I was telling one of my boss at work this morning that I was really surprised to learn that Enid Blyton was not a man. Whoa, she exclaimed, you have to write about it. So I did.

Anyone up for buying me a present?

I e-mailed 20th Fox Century’s press office, entered every competition I could think of, even added pictures of my kitten to my e-mails as proof that I am a dedicated fan and prayed - atheist style- for a ticket to the official screening this Wednesday but nothing, no premiere for Jess. And all this after Mark told me that he thought I was England’s most deserving girl when it comes to being invited to see the movie.

I mean, who are those cold hearted people resisiting pictures of kittens, anyway? Jeez, I would have blog positively about the movie for free! Even if it is a disaster!* Ah, PR people are stupid.

Well, at least some people’s genius are cheering me up. I really need that embroidery pattern.

* My friend Matt says the movie is “potentially the most tarnishing crack at a legacy ever”.

Near my work is a lovely little park adjacent to a street food market. I usually have my lunch there when it’s not raining and am a sucker for the market’s mushrooms stall (held by Sporeboys) whose people make wonderul portobello, tomatoes and haloumi burgers. God, Halumi is the best food I have discovered this year.

The park is home to wonderful lavender plants and a wild garden, and I couldn’t resist but to pick some branches the other day - is it illegal? Point is, I decided it was time to either learn how to make an orange and lavender cake, or get creative with it. I mixed some buds ( two teaspoons) with soft brown sugar in a glass jar, and topped it with half a vanilla pod. I am expecting a very fragrant sugar in a couple of weeks - I already tried it after a couple of days and was pleasantly surprised.

I think I will use it in spicy teas or on fresh baguette with butter. I am not sure about a potential use in cakes, but who knows?

In other news, X-files movie = D-day minus 2. To say I am ridiculously hopeful and excited is an understatement but to be fair, even if the movie turns out to be painfully bad, I am certain I will be one defend it. Which brings me to something even more embarrassing: I had a great woman over for dinner last night, who also happens to be quite the feminist. I am not sure how this conversation started, but we realised that we both had something for Charmed (gasp) and Grey’s fucking anatomy (double gasp). Oh boy, did it make me feel better to know a hardcore feminist, like me, was totally down with retarded TV shows, as well as the good ones*.

*Mark and I finished season 4 of The Wire and while Six Feet Under is still my all time favourite, damn, all the TV scenesters were right. This show is amazing.

I have a new blog entry up on Comment is Free re: Jezebel. A bit late to the game but whaddyaknow, still trying to make a point.

Here’s a recipe for a good blogosphere scandal: take two sassy, trendsetter bloggers writing for one of Gawker Media’s most popular sites. Invite them to a comedy show that will be broadcast online and have them interviewed by a ruthless and nosy host eager to discuss their sex lives. Add a lot of free alcohol to the mix, and you have the perfect ingredients for the viral equivalent of a car crash. [read the rest here]

“But I think because we in some sense have shared the ups and downs of literary life together for so many years that it’s almost like breathing.” (via)

I think it was my friend Faith who first mentioned ‘What I loved’, the second novel written by Siri Hustvedt. One small detail pushed me to buy the book as soon as she mentioned it: Hustvedt is Paul Austers’ wife, and of course Auster is one of my all time favourite artist.

I loved her novel and quickly read her other works through the years. And as it happened, I just finished her new book, The Sorrows of an American. I thought it was wonderful, but one thing stopped me in my tracks and forced me to reflect is how similar her writing is to her husband’s.

I am absolutely not interested in knowing who was ‘first’ in writing in such a style, who thought of using serendipity and coincidences with such gusto, or who decided to paint post 9/11 NY in such lights. But the obvious question are at which point does a marriage start to really influence an artist’s thought process? Would both Auster and Hustvedt write in similar manners should they not have met? Do they talk and inspire one another during the writing process?

In retrospect, and having read more than my share of Auster interviews, I recognized much of his (their?) lives in her words: the quick mention of holidays and villa renting in Provence, the beautifully described white middle class guilt, the interest in the occult and the paranormal (Mr Vertigo), the symbolic metaphor (The Country of Last Things), the celebration of multiculturalism (Smoke) or the postmodern love letter to America.

They are, of course, many differences in their prose. I think Hustvedt does the sensual and erotic better than her husband, and she undeniably is more subtle than him in myriad of ways - I would even dare to say this is due to her gender, but I would hate to jump the gun.

So where does that leave me? Oh, yes: when two artists -or two human beings, for that matter- spend so much time together, do they end up seeing things with the same eyes? Are they inspired by the same details in their environment? When I try to think of different couple using the same medium as a creative outlets ( Frida Khalo and Diego Rivera, Simone de Beauvoir and Jean Paul Sartre, Kurt Cobain and Courtney Love, hell, even Van Gogh and Gaugin), I think it’s definitely safe to say there is an element of competition and envy in their relationship. As Auster’s books are receiving less and less positive reviews (fools!) while his wife’s novels are widely acclaimed, I wonder if he’s just proud to be with her, or just frankly peeved.

… Did I mention his name is not in the book’s ackowledgments?

This art project made my morning:

Somehow, I am sure the tree is very grateful. More here and here.

You know, considering the number of Law and Order episodes produced since 1990 (that would be 403), and the number of times I have watched the show (less than a dozen), I really don’t understand why when catching reruns, it’s always episodes that I have seen already.

Finally, someone understood how to successfully release music online - and under a Creative Commons license, no less. For some reason if feels way more natural than Radiohead’s first try. It might be because Reznor produced Saul Williams’ latest album, which was released in the exact same way (albeit with less options). Mark - always the devil’s advocate, but most often than not right [argh] - pointed that the decision is easy for a multi-platinum artist, but i can see how this would also work for smaller bands too. Thoughts?

me: Saw the NIN? If you buy the deluxe package you get an LP signed by Trent - awesome. It’s way more clever than radiohead to give people options like that - also it’s released on a CC license. Love Trent.

mark: Yeah, but it’s all stupid… It’s all well and good if you’re a multi platinum selling rockstar who is already a millionaire, but it hardly helps new bands.

me: Well, duh - but his job is not to help new bands. Also, saul williams is not massive, and he did the same.

mark: It was with trent reznor though!

me: Yeah but even so - it’s not the entire cd - The new NIN is 9 free tracks only. Small bands can use this model: release an LP of 5 free songs, have people download the rest for 5 quid, they’d still earn more than with a contract.

Photo via.

In an ideal world, this is where I’d be on April 18-20. Absolutely fascinating. I would love to go, anyone willing to come along?