"a fish, a barrel, and a smoking gun" |
Dream Girl Thomas Pynchon's Lotion interview convinced us that Esquire isn't really all that picky about who it profiles, so at first the sight of an unknown actress on the cover didn't seem so unusual. Equally ordinary was the story itself - on Hollywood "It Girl" Allegra Coleman, nestled in the feature well along with an article naming the year's best new restaurants and another celebrating the Baldwin brothers' political consciousness. Not only is Coleman the object of David Schwimmer's affections and the star of Woody Allen's forthcoming film, writer Martha Sherrill reports in the hype-heavy prose typical of such puff pieces - the rising star is actually emblematic of Hollywood today. Or as the magazine puts it on the contributors' page: "If Allegra Coleman did not exist, someone would have to invent her." By now you probably know the punchline: She didn't, so Sherrill did. In a press release sent out over the newswires, Esquire revealed that the profile is a hoax - "a parody of the celebrity journalism that's run wild in the '90s." While we await forthcoming releases revealing that the magazine's similarly featherweight pieces on Oscar De La Hoya and the up-and-coming actress Tilda Swinton are actually artfully skewering the conventions of their respective genres, it's hard to tell how anyone who didn't read the original would know the Coleman story is bogus. Especially in a magazine that's been known to publish the occasional puff profile itself. Not only does an unironic read of the story fit in all too well with the rest of the magazine, there's nothing in the feature itself that invites suspicion - especially in an age when plenty of celebrities we've barely
heard of before their second major role. Editor-in-Chief Edward Kosner says in the press release that "sophisticated readers will get the joke," but we wonder if he's actually referring to Esquire readers; after all, he was the one who reintroduced the cartoon mascot Esky into a magazine once known for publishing some of the most sophisticated journalism in America. Besides, it's one thing to expect media savvy, quite another to expect subscribers to thumb through press releases as supplementary reading. Provided anyone in the intended audience actually does get the joke, who exactly is it pointed toward? Mocking the likes of US and Entertainment Weekly certainly allows Esquire to occupy the moral high ground, but the piece's just-us-guys point of view (it mentions Coleman's "triumphant breasts" in a way we kinda think People wouldn't) pegs it as a definite men's mag piece. Sure, rival GQ will probably blush a little, but the Coleman satire seems more like self-parody than anything directed outward. It's as if Spin ran an enthusiastic article about a (bogus) hot new band or Wired printed a positive piece on a (fictional) cool young venture capitalist. Sometimes even playful parody hits a little too close to the bone. Any self-parody aspect was all but ignored by media reporters eager to see the once-proud magazine rack up some relevance
points with typically breathless prose about the hot new actress - then revealed in the second or third graf that she was invented. Others chuckled over what the Associated Press called "the real joke": The woman who portrayed Coleman, Ali Larter, is reportedly talking to an agent and has already appeared on "Good Morning America" - no doubt to talk about her demanding role. It should come as no surprise that Larter's star is rising - Esquire's parody is intended to poke fun at the speed of celebrity as well as its vapidity. But the real joke is how quickly journalists turned a magazine's publicity ploy into a creative coup. Even more formulaic than the celebrity journalism Sherrill mocks, their pieces give Esquire a veneer of hip it lost long ago. Even the somewhat more sober Salon calls the profile "a stunt reminiscent of Esquire's glory days in the '60s." Facile as this may be, we doubt Kosner and crew will pull out their pens to parody such puffery. It's even more important to read your press than weigh it, especially when your own magazine has been getting thinner by the year. courtesy of Dr. Dreidel
| |
![]() |