Read all about it.
I don't know if I'm more annoyed that someone who made her money raising unrealistic expectations about romance is now profiting off the inevitable result of unrealistic romantics getting married or that divorce is STILL this woman's schtick.
Either way, Nora Ephron sucks.
From the HuffPo announcement: “Those of us who have been divorced know that, especially if you have children, you are never really divorced,” Huffington says. “The relationship continues.”
I beg to differ. I think it is safe to say that my relationship with my ex came to a total and complete end when, somewhere around five years after the legal act, I stopped wishing her dead.
Well, I'm no big Ephron fan, but I loved Julie and Julia...
I suppose when I was freshly divorced 7 years ago I might have been interested in reading a blog/column on the topic. Now happily remarried for 5, all I can say is 'meh.'
Nora Ephron is an enemy of the Chaliceblog.
Enemy of the Chaliceblog and accountability...
Seems sort of self-contradictory: her shtick is divorce (as with her book and movie about divorcing Carl Bernstein), but she raises unrealistic expectations about romance? I would have thought that being super-public about what it's like to have your husband commit adultery with one of your friends, while you're pregnant, would be a dash of cold water in the face regarding romance. At least, "Heartburn" didn't leave me feeling very positive about love and marriage; it contributed a lot to my belief at the time that it was better not to pursue relationships with guys who could be plausibly played in a movie by the young Robert Redford.
Personally, her schtick is divorce and a lot of her autobiographical stuff is about it even though it happened decades ago. But a lot of her fiction writing is all about unrealistic romances.
Also, I think she was married to the one played by Dustin Hoffman.
Post a Comment