Insipid Magazine by Jamie Sigadel

Volume 4 . Issue 5 Education Issue

INSIPID MAGAZINE : EDUCATION

from the editor

School’s out for summer - and that only means on thing: TV. Sure, you could entertain yourself by going to the beach.. but why do that, when you can get all the beach excitement – the sun, the surf, the attractive people frolicking about – from the safety of your own couch? Because really, the beach is kind of gross. You get sand in unwanted places, there’s kids everywhere.. Before you know it, if you’ve lied in the sun for two hours and now you have sunburn. And, to think, it could’ve been avoided.

CONTRIBUTORS PUBLISHER Sigadel Inc EDITOR Jamie Sigadel CONTRIBUTORS Adam Assen Linda Donelley Trish Hanson Zach Johnson Emily Nussbaum R. Kurt Osenland Karen Thomas John Tierney DESIGNER Jamie Sigadel PRINTED MagCloud Glossy Paper ÂŠ

14 st

-a

’S

d’s

y e fe b mi ec ly am nu e t ss he ba fi um rs t

12 ea

ies

th ma e fo rr rm ia ul ge a s’ th do at om pr by ed jo ict ho hn s c te w t ch he tie ele no go rn br lo od ey ity gy w b i

10 06

CONTENTS ISSUE 1: EDUCATION

WHAT’S HAPPENING

FOUR OF THE MOST ANTICIPATED SUMMER FILMS BY R. KURT OSENLUND

Between superhero orgies (The Avengers) and bubblegum 3D concerts (Katy Perry: Part of Me 3D), there’s a rich array of warm-weather fare, from pintsized love stories (Moonrise Kingdom) to sci-fi prequels (Prometheus) to breakout festival faves (Beasts of The Southern Wild, The Queen of Versailles). In addition to catching the final chapter of Christopher Nolan's Batman saga (The Dark Knight Rises), we’re dying to see Joachim Trier's follow-up to Reprise (Oslo, August 31st), Hirokazu Kore-eda's latest sure-to-be humanistic triumph (I Wish), and a twisted revenge-horror flick that's already made waves in Australia (The Loved Ones). If there’s time after Channing Tatum's semi-autobigraphical strip show (Magic Mike), we might squeeze in a sit with The Avengers, but only if they promise to deactivate Katy’s whipped-cream boob cannons for good. 1 I WISH /

INSIPID MAGAZINE : EDUCATION

« Above: Oslo. A recovering drug addict takes a break from rehab to catch up with old friends.

1. Dir. Hirokazu Kore-eda, May 11 From After Life to Still Walking, Japanese auteur Hirokazu Kore-eda has proven himself a master of richly drawn family drama and soulful meditations on loss. For his latest effort, he gently lightens the mood to tell the tale of two young brothers (real-life siblings Koki Maeda and Oshiro Maeda) on a mission to reunite. Any film by Kore-eda is pretty much unmissable, and what’s more, this one reunites him with Still Walking standouts Hiroshi Abe and Kirin Kiki. 2. Moonrise Kingdom / Dir. Wes Anderson, May 25 Wes Anderson’s first live-action film since 2007’s The Darjeeling Limited sees his singular whimsy channeled into an appropriately youthful yarn, which tells of two pre-teen lovebirds (Jared Gilman and Kara Hayward) who fly the coop and leave their small town’s adults in an Andersonian frenzy. As usual, the obsessive production design looks to be as colorful as the cast, which also includes Bruce Willis, Frances McDormand, Tilda Swinton, Edward Norton, Harvey Keitel, and Anderson favorites Bill Murray and Jason Schwartzman.

“TRUE BLOOD” MINI TRAILER:INSIDE TERRY’S CHARACTER IN SEASON 5 BY TRISH HANSON The new season of hbos hit vampire show, True Blood is due to premier in June and fans have been waiting in anticipation. There are a few trailers out for the new season, but a new one was just released today. It focuses on Terry, played by Todd Lowe, and how he has to battle some personal demons this season. In the new trailer, someone has Terry cornered. With Terry is Patrick, played by Scott Foley. Welearned at the end of season four that Patrick is Terry’s former platoon leader. The person with gun, who we don’t see, keeps asking Patrick and Terry if “anything” followed them. It’s not “anyone,” but “anything.” Terry found out in season four that Patrick was alive, which was not something he was quite ready to deal with. Patrick knows all about Terry’s past. While we’ve learned quite a bit about Terry over the four previous seasons, there’s a lot that the viewers will learn in season five. There’s going to be a lot of things that Arlene, who is played by Carrie Preston.

We don’t know yet if Patrick will be a good guy or not. What we do know is that he’s going to end up making life difficult for Terry at the very least. The way that Terry will deal with his past will certainly fit the tagline for the new show, which is “Nothing stays buried forever.” For those that have read the True Blood series by Charlotte Harris, they know that tagline has a lot to do with the return of Russell Edgington. It’s not going to be a pretty sight when he finally gets loose from his cement grave. Have no fear, fans. The wait is not much longer and our Sunday evenings will be busy once again.

What can be worse than a possessed baby? Stay tuned to find out! »

3. Oslo, August 31st / Dir. Joachim Trier, May 25 With Reprise, Danish-Norwegian filmmaker Joachim Trier served up a stunning groove of a debut, evoking a handful of clear, iconic influences while musing over the dueling beasts of friendship and creative expression. His sophomore film, which has already been widely lauded on the festival circuit, reunites him with exciting Reprise lead Anders Danielsen Lie, who this time stars as a jobless, Gen-Y addict adrift on the streets of Oslo. Winner of Best Film and Best Cinematography at last year’s Stockholm International Film Festival, the movie, like Trier’s first, was just a tad too slick to land on Oscar’s Foreign shortlist. 4. Prometheus / Dir. Ridley Scott, June 8) Despite the hubbub over flicks like Thelma & Louise, Gladiator, and Black Hawk Down, some would argue that Ridley Scott hasn’t made a decent film since his one-two sci-fi punch of Alien and Blade Runner in 1979 and 1982, respectively. With Prometheus, a largely shrouded and brilliantly advertised pseudo Alien pre-quel, the atmospheric director at last returns to his strongest genre, employing the beloved elements of his two greatest movies. This is easily the summer’s most intriguing big-budget title.

INSIPID MAGAZINE : EDUCATION

MARA WILSON: WHY I QUIT FILM ACTING BY ZACH JOHNSON As a child actress, Mara Wilson captivated audiences in family-friendly films like Matilda, Miracle on 34th Street and Mrs. Doubtfire. After 2000's Thomas & the Magic Railroad, however, Wilson left showbiz behind – without much explanation. Wilson, who studied art at New York University and now works as a playwright, finally addressed her early retirement in a March blog post.

“Imagine that when you were a child, you liked to finger-paint. It was a fun pastime, but it came easily to you, so you never took much pride in it.”

“Regardless, you got a reputation for your finger-painting. Now imagine that, 15 to 29 years later, people are coming up to you and telling you that they have your finger-paintings up on their walls and that your finger-paints changed your life. It’s flattering, but you haven't finger-painted in years, and it seems like something you did a long, long time ago. You’ve realized you don’t particularly enjoy getting your hands dirty and that there are other outlets for your creative urges. But people are adamant: ’Are you going to finger-paint again? When? Wait, you’re not? Why not?’ That's what it feels like.”

INSIPID MAGAZINE : EDUCATION

Though Wilson still hears from her fans on Facebook and Twitter “nearly every day,” she doesn't missing being in movies. “Film acting is not very fun,” she writes. ‘Doing the same thing over and over again until, in the director's eyes, you ‘get it right,’ does not allow for very much creative freedom. The best times I had on film sets were the times the director let me express myself, but those were rare.” She adds: “Film can be exciting, but more often, it’s tedious. The celebrity aspect is nothing short of ridiculous, and auditioning is dehumanizing.”

“Every time I see a pretty young girl on the subway reading sides for an audition, my only thought is: Man, am I glad I'm not doing that anymore. I never feel nostalgia, just relief.”

Left: Mara Wilson as Matilda, the telekentic prodigy with really, really crappy parents. »

Wilson goes on to say that “there are many much more talented, much more conventionally attractive actresses out there who are taking the roles I would have been offered,” like Anna Kendrick, 26, Ellen Page, 25, and Jennifer Lawrence, 21. The former child star then reiterates that she doesn't “have any plans to pursue film acting. It's not my ‘thing’ anymore, if it ever was. Yes, I do still act [on stage] sometimes. But when I do, it’s with people I know and trust, people who respect me as a person and appreciate what I have to offer.” With no desire to ever return to the spotlight, Wilson adds: “And no, you will never see me on Dancing With the Stars. Sorry.”

COINED IN THE REALM OF CELEBRITY COUPLES BY KAREN THOMAS It’s an old-fashioned concept from Lewis Carroll that has proved to have staying power when it comes to most celebrity couples. For instance: Brad Pitt and Angelina Jolie equals Brangelina. Or, Tom Cruise and Katie Holmes equals TomKat. The mania started in 2002 or 2003, when Ben Affleck and Jennifer Lopez were dating amid huge media scrutiny, and at some point “Bennifer” was coined. The moniker became so ingrained in popular culture that Affleck poked fun at it on nbc’s Saturday Night Live. “A lot of it has to do with convenience and poking fun at celebrities,” says Jared Eng, who writes a popular celebrity blog called Just Jared. “Plus, they really attract attention in headlines and captions. I’ve noticed even the Associated Press has started using the nicknames.” And there’s good reason for the staying power of nicknames, says linguist Joshua Gunn, a professor at the University of Texas-Austin.

“It sells and is, more or less, cute,” Gunn says. “That is, the blended name reflects the commodity nature of public Hollywood romances, and the blending itself is phonetically pleasing, of course.” But not all A-list power couples have earned a uniname. Eng says the reason may be that not all celebrities evoke strong emotions — negative or positive — among online star-gazers. “There’s a lot of TomKat haters or Brangelina haters,” he says. “But not many people feel that strongly about Gwyneth Paltrow and Chris Martin.”

INSIPID MAGAZINE : EDUCATION

Above: Juliana Margulies leads a fantastic cast in CBS’ The Good Wife. »

HOW “THE GOOD WIFE” BECAME THE FIRST GREAT SERIES ABOUT TECHNOLOGY Set in Barack Obama’s home city of Chicago, The Good Wife went at its theme sideways, with cunning and great TV craftsmanship. With her helmet of hair and black-slash eyebrows, Julianna Margulies’ Florrick was a mysterious figure, gifted at hiding motives, even from herself. In the first episode, she was still recovering from the press conference at which her husband, Peter (Chris Noth), the Cook County state attorney, had confessed to having sex with prostitutes. The press nick-named her St. Alicia, a sneer embossed on a pedestal. While Peter was in jail, awaiting trial for corruption, he took a job as a junior litigator, transforming herself into a single working parent, paying legal fees, a mother-in-law, and a divorce. What has received less notice than the show’s complexity and its bold female characters is its unprecedented emphasis on technology. This season alone, Lockhart Gardner took a case involving the online currency Bitcoin; used Twitter to upend British libel laws; handled a military case involving drone warfare; litigated crimes featuring violent video games and a “date rape” app; and dealt with various leaked-image disasters (a corporation fighting a viral video, an Anthony Weiner-like dirty photograph).

INSIPID MAGAZINE : EDUCATION

By Emily Nassbaum

In one dizzyingly self-reflective story line, a Zuckerbergian entrepreneur sued a Sorkinesque screenwriter; the episode had a confident structural wit, subjecting a writer who defended distorted portrayals to his own distorted portrayal. Over time, such plots have become a dense, provocative dialectic, one that weighs technology’s freedoms against its dangers, with a global sweep and an insider’s nuance. In this quality, The Good Wife stands in contrast not merely to other legal shows, with their “The Internet killed him!” plots, but also to the reductive punditry of the mainstream media, so obsessed with whether Twitter is making us stupid.

Put bluntly, “The Good Wife” is to the digital debate as “The Wire” is to the drug war.

The series is often at its best when it uses technology as a lens to examine the Florricks’ marriage. Like the Clintons, the Florricks train their teen-agers to be discreet. In one of the season’s most affecting sequences, Alicia tells her children that she is leaving their father – but that they must tell no one. “But Mom, that’s lying, that’s hypocritical,” her daughter, Grace, blurts out. Alicia argues that it’s O.K. to deceive people who want to hurt you – what’s important is that they are honest with each other. “You need to protect us more,” Grace responds, and Alicia bursts into tears. While their mother clings to an older ethic, her children can see that no bright line exists between their private and public lives. This season, Grace is drawn both to a YouTube preacher and to a cheerfully self-exposing video artist (played by an actual YouTube dancer, Anne Marsen); she’s fascinated to meet a girl who feels free to make art so spontaneously, without fear of judgment. Meanwhile, her brother stalks a schoolmate’s Facebook page, collecting oppo research that gets his father elected, a dirty trick that his mother never discovers. The show isn’t flawless. Recently, it has been marked by structural tensions, as the writers struggle to contain an overgrowth of subplots—an unfortunate side effect of their remarkable worldbuilding skills. Peter Florrick is state attorney again, and ramping up to run for governor. His former campaign manager, played by Alan Cumming, has joined Alicia’s firm. There are endless cameo players, including a variety pack of quirky judges, as well as lawyers who twist the world’s biases in their favor, like one played by Michael J. Fox, who manipulates juries with his disability, and another, played by Martha Plimpton, who brandishes her baby as a prop. There’s a fascinating subtheme about theatrical femininity, from Carrie Preston’s faux-scatterbrained lawyer to the hyperseductive investigator played by Archie Panjabi. In fact, there’s so much going on that the series risks burying its most dramatic arcs, including the vendetta of Peter’s ex-opponent Wendy Scott-Carr (Anika Noni Rose), who went rogue as a special prosecutor. (In a particularly smart bit of jujitsu, the show took a viewer criticism, that Lockhart Gardner won too many cases to be realistic, and transformed it into a legal threat, as Scott-Carr accused the firm of bribing judges.)

Yet it’s worth noting how daringly the show’s creators avoid obvious plot turns–the kind of twist they called “schmuck bait” in a recent interview–in favor of something stranger and grayer. This season began with Alicia finally consummating her flirtation with Will Gardner, her former friend and now her boss – their chemistry had been building since the première. The elevator scene in which they finally went for it felt explosive. Then, just as quickly, the writers dismantled that bomb: the affair became risky, then absurd, and then it fizzled. In the end, it was clear that Alicia wasn’t in love –and that Will was no hero. She learned that she’d got her job through patronage, that Will had bumped a more qualified candidate. The lovers were forced to watch a hilariously grim sexualharassment video. If the scene between Will and Alicia was repressed, the episode that framed it boiled with outrage. In the case of the week, Gardner represented American activists in Syria—although he was secretly doing so on behalf of that Zuckerbergian magnate, who wanted to undercut his company’s competitor. The activists tried to film police violence, only to be arrested when a software company helped the Syrian government tap their cell phones. There were references to the real-life Wiretappers’ Ball, an international trade fair for surveillance; a plot about a Middle Eastern lesbian blogger unveiled as an American man; a judge (the great Denis O’Hare) besotted by Occupy Wall Street; and sequences involving a vulnerable fixer in Syria, who communicated via Skype and then disappeared. There was a very Good Wife punch line: “I know how we’re going to win the case: tech support.”

INSIPID MAGAZINE : EDUCATION

The Formula That Predicts Celebrity Marriages’ Doom By John Tierney

In 2006, Garth Sundem and I confronted one of the great unsolved mysteries in social science: Exactly how soon will a given celebrity marriage blow up ?

INSIPID MAGAZINE : EDUCATION

Drawing on Garth’s statistical expertise and my extensive survey of the literature in supermarket checkout lines, we published an equation in The New York Times predicting the probability that a celebrity marriage would endure. The equation’s variables included the relative fame of the husband and wife, their ages, the length of their courtship, their marital history, and the sexsymbol factor (determined by looking at the woman’s first five Google hits and counting how many show her in skimpy attire, or no attire). Now, with more five years of follow-up data, we can report firm empirical support for the Sundem/Tierney Unified Celebrity Theory.

The 2006 equation correctly predicted doom for Demi Moore and Ashton Kutcher; Pamela Anderson and Kid Rock; and Britney Spears and Kevin Federline. It also forecast that Will Smith and Jada Pinkett would probably not make it to their 15th anniversary, in December 2012; so far, they’re still married, but gossip columns are rife with reports of a pending split.

THE GOOD NEWS? On a happier note, the 2006 equation identified two couples with a good chance to make it to their fifth anniversary, in 2010: Ben Affleck and Jennifer Garner, and Matt Damon and Luciana Barroso. Sure enough, they made it (and are still married). As impressive as these results are, we believe even more scientific progress is possible. We have refined the equation by drawing on recent data as well as the research conducted by Garth in his fiendishly clever new book, “Brain Trust: 93 Top Scientists Reveal Lab-Tested Secrets to Surfing, Dating, Dieting, Gambling, Growing Man-Eating Plants, and More!”

INSIPID MAGAZINE : EDUCATION

While the 2006 equation did a good job over all of identifying which couples were most likely to divorce, some of the specific predictions proved too pessimistic. Because Demi was so famous – and much more famous than Ashton – we gave their marriage little chance of surviving a year, but they didn’t split until 2011. We were similarly bearish on Tom Cruise and Katie Holmes (because of his fame, his two failed marriages and their age gap), but they’re still together. What went right with them – and wrong with our equation? Garth, a self-professed über-geek, has crunched the numbers and discovered a better way to gauge the toxic effects of celebrity. Whereas the old equation measured fame by counting the millions of Google hits, the new equation uses a ratio of Two other measures: the number of mentions in The Times divided by mentions in The National Enquirer. “This is a major improvement in the equation,” Garth says. “It turns out that overall fame doesn’t matter as much as the flavor of the fame. It’s tabloid fame that dooms you. Sure, Katie Holmes had about 160 Enquirer hits, but she had more than twice as many nyt hits. A high nyt/enq ratio also explains why Chelsea Clinton and Kate Middleton have better chances than the Kardashian sisters.”

THE FEMALE FACTOR Garth’s new analysis shows that it’s the wife’s fame that really matters. While the husband’s nyt/enq ratio is mildly predictive, the effect is so much weaker than the wife’s that it’s not included in the new equation. Nor are some variables from the old equation, like the number of previous marriages and the age gap between husband and wife. In the fine tradition of Occam’s razor, the new equation has fewer variables than the old one. Besides the wife’s tabloid fame, the crucial ones are the spouses’ combined age (younger couples divorce sooner), the length of the courtship (quicker to wed, quicker to split), and the sex-symbol factor (defined formally as the number of Google hits showing the wife “in clothing designed to elicit libidinous intent”).

INSIPID MAGAZINE : EDUCATION

Why is the wife’s sexy image dangerous? And why do her variables, her image, her tabloid fame, matter so much more than her husband’s?

“You could explain this two ways,” Garth says. “Either the guy’s powerless to predict the marriage’s fate, or he’s an enigma, indefinable by numbers. I prefer the latter.” But the former explanation seems more plausible to the experts I consulted, like John G. Holmes, a psychologist at the University of Waterloo in Ontario who studies relationships. “Women initiate 70 percent of breakups, so perhaps that’s why their personality and image are more predictive,” he says. David M. Buss, who analyzed mating strategies around the world in The Evolution of Desire and Why Women Have Sex, suggests several reasons the wife’s sexy image and tabloid fame mean trouble. “Research has documented that women who wear skimpy or sexually provocative clothing tend to be higher on the trait of narcissism,” says Dr. Buss, a psychologist at the University of Texas. “My research on married couples found that the trait of narcissism predicted likelihood of sexual infidelity. Those high on narcissism feel entitled to have sex with others. Also, they oscillate between feelings of grandiosity and worthlessness, and the sexual attention helps keep them in the self-aggrandizing region of self-esteem.” Sexual infidelity is also an excellent strategy for a narcissistic celebrity to get attention from the tabloids. And while the tabloids are happy to go after cheaters of either sex, Dr. Buss says that that research into marriage longevity shows there’s still a double standard: “Sexual infidelity by women is statisti-cally more likely to lead to marital breakup than sexual infidelity by men.” Of course, correlation doesn’t mean causation, says Betsey Stevenson, an economist at Penn who has studied marital longevity. “We know that people marrying young have a much higher chance of divorcing,” Dr. Stevenson says. “But what’s much harder to tell is whether the types of people who marry young are more likely to divorce, or whether the young age at time of marriage actually makes the marriage more prone to divorce.”

INSIPID MAGAZINE : EDUCATION

Above: Kartie Holmes and Tom Cruise seem like candidates for the chopping block - the one requirement being that they’re both famous. »

PREDICTING THE INEVITABLE Either way, we can still use these variables to make predictions. The good news is that, aided by long courtships, a few couples have a better-than-even chance of lasting at least 15 years: Kate and Prince William, Calista Flockhart and Harrison Ford, Chelsea Clinton and Marc Mezvinsky, and Beyoncé Knowles and Jay-Z. Many others are likely to split between their 5th and 15th anniversaries (including Tom and Katie, now in their sixth year), and some aren’t likely to make it that long.

After he crunched the numbers, Garth’s advice to Jessica Simpson and Ms. Spears is to avoid marriage anytime soon. And he doesn’t hold out much long-term hope for a Kardashian sister married to a pro basketball luminary. “I’ve calculated the chance of Khloe Kardashian and Lamar Odom celebrating their golden anniversary,” he says, “Even when I extend it to 15 decimal places, the probability is still zero.”

INSIPID MAGAZINE : EDUCATION

TAREQ + MICHAELE SALAHI

ZOOEY DESCHANEL + BEN GIBBARD

KATY PERRY + RUSSELL BRAND

KIM KARDASHIAN + KRIS HUMPHRIES

WIFE IS MORE FAMOUS

SEAL + HEIDI KLUM

DEMI MOORE + ASHTON KUTCHER

FEMALE SEX-SYMBOL

JENNIFER LOPEZ + MARC ANTHONY

MARRIED A POLITICIAN *

ARNOLD SCHWARZENEGGER + MARIA SHRIVER

COUPLE IS TOO YOUNG

LEAH MESSER + COReY SIMMS

INSIPID MAGAZINE : EDUCATION

ASHLEE SIMPSON + PETE WENTZ

* Marrying a politician, historically - not the best idea.

THE MOST SHOCKING CELEBRITY DIVORCES OF 2011 There have been so many shocking celebrity divorces lately, even by Hollywood standards. Not just breakups, but actual marriages crumbling before our eyes. Some did surprise us more than others, but we can honestly say we didnâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t see any of these divorce filings, all from the last 12 months alone, coming at all.

THE COUPLES WE ROOT FOR

JAY-Z + BEYONCE

FELICITY HUFFMAN + WILLIAM H MACY

TOM HANKS + RITA WILSON

ELLEN DEGENERES + PORTIA DI ROSSI INSIPID MAGAZINE : EDUCATION

The of

“ Kn

INSIPID MAGAZINE : EDUCATION

e Island

“Lost” nowledge By Adam Assen It's 8 a.m. and a room full of University of North Florida literature students is eager to discuss last night's assignment. You'd expect to see bleary-eyed students groaning at the thought of in-depth literary analysis of themes and symbolism, but these 27 scholars can't seem to stop talking. That's because their homework was to watch TV.

INSIPID MAGAZINE : EDUCATION

PLOT POINT Sarah Clarke Stuart teaches a literature course on Lost the hit abc show about the survivors of Oceanic Flight 815 who crashed on a mysterious island. It’s a mystical show full of puzzles, cliffhangers and frustrations. Try to explain the show to non-watchers and you’ll end up sounding like you’re on acid: “I mean, there’s polar bears, ghosts and a smoke moster. And, uh, they travel through time, but they can’t change anything and, uh, there are these others who don’t like the Dharma Initiative. It’s trippy.” With all the references to literature, physics, religion and even math, you almost need a master’s degree to know what’s going on. Avid watchers scour message boards and blogs to unlock the secrets. That’s why Stuart was inspired to create the course last summer. She thought, if there’s all of this passion among young people to analyze the show, couldn’t that passion be used for academic learning? Plus, Stuart really knows the material. The 32-year-old is on the message boards with everyone else, obsessing about her favorite show. A similar course is taught at Tufts University, but besides that, Stuart doesn't know of any other others.

ACADEMIC INTEREST

Last summer, students watched the show’s first season on abc.com and then discussed themes of redemption as each character tries to break free from his or her old self, such as Charlie’s drug addiction or Kate's criminal past. This spring’s course, called The Infinite Narrative, looked at classic literary references and themes in the show. When a character is caught reading James Joyce’s Ulysses, students discuss how that book relates to the show.

The class isn’t water cooler talk, predicting what’s going to happen next week. It’s about analyzing what it all means. “I try to refer to it as a narrative instead of a show,” she said, “because I do try to compare it to other narratives like plays and books.”

MOTIVATION TOOL Stuart said she has students from her other classes who hated analyzing books. But when it comes to Lost, they have no problem discussing character development and story structure. “They would never do it for, say, a Henry James novel, but they’ll do it for Lost,” she said. “It’s the same skills. It’s because they are into the stories. I think it just makes such a difference, the motivation of the students.”

Physics

Philosophy

Oh, time travel. The most complicated part of the show. It might seem far fetched, but the time travel rules - based on string theory - are actually studied by real life Daniel Farradays at colleges. Florida State physicist Christopher Gerady said he sees a few inaccuracies, but generally believes the show is based in real theories. “My experience of the physics in Lost is a bit like recognizing little snippets of a familiar melody in an extended jazz improvisation,” he said. “You don't have to stick strictly to the notes on the page as long as it swings.”

Just look at the names of some of the characters - Rosseau, Locke, Hume - all famous philosophers. Even Locke's pseudonym, Jeremy Bentham, was a philosopher responsible for Utilitarianism, the idea that one's actions should create the greatest good to the greatest number of people. Josh Gert, an ethics professor at Florida State University, has an interesting view: “Once you start believing in (time travel and other supernatural stuff), it is harder to have strong ethical intuitions. After Locke dies, he's back. That has to affect his views about killing people.”

INSIPID MAGAZINE : EDUCATION

Stuart also has her students look at the show’s interaction with its viewers through message boards and online games. They’ve also talked about the film The Matrix and the online community Second Life as it pertains to participatory and convergence culture. Stuart said she’ll teach the course again “whenever they let me” and might offer it in the fall. The semester ended in April, so the class didn't get to discuss the show's season finale, which aired earlier this month. Those who took the course said they learned plenty, even if they signed up just because they prefer a remote to a book. “I thought it was interesting, and I didn’t have to read as much. I could just watch TV for home-work,” sophomore James Jardine said, “but I found that there’s a lot more depth to TV shows than just watching it.”

Religion

Literature

If you can't pick up on the power struggle between agnostic Jack and faithful Locke, then you aren't watching the show. There are other religi-ous mysteries, such as the omniscient Jacob (who in the Bible was the father of the 12 tribes of Israel. Hint?) and Locke's resurrection. Even Egyptian spirituality has popped up in the current season.

The show is filled with literary references, sometimes as obvious as a book that a character is reading, such as James Joyce's Ulysses, Stephen Hawking's A Brief History of Time and Ayn Rand's The Fountainhead. Professor Sarah Clarke Stuart says there are also many literary techniques used in the show, such as nonlinear storytelling, symbolism and unreliable narrators.

Mathematics A mysterious numerical sequence - 4, 8, 15, 16, 23, 42 - pops up throughout the show. Not only can you find these numbers in the hatch or on Hurley's Lotto ticket, but some think it's part of an equation to predict the end of humanity and the Dharma Initiative's mission to change the numbers. In real life, physicists are using mathematical equations to come up with a Theory of Everything, an answer to all known physical phenomena. It's tied to string theory, the show's basis for time travel.

INSIPID MAGAZINE : EDUCATION

1. Arguing with Judge Judy: Popular ‘Logic’ on TV Judge Shows: Ever felt like the plaintiffs on TV judge shows have some pretty questionable logic? This class addresses that subject directly, allowing students to pull apart courtroom excuses just like Judge Judy. – [UC Berkeley]

10. Goldberg’s Canon: Makin’ Whoopi: While not offered since 2004, this course was the first and only to examine the sometimes controversial public persona of this comedienne, actress and now daytime talk show host. – [Bates]

2. Elvish, the language of Lord of the Rings: This course was taught by the world’s foremost expert on this language, who was even a consultant to the makers of the films. While not practical, it certainly speaks to super fans of the series. – [U of Wisconsin]

11. The Office: Awesome, Awkward, & Addicting: Let’s hope this course on the popular show isn’t nearly as uncomfortable to watch. – [Oberlin Experimental College]

3. The Science of Superheroes: While it might sound like fun and games, this course takes superheroes as a means to teach students real lessons about physics. - [U of California Irvine] 4. The Simpsons and Philosophy: While The Simpsons may appear to be just good entertainment, this course shows the deeper philosophical issues under all those “d’ohs.” – [UC Berkeley]

12. Calvin & Hobbes: This iconic comic was much more than just simple Saturday morning entertainment–or so this course aims to show. – [Oberlin Experimental College] 13. American Pro Wrestling: While the words “mit” and “pro wrestling” may not be two you’d bring together, this course asks students at the tech-savvy school to think about the cultural implications of the often theatrical wrestling world. – [MIT]

5. Star Trek and Religion: Look at religion through the lens of the Star Trek world, with discussions that address both supporting and criticizing religion. – [U of Indiana]

6. Underwater Basket Weaving: Here it is, the course that has been the butt of numerous jokes about the declining quality of college education in America. Yes, it really exists and you can take it at this school and others for credit. – [Reed College] 7. The Road Movie: From Easy Rider to Thelma and Louise, this course looks at the road trip movie and the concept of the journey. Curiously omitted was the college age favorite Road Trip. – [Barnard College] 8. Oprah Winfrey: The Tycoon: While no longer offered, this course gave students a chance to look deep into the life of one of the most successful and recognizable women in the world. – [U of Illinois - Urbana] 9. How to Watch Television: Though most of us are pretty adept at turning on the TV and vegging out, this course aims to teach students how to watch TV actively. – [Montclair]

INSIPID MAGAZINE : EDUCATION

1/4

Hilarious College Courses that Really Exist

By JIM CAMPBELL While most of us spend our college educations taking the standard, required courses, there are more than just the basics out there when it comes to college classes. Some of these 14 courses walk the line between useful knowledge and the ridiculous, though many others offer great educational opportunities despite having names that donâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t do them justice.

11/12

INSIPID MAGAZINE : EDUCATION

Hollywood’s most sought after body parts By LINDA DONNELLEY

The perfect woman should have Taylor Swift’s hair, Natalie Portman’s nose and the body of curvy star Penelope Cruz, according to a survey by Hollywood

INSIPID MAGAZINE : EDUCATION

The Winning Combination

Celebrity Confessions

The combination of features of the Hollywood stars makes up what people seeking plastic surgery believe would be the perfect look. The most sought after body parts of the rich and famous were revealed by two Hollywood plastic surgeons. Dr. Richard Fleming and Dr. Toby Mayer carried out a survey among their patients to build up the picture of what the perfect woman would look like. The doctors said the trend for plump, luscious lips as sported by Angelina Jolie were no longer popular. Instead the pair said women preferred the lips of actress Scarlett Johansson. In the category of the most sought after body shape, former supermodel Gisele Bundchen and Jennifer Aniston were in the top three. But Penelope Cruz, who has just given birth to her first son, was voted as having the top body. The Spanish born star is known for her voluptuous figure. Natalie Portman, who received an Oscar nomination for her portrayal of a ballet dancer driven over the edge in Black Swan, has the nose most cosmetic surgery patients want.

But, what do celebrities have to say about their own bodies? Hunger Games star Jennifer Lawrence speaks candidly in an interview with Glamour magazine confessing, “I hate saying, ‘I like exercising.’ I want to punch people who say that in the face. But it’s nice being in shape for a movie, because they basically do it all for you. It’s like, ‘Here’s your trainer. This is what you can eat.’” Although she adds, “I do exercise! But I don’t diet. You can’t work when you’re hungry, you know?” Pregnancy had a big impact on Jessica Alba, who has admitted to struggling with accepting her body in the past. “After the pregnancy, I felt liberated. I learned to accept my body and to give less importance to my appearance. Being a mother has taught me how to adapt to any situation.” Victoria’s Secret angel Adriana Lima shocked people everywhere with her honesty about her “really intense” training before the annual lingerie show, admitting to twice-daily workouts, 12 days on a liquid diet and no drinking at all for the 12 hours before the show. While the diet is admittedly extreme, Lima only confirmed what many people suspected, and it’s kind of a relief to know she works hard to look that good. Plus, she adds, “It’s not that I do crazy diets throughout the year. I just do it for this particular thing. After this show, I become normal again!” “Part of my career has always been because of the way I look. I’m not ashamed. It has opened doors. But I also know that if I didn’t have something else, I’d be long gone,” Sofia Vergara told In Style magazine. “I do have that thing of, ‘Oh my God, I’m disgusting!’ You won’t hear me saying I have no body issues because I wouldn’t be human if I didn’t.” After copping to some every-woman body angst, Emma Stone confessed in US Weekly how she really feels about working out. “I haven’t worked out for a month and I’m proud of it! Running is bad for your knees and I like to do things I actually enjoy, like going for a swim. I had a trainer during Spider Man and I discovered I have deepseated rage when I’m holding heavy weights over my head. Whatever dormant anger I have in me, that’s where it comes out. That’s not the kind of working out I want to do. I would much rather sleep at night than want to throw a weight across a room at someone. I’m usually a pretty peaceful person, but for some reason when I get in the gym something bubbles up in me.”

She should also have Scarlett Johansson’s lips, the cheeks of January Jones and the jaw line of Halle Berry. The Perfect Man The Beverly Hills surgeons also compiled a list of the most desirable male features. Mad Men star Jon Hamm has the most desired jaw line, while others liked Jude Law’s nose and George Clooney’s hair. Mark Wahlberg, who showed off his toned physique in The Fighter, was said to have the most sought after body. Channing Tatum and Tyson Beckford were also named as having the most desired body shape. Dr. Fleming and his partner produce a list every year based on a survey carried out among their current and former patients. “There are common features you find year to year,” said Dr. Fleming. “But these names are more a commentary about pop culture – whose face is in your face this year.”

INSIPID MAGAZINE : EDUCATION

Most Beautiful Goes

INSIPID MAGAZINE : EDUCATION

MALE

FEMALE

BODY Mark Whalberg Channing Tatum Tyson Beckford

BODY Jennifer Aniston Gisele Bundchen Penelope Cruz

MOUTH Ashton Kutcher Viggo Mortensen Brad Pitt

MOUTH Scarlett Johanssen Angelina Jolie Christina Aguilera

EYES Hugh Jackman Jake Gyllenhaal Ian Somerhalder

EYES Anne Hathaway Mila Kunis Megan Fox

FACE Jon Hamm George Clooney Chris Pine

FACE Taylor Swift Jennifer Aniston Kim Kardashian

You voted â&#x20AC;&#x201C; here they are, the most popular body parts!

INSIPID MAGAZINE : EDUCATION