Golden Globs

I, for one, am disappointed by the cancelation of the usual Golden Globes ceremony tonight--in which stars in their glitziest on-loan designer-wear have traditionally got shitfaced on camera and spoken incoherently on stage.

I am particularly fond of the memory of under-rehearsed presenter Elizabeth Taylor unable to read the TelePrompter and acting like just any other senior citizen trying to maneuver call waiting on an iPhone.

More precious still were those cutaway shots showing strapless-gowned and tuxedoed celebrities openly leering at each other and all but drooling into appletinis.

It was never about the prizes ... not for me. Just under 100 members of the Hollywood Foreign Press Association determine who the nominees and winners will be. Hardly a credible or representative assembly of voters. The election process does not impress me as particularly scientific or meaningful.

For me it was the carnival mess of the Golden Globes that fascinated.

At the Golden Globes, one could witness the glamor of disorganization. At the Golden Globes, one could watch usually too-cool-for-you gangsta rappers break into a sweat over what Kathy Griffin may say to them. At the Golden Globes, one could grimace with delight to hear usually competent actors badly fake modesty and nonchalance.

It was your best nightmare of a high-school prom writ large in klieg lights and red carpeting.

This year, because of the Hollywood writers' strike and major stars' support of the strike, the Golden Globes will be presented as part of a simple and presumably dignified press announcement.

Too bad. I will sincerely miss the vulgarity of it all.

On the other hand, I am considerably less impressed with the gaudy mess that is now American politics.

If only the network pundits would go on strike, we could conduct this year's presidential election without the circus atmosphere and misleading prognostications.

Why can't America elect a president by simply having a large number of candidates present their positions and credentials before the public, and then publicly and directly challenge or defend each others' positions and credentials, and then let the electorate decide for itself who the next president should be?

Then the winner could be announced on all the networks in a simple and dignified meeting with members of the press.

It's said that Washington, DC, is Hollywood for ugly people. By analogy, then, the arrogant ineptitude and hubris of American news media make coverage of the U.S. elections the equivalent of an awards show (a really BAD awards show) for ugly people.