MURDER, POLITICS, AND THE END OF THE JAZZ AGE
by Michael Wolraich
Order today at Barnes & Noble / Amazon / Books-A-Million / Bookshop
|
|
|
From the Readers
- barefooted 8 months ago
- PeraclesPlease 9 months ago
- PeraclesPlease 11 months ago
- PeraclesPlease 11 months ago
- PeraclesPlease 11 months ago
- PeraclesPlease 1 year ago
- artappraiser 1 year ago
- PeraclesPlease 1 year ago
- PeraclesPlease 1 year ago
- artappraiser 1 year ago
Creative corner
- PeraclesPlease 10 months ago
- PeraclesPlease 11 months ago
- PeraclesPlease 1 year ago
- artappraiser 1 year ago
- artappraiser 1 year ago
From the Dagbloggers
- Michael Wolraich 10 months 3 weeks ago
- Danny Cardwell 3 years 1 month ago
- Doctor Cleveland 3 years 10 months ago
- PeraclesPlease 4 years 2 weeks ago
- PeraclesPlease 4 years 2 weeks ago
- William K. Wolfrum 4 years 2 weeks ago
- William K. Wolfrum 4 years 2 weeks ago
- Doctor Cleveland 4 years 1 month ago
- Doctor Cleveland 4 years 1 month ago
- William K. Wolfrum 4 years 2 months ago
Jennifer Aniston lists Beverly Hills home for $42 million
By artappraiser on Fri, 02/18/2011 - 11:13pm |Ministry of Gossip @latimes.com, February 18, 2011 | 6:10 pm
...Just a year after gushing to Architectural Digest about the major renovations she made to the property, Aniston has decided to offload it for an asking price of $42 million. She purchased the pad in 2006 for $13.5 million.
"My life needs to be simplified and clear out the clutter," she said in a recent interview....
URL:
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/gossip/2011/02/jennifer-aniston-house-for-sale-42-million-beverly-hills.html
- Add new comment
- 2461 reads
Comments
She is discovering 'who she is' according to the story, just don't increase her taxes, it might inhibit her ongoing revelation of her real self, and, do your worst, might be wasted on something like reducing the planned firing of thousands of California teachers.
by NCD on Sat, 02/19/2011 - 12:13am
I'm just wondering - between the pics of tennis girls in short shorts and Jennifer Aniston gossip, has there been some decision about turning Dag into a Baby HuffPo, to then sell ourselves to AOL for gazillions? Because if so,
(i) awesome!
and
(ii) can I have some stock options?
;0)
by Obey on Sat, 02/19/2011 - 9:31am
Absolutely, do you think the rubes want to read boring discussions on geography, culture, history or science?
Some people say (Foxism) Genghis is grooming a relative to take over 50% of the site and of course, the enormous expected revenues, in a move exactly like Rupert Murdoch.
by NCD on Sat, 02/19/2011 - 12:26pm
I must have missed that issue of Arch Digest. Aniston might figure that CA real estate and her fame are as high as they're going to get.
by Donal on Sat, 02/19/2011 - 9:52am
I admit I thought of you when I saw the quote that I highlighted in bold. And not because of architecture. It was the $28.5 million worth of "clutter" purportedly produced by one person in 5 years. You might even like to figure out how much of that truly was clutter and how much was inflation. And then get into details like "what constitutes clutter?" I.E., does installing a state-of-the-art geo-thermal heating system count? And how many jobs did those Scalamandre draperies really provide? (Not to mention their energy saving cost-effectiveness when closed.) And whether a La Cornue stove really can produce finer meals from the best local ingredients as well as adding to real estate values and how many well-paying artisan jobs does creating them provide? And then on to things like: if Jennifer downsizes, will Al Gore and John Edwards be next? And who will eventually be writing the story of the glory that was once ancient Beverly Hiills?
by artappraiser on Sat, 02/19/2011 - 1:34pm
I've read opinions claiming that, environmentally, it doesn't really matter what the rich do because they are so few. The middle class is the big consumer and polluter. But to the extent that the middle class tries to emulate the rich, I think the rich do have an effect. The problem is that the rich can afford all the pricey Living with Ed energy-saving paraphernalia and hybrid cars at a time when parts of the middle class are just trying to hold on to their jobs.
by Donal on Sat, 02/19/2011 - 1:50pm
Quite some time ago it occured to me that it was nearly a sure thing to predict that eventually in LA only the underclass would be driving gas guzzlers...
by artappraiser on Sat, 02/19/2011 - 2:00pm
Jennifer Aniston productions have grossed $1.7 billion.
What has John Edwards brought to the world, except a bastard child and a faux charity to feed his presidential run?
I think the main idea of "clutter" was simply owning a large piece of mansion vs. a Manhattan loft. Just the gardening requires a major business proposition.
But as DagBlog turns into RagBlog, will probably not matter.
by Decidious (not verified) on Sat, 02/19/2011 - 2:10pm
I think the main idea of "clutter" was simply owning a large piece of mansion vs. a Manhattan loft. Just the gardening requires a major business proposition.
I know this, I've seen it up close and personal doing appraisals. It made me wonder why anyone would purposely chose a life where your home needs a public address system for things like announcing to the army of people working on various tasks in your house that lunch is now being served on the veranda.
What has John Edwards brought to the world, except a bastard child and a faux charity to feed his presidential run?
You'll get no argument from me on that. I never understood that attraction in the first place, he always struck me as very phony, nearly a classic phony politician. At the same time, I didn't see much use in publicly disparaging the belief of others based only upon my gut reaction, especially in the commentariat of the blogosphere, where all that would tend to do is easily offer yourself up as a straw man.
On your whole theme, all I can say is: ah meritocracy, one of the difficult things about it is so much disagreement about the deifintion of merit. Myself, I don't see a damn bit of value in things like professional football.
by artappraiser on Sat, 02/19/2011 - 2:47pm
I have no idea why I followed your link. I am not even sure whether or not I like Jennifer Anniston. I will admit to feeling some compassion for how the check-out tabloids have branded her as the wronged woman but really have no clue whether or not it even bothers her. Now I have to add to that some sympathy for her living in a family house alone. She even named it family house. Poor little rich thing.
But I did learn what travertine and Murano mean!
Oh, and about Johns Edwards. I feel some sympathy for him as well. His heart never seemed to be in the game of politics but Elizabeth's did. From what I have read, my impression is that the death of their first son really destroyed the family too. John never got over Wade's death and Elizabeth coped by having two more children via fertility treatments. Then squandering money on a presidential bid and real estate. Then another woman and another child. Recently Elizabeth's premature death. What next? This is the stuff of screenplays not real lives -- or it shouldn't be.
by EmmaZahn on Sat, 02/19/2011 - 3:13pm
To be clear, I don't care about Edwards' affair or child. I care about the craven way he handled his "charity" for the poor, and the absurd, dangerous way he carried on his affair going into a presidential campaign - i.e. any sniff of that would have shitcanned the donations and efforts of his supporters.
So maybe he should have just stayed out of politics. Though it took him long enough to reach this conclusion, say 2 presidential campaigns.
Anyway, Jennifer Aniston's welcome to build up her home value by whatever hype she wishes.
by Decidious (not verified) on Sun, 02/20/2011 - 11:18am
What are you, friend of Hollywood's poor and downtrodden? Aniston, the miss-anthem-um singer, all the rest? Damn.
I just wish they and their boyfriends and their tabloid stories would get raptured.
by quinn esq on Sun, 02/20/2011 - 12:16pm
Not a friend or an enemy - why is this even a story? On a progressive blog? Oh, women and houses, never mind.
by Decidious (not verified) on Mon, 02/21/2011 - 11:37am
It's you and Obey, with your Jen-mania, that keep these sorts of stories viable.
Let's get back to pics of tennis chicks.
by quinn esq on Mon, 02/21/2011 - 1:37pm
why is this even a story?
I posted it just for fun. I'm surprised to see you have such a P.C. stick-in-the-mud reaction to it. I didn't think you were like that at all.
And it did happen to remind me of a lot of things Donal likes to write about.
When Genghis started this section and I was nearly the only one posting on it, I said to him that I was tempted to post a link from National Enquirer to see if anyone was awake and looking at the section. He responded more seriously than I expected, he said that would be fine, that it was for any links anyone might like to refer to.
On a progressive blog?
I got the impression, from the explanation of the invite to Michael Orion Powell to post here, that they don't want this site to be just a "progressive blog." But I'm not privvy to any more info. on that.
never mind.
Glad to see you say that.
by artappraiser on Mon, 02/21/2011 - 9:36pm
I don't think that there's any question that dagblog is progressive. That said, I don't think that being a progressive blog means that contributors sign an oath of loyalty, and there is value in a diversity of opinions. I would welcome more moderate conservatives for the sake of good debate.
PS For the record, I'm confident that dagblog's progressiveness is robust enough to survive a link to news about Jennifer Aniston's house.
by Michael Wolraich on Mon, 02/21/2011 - 10:04pm
Wait. So then...it's okay if I show my boobs?
by LisB on Mon, 02/21/2011 - 10:37pm
The people cry out!
by jollyroger on Mon, 02/21/2011 - 11:30pm
Are we to look forward to a new avatar??
by jollyroger on Mon, 02/21/2011 - 11:31pm
Only if you're holding a tennis racquet.
by Donal on Mon, 02/21/2011 - 11:50pm
Hmmm. I'll work on it....get back to you.
by LisB on Mon, 02/21/2011 - 11:58pm
Well, I found myself spewing some facile "Brangelina" crap a couple years ago, and realized that Angelina Jolie has done a helluva lot more for progressive causes than I've ever even thought of.
And it's just another part of the culture wars - nobody would even discuss Carly Fiona's house, but they'll discuss a Hollywood star's house. Bush can buy his way into a "ranch" (without cattle), and that makes him a stud. Go imagine the amount of appreciation on his investment. Half of Washington talking heads own hugely expensive property in Martha's Vineyard to go mingle with the elite, but that's not discussed - just Hollywood. And perhaps I'm imagining things, but I think it's more the starlets in Hollywood who get jazzed over this than the stars. Especially those ditzy blondes.
So maybe I'm a stick-in-the-mud, or maybe I have a good point. Every time we dis one of these stars, we're basically piling on Rush/Glenn Beck's "fuck the liberals" shtick.
BTW, Michael Moore opened his blog to high school students this week - what a guy. Too radical for the Democratic Party, he's done more to push the Democrats to relevance in the last 10 years than anyone else I can think of. Sad he's another persona non-grata.
by Decidious (not verified) on Tue, 02/22/2011 - 10:49am
Dear God, I actually agree with you.
I don't care about their homes and properties, or lifestyles or whatevers. I'd like to tax the shit out of them, same as I would a banker who makes millions a year, but there's really nothing interesting in the shit they collect or buy or sell.
That said, I DO care when they step out in front of the cameras and make their mass pitch, whether in tv and movies or ads or interviews or special performances or photo shoots. And at that point, I rate their stuff on the basis of whether or not it's gonna help people get better, or help em get worse. Which is why that Aguilera person and Trump must go, while Michael Moore can stay.
In fact, I think I could probably spin that up into a proper TV show, where I get to interview the stars, discuss their work with them, and then, have them killed. Like that British show, Room Whatever, only real. Reality-real. Real TV. Excuse me, my throat is closing. Gotta go.
by quinn esq on Tue, 02/22/2011 - 12:28pm
Are you leading into human piñatas? Think we better call Miguel in as advisor.
by Decidious (not verified) on Tue, 02/22/2011 - 5:56pm
Living With Ed once profiled Larry Hagman's opulent 25,000 SF hillside mansion. To his credit, Hagman has incorporated $750K worth of solar panels, and donates energy to help nearby working class families, but such an immense house for two people, even with a household staff, is extravagantly inefficient.
by Donal on Sat, 02/19/2011 - 3:42pm
And what did Ted Kennedy live in, a studio apartment with energy efficient bulbs?
What does the President of Con Edison live in? What's Mitt Romney's house like? Does Larry Ellison recycle?
by Decidious (not verified) on Tue, 02/22/2011 - 10:52am
Is Decidious looking for attention?
by Donal on Tue, 02/22/2011 - 11:35am
Oh no, I come here to write boring comments that get ignored. Doesn't everyone?
by Decidious (not verified) on Tue, 02/22/2011 - 5:59pm
AA.. Ministry of Gossip @ LATimes.com!!!
Nice one.. that made me chuckle.
by tmccarthy0 on Tue, 02/22/2011 - 2:35am