From top: Yesterday’s The Guardian; Luke Brennan
Luke Brennan writes:
Honestly, is the truth important?’ I think it is. Or it should be. It is to me. Not specifically to me, I do like the truth, but, I’m just a bloke, a consumer/user/reader of articles.
But when I see the headline: ‘‘They said I wasn’t hot enough’: Carey Mulligan hits out again at magazine review’ As it did yesterday, on The Guardian homepage I can’t help thinking….and I’m paraphrasing here, that a magazine said that Carey Mulligan wasn’t hot enough in a magazine review.
I think two things, actually. I think Carey Mulligan said it, but I also think, reasonably enough, that she said it, because, well, that is what the magazine said.
Committed fan of Carey Mulligan that I am, I want to know more. I’m sure I wasn’t the only one to click on that particular article, it features highly in the “most viewed” articles on the site.
I am, however, a little surprised when I visit the article, what Carey Mulligan said was a bit different, it was:
Speaking to the New York Times last month, Mulligan said the Variety review “was basically saying that I wasn’t hot enough to pull off this kind of ruse”.
Now, I think we all know the difficult word here is “basically”. Has anyone else had this conversation?
Me: “Are you telling me the truth?”
The Guardian: “I’m basically telling you the truth.”
You can see ‘basically’ is a very useful word when you want to tell the truth, but find it a little inconvenient. You start to use it when you hit your late teens and you work out that you are basically a genius.
So Carey is avoiding an inconvenience here, but where the truth is being stretched, or indeed hidden, is the removal of that word ‘basically’. I’ll show you how that works:
Me: “Are you telling me the truth?”
The Guardian: “I’m telling you the truth.”
I suppose you might be wondering at this stage what the review article actually said about Carey Mulligan?
It’s not really important. But they said:
“Mulligan, a fine actress, seems a bit of an odd choice as this admittedly many-layered apparent femme fatale – Margot Robbie is a producer here, and one can (perhaps too easily) imagine the role might once have been intended for her. Whereas with this star, Cassie wears her pickup-bait gear like bad drag; even her long blonde hair seems a put-on.”
Now I personally think this criticism is unfair. The film is slightly clumsy, but important. It seems ridiculous to think how Carey Mulligan looks has anything to do whether it “works”.
It is diminishing of both the actor and film to see it reduced in this way and raises questions of whether the review author is able to pull off this particular ruse, or was he just looking for a little attention.
What I care a bit more about is the truth, and whether The Guardian feels the recycling of this reduction, with a removal of their own to fan the flames, is worth it.
It just sort of bothers me, as a Joe Schmoe, reader of articles, that they don’t hold themselves to a higher standard. Truth is a good starting point for any article, isn’t it?
Previously: Luke Brennan on Broadsheet
‘They said I wasn’t hot enough’: Carey Mulligan hits out again at magazine review (The Guardian)
‘Promising Young Woman’: Film Review (Variety, January 26)
