07 June 2006
What's in a Name? Crap.
I'm sure it's been around for awhile but I've heard every respected media outlet -- print, television and online -- refer to Vince Vaughn and Jennifer Aniston as "Vaughniston" over the past few days in stories about the movie "The Break Up." This is beyond ridonkulous. First, these celebrity merger names have run their course. Second, if you're going to apply a celebrity merger name to a couple, at least do it in proper context.
Most credit/scorn J. Lo's and Ben Affleck's "Bennifer" for unleashing this monster but I remember hearing it in the 1990s when people were referring to the Clintons as "Billary;" the combined name implying that the couple, based on its public persona, was not two individuals but a singular entity. The "Bennifer" and "TomKat" labels grew out of a similar sentiment: The couples were ubiquitous, they were constantly in the public eye courting the media. Also, their relationships seemed to be born not out of love but of business mergers meant to pimp their careers. Suddenly every new couple that emerges or even hints at emerging is tagged -- even when they don't fit the profile.
Brad Pitt and Angelina Jolie ("Brangelina") are hiding out in the African desert. I think Vince Vaughn and Jennifer Aniston have been spotted together in public once. Neither couple is in-your-face like the others. These crappy names have no meaning. They are no longer funny or creative and JamKat has tired of them.
NOTE: When Jared Leto and Lindsay Lohan hooked up for 10 minutes last year, I heard someone refer to the potential couple as "Jared CataLohan" based on Leto's "So-called Life" character Jordan Catalano. Now that was truly inspiring.