4/12/08

I have my standards.

I LOVE to read. When I gave birth to Zoe, I found I could no longer read my stack of novels, the New Yorker, the newspapers, the WRITING ON THE CEREAL BOX. I needed very short stories with lots of pictures and vicarious thrills. After weeks of begging for weekly drugstore runs to find something to read, I actually bought a subscription ("We'll save money!") to the one periodical (ha! HAHAHAHA!) that fulfilled my need for the written word in the most simple, satisfying form.

I am, of course, talking about US magazine.

I would await it's arrival in the mailbox with bated breath and retrieve it, infant tucked under one arm, with reverence. I would devise different ways to read it to make it last a little longer. I would lap up the pictures of stars picking their noses ("Just like US!") and deeply ponder the "Who Wore it Best?" comparisons.

Once we got through the first few months of Zoe's life (the "whatever gets you through the day, honey" months), my husband asked me when I would cancel my subscription. Surely I was ready for real reading? And aren't I the same person who regularly decries our culture's obsession with celebrity?

With Zoe nearly two, I finally sat down in front of my computer last Friday and canceled my subscription. Unfortunately I cannot say that it was any of CG's reasons that got through to me. What got me was the CONSTANT, IN EVERY ISSUE focus on those freaking Hills girls! Now, I love reality TV as much as the next girl (I can go toe to toe with anyone on trivia about the first 6 seasons of Survivor and the first ten of The Real World), but I'm SO OVER these girls and the ENDLESS stream of coverage of them DOING NOTHING.

So, perhaps, it's off to People I go. Just don't tell my husband.

2 comments:

Swistle said...

I'm getting SO TIRED of the Hills coverage, too! WTH, US Weekly? WTH?

People is better.

Sarah said...

I second that. People is definitely better. It's a little classier- it's the Target to US Weekly's Wal-Mart.

Blog Designed by: NW Designs