Kim Kardashian on the Cover of "W" Magazine

W Magazine has chosen Kim Kardashian, poster child for starting a brand identity that launches into a global empire based on pretty much nothing, to grace the cover of their Art Issue. Full frontal nekkid. I will look at that! This woman's level of fame is bewildering, but I don't hate her for it. What's there to hate? She's too much of a boring normy to hate. If anything I'm fascinated by her trajectory.

I don't understand how the Kardashians became so famous (does anyone?), but I've talked to Kim (about almost nothing), and from what I've read (almost nothing) and seen on their show (almost nothing), they seem like a pretty nice bunch. I'm not posing a debate about the Kardashians' intellectual capacity or charitable contributions to humanity, as that is not the gauge I use to judge reality TV stars. Hating on the Kardashians is a complete waste of time, especially since they're so inoffensive. And one of them is super funny? PARIS HILTON, on the other hand, needs to be taken out to a pasture and put out of her misery. What a terrible human. ENNEHOO.

Everyone is obsessed with Kim's body (see evidence A pictured above), which she uses to her benefit.  If I looked like Kim, I'd have a hard time forcing myself to get dressed in spite of public indecency laws.

Bitch is B-A-N-G-I-N-G.

I realize that the world is in a sad state when, as a woman, I get excited when a waify person isn't on the cover of a magazine, but that's an entirely different conversation that I'm too tired to indulge in these days. Those arguments took place in my college years, when I still thought words from the non-famous populace mattered.
What I DO NOT GET is how the editors at "W" decided to put her on the cover of the ART issue. I mean, I know WHY they did it... they want to provoke a conversation, create an argument, sell a million extra print editions, and get an enormous amount of press. I get that. What I don't get is HOW Kim Kardashian is an artist in any capacity. She can be nude and silver anywhere, but on the cover of an issue of a magazine that is themed around ART? SORRY REMBRANDT! SORRY BASQUIAT! and for those of you who read Vice, SORRY DAVID CHOE! SORRY AUREL SCHMIDT! I don't think that a powerful marketing entity can be considered art, but you know what? Lynn Hirschberg - hero, genius, and skewerer of all skewerers wrote the article and I trust her, despite being the harbinger of Trufflegate.

I'm going to walk over to the newsstand on Sunset and actually buy that issue. Something I rarely do since Tokion stopped using watercolor headers and calling everything the King of everything (true Tokion fans know what I mean). I need answers.

And yes, one big giant cellphone photo fuckfest is happening on this blog soon. It takes foreeevvvveeeerrrrrr to get all your photos into Blogger, but I'm too lazy to switch. Does anyone want to help me get my blog on Tumblr or Wordpress? HALP ME CHIRRENS OF THE INTERNET!
ps - going to New York Friday. LETS HANG!