This is the last statement that Lena Dunham has launched the world through the global speaker of his account Instagram: "At 32, weight the most I have ever weighed. I love more than ever. I read, I write and I laugh like never before. I have never been so happy. Not with the fragile and precarious happiness of those who believe that "things go perfectly". But with the enormous, generous and babbling happiness of "I think I'm beginning to find out what this is about".
This is another chapter of Lena Dunham's peculiar live life, incapable of restraining the exhibitionism with which the marketing experts have characterized their generation. It might seem that his is reduced to selfies and confessions. Nothing could be further from the truth. Right now write a script for Spielberg, just joined Luminary's star team - the Netflix of the American podcast - and in July we'll see it in Once Upon a Time in Hollywood, the new film by Quentin Tarantino.
At 32 weight more than ever. I love more than ever. I read, I write and I laugh more than ever. "
The writer, director and actress does not talk about work projects. He prefers that maturity be the new argument of his public persona, once the explosive attention he provided Girls (2012-2017): Emmy for Best Comedy in 2012 and Golden Globe for Best Television Series and Best Actress in 2013, among many other awards. "I thought that my job was to be the most vocal, active, noisy, present and busy feminist. The more, more, more, more -have confessed to the portal Refinery29-. And from that belief came wonderful things. Because I thought I had to become an important voice among women in Hollywood, an advocate of bodily diversity, a spokesperson for this, for the other, for that ... But, the truth, right now I just think about being able to reach be a strong and strong friend, a good daughter, a loving sister and a writer. That is my dream today. "
The conversation trap
Despite his efforts, what persists as a matter of maximum interest in the fabric of global showbusiness is his insistent and uncontrollable loquacity. He has never faced the interpretation machine media a person with such obvious self-interest to control their public image. The creator baffles for her Absolute lack of filters, rara avis in the public space of his country, where political incorrectness often leads to losing contracts. The only thing that Dunham seems to plan in the face of his public appearances are his outfits, almost always protagonists for his wonderful ugliness or because he is wonderfully wrong. From what she says or from what you saw, Lena can not stop epatar.
This data is fascinating: since January 2018 there has been no month without Dunham's viral history. A media impact that already wanted for itself the most implacable advertising strategist. Let's review: in January it was news his break with the musician Jack Antonoff. In February we learned that she had undergone a hysterectomy to rid her of endometriosis. In March he wrote an essay for Vogue on the subject. In April he participated in the hyper snob festival of conferences, music and cinema South by Southwest (SXSW). In May he attended the annual Met Gala, but had to run to the hospital due to complications due to the operation. In June he published another essay in which he confessed his loneliness. In July he confessed to having gained 10 kilos. In August he published three photos of his stay at the hospital. In September he closed his famous Lenny newsletter. In October he confessed that he had been clean for six months from his addiction to Klonopin, an anxiolytic. In November, he defended a screenwriter colleague (Murray Miller) for the rape accusations of an actress (Aurora Perrineau), despite having campaigned to give credibility to the victims. In December he publicly apologized to Perrineau. And this year, it continues to give talk with the same hammering regularity.His love story with four-time Grammy-winning musician Jack Antonoff made rivers of ink run. Your break, too. instagram
Physics and chemistry
Given this avalanche of information, journalists can not help but fall into the trap of conversation and nurture the character with dozens of articles in which they analyze, evaluate and judge each of their movements. They do not understand that Lena Dunham speaks tirelessly about her personal life Or that I put my leg so much in public. In other words, that it does not "sell better".
The director and actress explained it in her speech at the SXSW: "I believe that authenticity has to do with the distance between what is aspirational and what you can reflect on. I can not offer anything to aspire to; But what I can do is to be transparent about who I am, what I am capable of doing and how my process is. Also, they taught me that the only way to grow is to fail and try again, again and again. "
In a devastating critique published in the influential Web Salon, Mary Elizabeth Williams describes Dunham as "exasperating" precisely because of the chain of errors and forgiveness, and compares it with what the humorist Hannah Gadsby calls "the Jimmys": men who do not have themselves by abusers, like Harvey Weinstein or Bill Cosby, but for "good men who, from time to time, are wrong".
In Forbes magazine, Dani Di Placido calls it "A monster that we have created", and ensures that the only way to eliminate its "intolerable" presence in public space is to stop writing about it: "In short, if we want Lena Dunham to shut up, we will have to stop talking about her". In the British newspaper The Guardian, Martha Gill asks herself what crime she has committed to receive so many insults and elaborates several: is the daughter of a rich and connected family, and everything has cost him nothing more than his talent (like Zosia Mamet or Allison William, who play Soshanna and Marnie in Girls); who writes stories about rich and white people (although the opposite could be labeled as usurpation); that is incorrect and even offensive (although others, like Sacha Baron Cohen, are more so without receiving so many criticisms); or that she is a woman who does not look like a sexy goddess. "Those who want what they have are asking themselves:" Why does she and we do not, if we look the same? "Gill sums up.His constant bombardment of nudity at work (and networks) has one objective: to normalize normality. instagram
Do I love to hate you?
This question of Lena's physicist is central. Katie Herzog, author of The Stranger portal, asks: "Why are the defects that are tolerated and even funny in Kim or Khloé Kardashian, so disgusting in Dunham?" Herzog finds the answer: "Because they are beautiful, while Dunham has a normal appearance, nothing extraordinary, the opposite of what happens in the world of entertainment."
Fight that beauty requirement for women to appear in the media, it has always been Dunham's personal and professional struggle. Yes Hannah, its Character in Girls She appeared insistently naked so that the bodies of the majority would also appear on TV.
At first, Girls was misinterpreted as the millennial translation of Sex and the City, but its protagonists could not be more different. Carrie Bradshaw worked as a device of seduction that put into play the most recurrent femininity weapons: coquetry, makeup, idealized eroticism ... Hannah was not created to seduce us but rather to make us uncomfortable. With it, Dunham broke the unwritten pact of fiction in which the female characters have to have a physical and / or a pleasant personality. And somehow, the irritation that Hannah caused happened to produce her also its creator. Why do we love to hate Dunham? "Because we find it more fun to hate whatever it is all together than to love him," suggests Katie Herzog.
In an interview with The New York Magazine, journalist Allison P. Davis expresses her surprise at the number of messages and personal photos that Lena sent her during the production process of the article. "She became herself a kind of TV series that I was wanting to devour, "Davis acknowledged. When she met her family, she discovered that her mother does not like the fact that she publishes intimate photos, but that she accepts it because "Lena considers it part of her work".
The overexposure of the writer is such that Davis arrives at the hypothesis that "Lena Dunham, the artist who challenges us to hate her, is the real work".
It is paradoxical that they are writers, sufferers like few of the demands of the digital economy, those that criticize in it the type of behaviors that the dispute for the attention in the entertainment business forces you. Several generations of young people have already been socialized in the competition for the likes that will mark your success professional, a career in which everyone uses what they can to achieve an audience that validates their talent. Until the non-digital generations we have ended up normalizing the exposure for viral credit. Why does it irritate us so much that someone does the same with their vulnerabilities?
Do not miss...
- The message behind Lena Dunham's tattoo on the back of the neck
- The allegation with which Lena Dunham teaches us to accept us as we are
- The before and after Lena Dunham: that's how her body has changed in a year