."

Also, blame Canada.
"There is absolutely nothing wrong with her (aside from her personality)."
That Elizabeth Wurtzel piece! The commas, the name dropping, the navel gazing, ugh.
I think part of the problem is this thing that journalists do where they have an assignment, and no matter how boring their subject is, they feel they need to describe it like it's the most interesting thing in the world, because that is what Great Writers do.

Also See: issue of minor importance that randomly becomes the Most Challenging Crisis to ever face humanity, because a Great Writer is writing about it.
You expected something other than this from Esquire magazine? You saw the cover, right?
It changed hands several times after the old Esquire era of the thirties to mid-seventies, and doesn't have much connection. It hovers in the continuum of Maxim, GQ, and Details, as far as I can see. Guys hitting all the keystrokes needed to sound smart enough to fill the spaces around the ads and photo spreads.
^^That describes most publications
Every modern journalist is a complete twat.*

*Few notable exceptions exist.
I was on the phone with the office of the CEO of Esquire after I read that piece. My friend Ira Lipshitz said it was way out of line.
Oh noes, Megan Fox is the worst human ever because she's more attractive than 99.9% of the competitive-minded women who hate her. How DARE she!
I'm so proud I wrote for Esquire one time. ONE TIME.
Hey! You have UNDERSTAND Liz Wurtzel's article!…