The Michigan Daily — michigandaily.com
Arts
Monday, September 14, 2015 — 5A
Classifieds
Call: #734-418-4115
Email: dailydisplay@gmail.com
Have you
purchased
the
Football
Book
yet?
Do the
crossword,
then order
one.
store.michigandaily.com
ACROSS
1 Cabbage side
dish
5 Costume shop
supply
9 Croatian-born
physicist Nikola
14 Spanish
appetizer
15 In couch-potato
mode
16 Like a cheering
capacity crowd
17 Happily __ after
18 Tidy
19 Destiny
20 *Publication
featuring Alfred
E. Neuman
23 Tidal retreat
24 The ones right in
front of us
25 Lt.’s superior
27 Engraved with
acid
30 “The Firm” author
John
33 Sea, to
Cousteau
34 Worker in a shaft
37 __ Gras
38 Coll. hot shot
40 Garden bulb
42 Tugboat sound
43 WF-3640 printer
maker
45 Traveler’s stop
47 “__ you happy
now?”
48 “Do not” follower,
on a closed-door
sign
50 Ride a seesaw
52 Roll call reply
53 Channel covering
Capitol Hill
55 Cute __ button
57 *Chinese food
staple
62 Light brown
64 Beech or birch
65 Many Keats
poems
66 Flub by a fielder
67 Balkan native
68 Cowpoke’s
footwear
69 “Yum!”
70 Knight times
71 “Born Free”
lioness
DOWN
1 Wineglass part
2 Volcanic output
3 Did an
impression of
4 Fireside feeling
5 Didn’t follow a
script, say
6 Brainstorms
7 Classic Krispy
Kreme coating
8 “The X-Files” org.
9 Get ready to
shoot
10 Open __: tennis
period since
1968
11 *Cold symptom
12 Rack of __
13 Many an Iraqi
21 “Excuse me ... ”
22 Big name in
ATMs
26 Exam for H.S. jrs.
27 Nestle snugly
28 Allegro, scherzo,
andante, etc.
29 *Lines that help
you 9-Down
30 Sandpaper
feature
31 Worship
32 Bishop’s
headdress
35 Unfeeling
36 Symphonic rock
gp.
39 Sheep shelter
41 Personal source
of annoyance ...
which might
make one feel
the first word of
the answers to
starred clues
44 Room with a crib
46 Starring role
49 On a pension:
Abbr.
51 Dress for the
choir
53 Monte __:
gambling mecca
54 Ink mishap
55 Aid in wrongdoing
56 Doris Day song
word
58 Online handicraft
market
59 Big screen star
60 Corp. heads
61 “¿Cómo __ usted?”
63 Understood, as a
joke
By Janice Luttrell
©2015 Tribune Content Agency, LLC
09/14/15
09/14/15
ANSWER TO PREVIOUS PUZZLE:
RELEASE DATE– Monday, September 14, 2015
Los Angeles Times Daily Crossword Puzzle
Edited by Rich Norris and Joyce Nichols Lewis
xwordeditor@aol.com
ROCKSTARS WANTED
Jimmy John’s Delivery drivers/bikers,
sandwich makers (PT) & Managers (FT)
All Ann Arbor locations.
Resumes to jfencyk@jimmyjohns.com
CENTRAL CAMPUS, FURNISHED
rooms,
shared
kitch.,
ldry.,
bath.,
internet,
rent from $575 per month.
Call 734‑276‑0886.
3 BEDROOM TOWNHOME
2 1/2 bath with den, incl. all appliances,
full size washer and dryer
1275 Wisteria ‑ $1,700/mo for 1 yr lease
Call 734‑663‑7633 for more info
COOK NEEDED @ Revive & Replenish
Full‑time; $12/hr ‑ Experience required
Email resume: revivereplenish@gmail.com
THESIS EDITING, LANGUAGE,
organization, format. All Disciplines.
734/996‑0566 or writeon@iserv.net
HOUSE CLEANING FOR Retired
Professor. $15 per hour. Flexible hours.
668‑8850
! NORTH CAMPUS 1‑2 Bdrm. !
! Riverfront/Heat/Water/Parking. !
! www.HRPAA.com !
BARISTA & COUNTER W
ANTED
Revive & Replenish: FT and PT positions
Flexible scheduling, meals included; $9/hr
Email resume: revivereplenish@gmail.com
Or apply in person!
WWW.CARLSONPROPERTIES.‑
COM
734‑332‑6000
ONE BEDROOM APARTMENT
now available close to Ross & Law
School 1 year lease September 2015 ‑
August 2016 $875 utilities included.
Call: (734) 834‑5021
TEACHERS POSITION FULL or part
time for infant toddler age for a center‑
based program. Must have early or ele‑
mentary education background. Send re‑
sume with references to kozyheart@gmail.‑
com. Must be a non‑smoker. Committed
and dependent team player.
FOR RENT
SERVICES
HELP WANTED
TV COLUMN
TV, where love
goes to die
By CHLOE GILKE
Daily TV Columnist
Warning: this column contains
major
spoilers
for
“Grey’s
Anatomy”
and
“The
Mindy
Project.”
I
f someone were to pick
up a scalpel and open up
my chest, he’d discover
a skippy, sloshy heart. A
surgeon would take one look
and say, “That girl’s heartbeat
is more irregular than a
German verb conjugation,”
and the nurses would groan
and contemplate leaving this
hospital and finding one where
the doctors tell better jokes.
To the layman, however, my
heart’s most unusual quality
would be the hundreds of little
signatures decorating the atria
and ventricles — Jim and Pam,
Scully and Mulder, Alicia and
Will, Kurt and Blaine.
I have a shipper’s heart. Since
I was a little girl watching Doug
and Carol on “E.R.” through
the crack in my parents’ closed
door (they thought “E.R.” was
not an appropriate show for
a
seven-year-old,
and
they
were probably correct), I’ve
cultivated an appreciation for
the thrill of will-they-or-won’t-
they
relationships.
There’s
something so rewarding about
following seasons and seasons
of a show and anticipating the
ignition of romance, waiting
and waiting until some far-off
season finale when those two
will finally freaking kiss.
But what comes after that
magical kiss? A relationship,
a.ka. the shipper’s ultimate
nightmare. It seems paradoxical
that someone who loves TV
couples would feel so negatively
about … actual TV couples.
But
really,
my
hesitation
makes
sense.
Relationships
are
terminally
undramatic.
Once the characters commit,
fans can look forward to an
inexhaustible stream of dates
and smiles and sex and fights
and tears as the ship reaches
its endgame. It’s possible for a
combination of these actions
to be compelling — romantic
comedies work so well as
movies because the characters
can have a fight and make up,
and then the credits can roll.
Unfortunately, TV shows rarely
end when it’s convenient for
the story. “Bones” is still on TV
because people still care about
Booth and Brennan, and for
every person who cares, there’s
another million dollars in the
pocket of some FOX network
executive.
If I consider all the pairings
I’ve loved on TV, I’d be hard-
pressed to find one that didn’t
turn sour somewhere along the
line. Time, the very thing that
makes following TV couples
such a gratifying experience,
is also capable of sinking a
ship faster than a surprise
courtroom shootout. All those
beloved names tattooed on
my heart read like epitaphs
on
a
gravestone,
memories
of pairings that were great
until somebody died or the
relationship
eroded
into
something so droll I’d wish
somebody would die and liven
things up.
Derek
and
Meredith
on
“Grey’s
Anatomy”
are
an
archetypal case of a great pair
turned awful. In the early
episodes of “Grey’s Anatomy,”
Derek Shepherd was a knight
in shining navy scrubs who
mentored new intern Meredith
through the crazy halls of
Seattle Grace hospital (and did
a lot more than mentoring in
the on-call room). But Derek
was married and trying to
work on patching things up
with his icy wife, which meant
that Mer would have to move
on and accept that Derek was a
fantasy. He’d never choose his
sad mistress over his gorgeous,
successful wife — except that
he did. Derek and Meredith got
married, had babies and inched
toward stagnation as the show
dragged onto its 11th season.
I stopped watching around
season eight, but I jumped
back in last winter when I felt
a fleeting pang of nostalgia for
my beloved MerDer.
On
Apr.
23,
2015,
an
Entertainment Weekly article
about
Patrick
Dempsey’s
departure
from
“Grey’s”
leaked just hours before the
penultimate
episode
of
the
season. I read the headline and
immediately gasped, clicked out
and decided immediately that
I was done watching “Grey’s
Anatomy.” I read my friends’
lamentations on Twitter: Derek
was in a terrible car accident,
somehow lived through the
injuries and died at the hands
of a hack surgeon. His demise
dragged out over the course of
an entire episode, punctured
by cruel stabs of hope that were
ultimately a middle finger to the
viewers who grew to care about
Derek in the 11 years he graced
“Grey’s.” Just like Denny, Henry,
Mark and George before him,
Derek was ultimately a pawn
for the show, more valuable
as a ratings-bait corpse on the
table than a dynamic, living
character. “Grey’s Anatomy”
delivered seven languid seasons
of MerDer dates, smiles, sex,
fights
and
tears,
stringing
viewers along only to punch
viewers with the reveal that
Derek Shepherd is dead, and so
is TV romance.
TV shippers can also face
strife more tragic than death.
For many couples, the simple
act of staying together kills the
romance. “The Mindy Project”
used to be one of my favorite
shows,
because
Mindy
and
Danny were such an exceptional
couple.
In
the
beginning,
Danny was highly unlikeable,
ridiculing Mindy’s curves and
bubbly personality and treating
her like an insubstantial ditz.
The two had chemistry, but in
the same vein as Daniel Cleaver
and Bridget Jones — the kind
of chemistry that might lead
to a volatile, doomed courtship
before she finds someone nicer
who will appreciate her spunk.
“The Mindy Project” surprised
me by spinning Danny from
handsome
scoundrel
to
romantic
hero,
redeeming
him
with
deft
character
development
and
genuine
change. Suddenly, he was good
enough to deserve Mindy’s
attention, and the show evolved
into a close approximation of
movie rom-com cuteness and
magic.
But of course, this is TV,
and every flame of a good
couple is doomed to burn out
spectacularly.
For
Mindy,
the
deciding
tragedy
was
an ill-timed pregnancy. The
pregnancy
exposed
cracks
in
Mindy
and
Danny’s
relationship, but these struggles
were a far cry from the frothy
Bridget Jones-style romance
“Mindy” delivered in earlier
seasons. Mindy struggled with
whether to prioritize her career
or the baby, Danny balked at
the idea of his conservative
Catholic mother meeting the
unapologetically nontraditional
Mindy, and Mindy resented
that Danny kept making her
the villain. Mindy hoped for
marriage, while Danny shirked
commitment. Suffice it to say
that
will-they-or-won’t-they-
get-married is not enough to
keep the show’s romantic heart
beating strong. Dismal ratings
following the marriage plot
were enough to get series was
canceled on FOX, but “Mindy”
will return for a fourth season
on Hulu this fall. I’m not sure
I’ll be watching.
Having a shipper’s heart
is a blessing and a curse. I’m
glad that I’m wired as a true
romantic, and can appreciate
blossoming love on TV and
in real life. I’m glad that I can
rewatch scenes from the first
season of “Glee” and still smile
at Finn and Rachel singing
“Faithfully” at their regional
competition, and I’m glad (and a
little embarrassed) that I can go
back to Nick and Jess’s first kiss
on “New Girl” and still surprise
myself by squealing in my empty
living room. I’m glad I can
watch shows like “Looking” and
“Jane the Virgin” and feel the
beginnings of another favorite
couple etching themselves into
my affections. TV romance has
let me down a thousand times
— but I’m still hopeful that one
day, somebody will get it right.
Gilke is getting a tattoo of
Will and Alicia from “The Good
Wife.” To express your concern,
e-mail chloeliz@umich.edu.
‘Enemies’ plays nice
By KARL WILLIAMS
Online Arts Editor
1968 was a seminal year in
American politics: Bobby Kennedy
and Martin Luther King Jr. were
assassinated
within a few
months
of
one
another;
Richard Nixon
was elected the
37th President
of the United
States; and, last
but
probably
least,
ABC
News
hosted
William
F. Buckley Jr. and Gore Vidal
participated in a series of debates
backgrounded by the lily-white
Republican Convention and the
brutality of the Chicago P.D. at its
Democratic counterpart.
“Best of Enemies,” the lively,
skillfully
crafted
creation
of
directors Morgan Neville and
Robert Gordon, documents the
histories of the debate and its
combatants. ABC News developed
the debates out of economic
necessity. The network was a
perpetual bronze medalist in
a three-horse race, lacking the
stalwart to attract regular viewers
that both NBC and CBS had in
Chet Huntley and David Brinkley
and Walter Cronkite, respectively.
Thus, they put all their money
on an unlikely but provocative
winner, but their gamble paid off.
William F. Buckley, Jr. was the
founder of the highly influential
National Review and the St. Paul
of the Neoconservative movement.
He thought Gore Vidal, and
his best-selling novel about the
titular transgender woman Myra
Breckinridge, Satan. And vice
versa. After being hired, Buckley
said he would not debate any
Marxists. Or Gore Vidal.
So, of course, ABC hired him.
Well-practiced in arrogance
and wit, Buckley and Vidal were
just close enough in their effete
affectations and just far enough in
their cultural and political views to
light the spark of a television bomb.
Both were aristocrats, but also
distanced from the aristocracy.
They spoke in “languid, patrician
tongues,” as Buckley’s surviving
brother summed it up, gilded by all
the benefits of their class. Buckley
went to Yale, but Vidal — who
attended prestigious prep schools
— had the sea as his Harvard and
his Yale.
But, most importantly, they
were respected and influential
intellectuals of their day. It is the
most startling anachronism of the
film. “Best of Enemies” harkens
back to a day when (some) leading
intellectuals frequented television.
It also reveals how ineffectual of
a format television is for nuanced
intellectual
debate.
Television
adores the sound bite and the clip.
Ephemerality is its fuel. So, for
men who write 600-page novels,
television is bound to fail.
The
Buckley-Vidal
debate
was not just a political battle,
but a cultural one in the massive
cultural warzone of the ‘60s. Their
debates were a contemptuous
conflagration that reached its
incendiary
apotheosis
in
one
infamous moment: In a battle
of skilled and savage wits, Vidal
provided a fatal sting by calling
Buckley a “pro- or crypto-Nazi.”
Buckley’s
response
was
the
original “George Bush doesn’t care
about Black people” moment: he
leaned toward Vidal with absolute
hatred, cracking the placidity of his
aristocratic facade, and said: “Now
listen, you queer. Stop calling me
a crypto-Nazi or I’ll sock you in
the goddamn face and you’ll stay
plastered.”
In the aftermath, Vidal cannot
contain his glee, nor Buckley his
devastation. Vidal coaxed him into
self-mutilation, and he obliged.
Although Buckley would continue
to have a successful career (he was
influential in landing the Messiah
of the Neocons in the Oval Office),
the moment would linger within
him
with
great
regret.
The
Buckley-Vidal debate would spill
over into multiple Esquire articles
and subsequent litigation.
One of the documentary’s main
arguments is that the Buckley-
Vidal debate laid the foundation for
modern network news television,
that it was the progenitor of the Bill
O’Reillys and Sean Hannitys of the
world. This is a slightly hyperbolic
claim; television was headed in this
direction from the beginning. But
if the Buckley-Vidal debate didn’t
breed contemporary talking-heads
television, it undoubtedly made
the soil more fertile and the field
more vast.
MAGNOLIA PICTURES
“I really value my chin. That’s why I have two of them.”
ARE YOU ONLY, LIKE, 60% SURE
WHO JIM HARBAUGH IS?
(WE’RE ALSO STILL TRYING TO
FIGURE IT OUT.)
WRITE FOR DAILY
ARTS!
To request an application, e-mail adepollo@umich.edu and
chloeliz@umich.edu
A-
Best of
Enemies
Magnolia
Pictures
Michigan Theater
FILM REVIEW