I Found Some Blog

a division of the Chersonian Institute

The Kenny Ortega Connection

When I was working at ICANN years ago (my second of three consulting stints so far), I worked with a different Web Content team that consisted of a coworker who knew a lot about the local L.A. music scene (I think his uncle was a studio musician or something) and by this time I had moved from L.A. to Santa Fe, New Mexico (Mr. Cher Scholar wanted to get a degree related to archaeology) and I would connect with the ICANN team via Skype (which we don’t use anymore but which was the chat tool back then) and this coworker thought it was very funny that I was such a big Cher fan and so would always play Seven Degrees of Kevin Bacon with me except it was Three Degrees of Cher.  He would throw out a musician or TV star and I would try to step that person back to Cher in three degrees or people, a challenge I was pretty good at because Cher has covered so many songwriters and has worked with so many people.

And I have to say that until I did a piece on My Top 1980s Music Videos on another blog, I never would have connected Billy Squier to Cher. When I did the video piece, I decided to exclude mentioning who the video directors were. I did this because what 15-year old girl in the 80s gave a whit about the video directors. In fact, when MTV started listing video directors in the lower left-hand corner, we thought that was pretty pretentious. And not because we didn’t consider music videos worthy of film credits, but the director line seemed grandiose, like so stereotypically director-ly. I say that but we did talk at great length about how Diane Keaton directed that Belinda Carlisle video and how surprisingly boring that one ended up being.

In any case, I was previously making an impassioned defense of the “Rock Me Tonight” video by Billy Squier which famously (and also simultaneously unknown to me) ignited a homophobic response that severed a rock star’s career. And as I was researching the video for the Top 80s Videos article, I learned who directed it: Kenny Ortega. And this is significant to me for many reasons.

Most of all because Kenny Ortega is gay. So the fact that the “Rock Me Tonight” video was accused of being “too gay” becomes more egregiously heartbreaking, as if the director’s gayness tainted the video. Definitely a thought homophobes recurringly have. Someone could do a whole essay now on this video and how it fits into the idea of Queer Readings, either incorrectly or by reading enthusiasm, sensuality and pastel shirts as “gay.” Which could lead to another essay about the oppressions and narrow-sightedness of a national culture in the mid-80s.

So then I read more about Ortega’s full career trajectory and how it started back with the band The Tubes and 10 years working as their choreographer.

Then in 1978, the Tubes appeared on Cher’s TV special which connected Cher with Kenny Ortega.

Then Cher asked Ortega to choreograph the Cher concert I love the most, Celebration at Caesars.

Cher was dating Gene Simmons at the time and then KISS used Ortega for their Dynasty tour in 1979. After that Ortega was one of the movie Xanadu’s choreographers and he worked on several John Hughes films. He also choreographed or directed other tours for Miley Cyrus, Olivia Newton-John and many shows for Michael Jackson. In fact, the best way to see Ortega behind the scenes would be to watch the This Is It documentary with Ortega working with Michael Jackson as they were assembling that tour which ultimately got cancelled due to Jackson’s accidental death. He’s also choreographed a SuperBowl, an Academy Awards and two Olympics, as well as directed a few movies that have become cult favorites.

By the way, I just finished the new Olivia Newton-John biography A Little More Love by Matthew Hild and there were many, many cross-over names with the Cher-o-sphere, including MCA Records, Warren Hamm, Billy Sammeth, Roger Davies, Kenny Ortega, Nick Vanoff, Gavin de Becker, John Kalodner and the Miles Copeland songwriters retreat. (By the way, the book illustrated how ONJ was ahead of the curve in supporting LGBTQ+ and medicinal marijuana.)

And while Ortega was working on all those tours, he choregraphed Madonna’s “Material Girl” and directed The Tubes video “She’s a Beauty” which was also on my Top 80s Videos list!

So there’s a straight line here. And at least I’m consistent, however innocently.

New Cher Garnier Ad

Garnier Diamond Sleek, or Garnier Fructis Diamond Sleek Shine-Coat Smoothing Spray (long name), is a “heat-activated anti-frizz and heat protectant spray.” Cher’s commercial for it  with  Xochitl Gomez came out on 4 June 2026.

Compared to the Uber Eats commercial, this one is meh. There are too many scenes and the scenes are too long. The art of editing was where the Uber Eats was brilliant.

Xochitl is good in the stiffly-written commercial and I actually liked her mussy self, where the ad opens. She’s a skateboarder. Cool. She comes across a poorly-designed Cher concert flyer. She’s wearing a retro Cher tshirt from the Farewell Tour era. Nice. (Cher fans are getting old. Not nice.

She goes into a posh salon? Bar? Club? She has hair too frizzy for such an upscale place. (Bad, I guess.) The instrumental parts of Cher’s song “All or Nothing” are playing. Cher is sitting at the bar wearing copious amounts of diamond-encrusted underthings and a white jacket.

Sone strange cataclysmic event occurs but it’s brief and confusing. There’s a cut to Xochitl peering around a wall. (Why doesn’t Cher just appear where Xochitl was previously?) Cher surprises Xochitl from behind. It’s just kind of an awkward and pedestrian Cher reveal.

Cher launches right into saying Xochitl is “an uncut gem” and all she needs is polish. It would have been better if Xochitl asked for help but this is Cher so don’t look a gift horse in the mouth. But maybe Xochitl’s got a look. A disheveled look but, you know, maybe she runs with a disheveled crew. Skateboarders and all. Okay, let’s assume she has a glam side too. I can related to this but the commercial (or “film” as Garnier calls it pretentiously) is a bit cryptically written. (Again, Uber Eats…doing a lot in a little time). Cher says Xochitl is a mess but “I’m here to help you.”

Now the idea of Cher as a Makeover Fairy is really, really good. For Cher. For all of us. This is like the wet dream of both gay Cher fans and hetero female fans. In fact, maybe we are all subconsciously shabby because we secretly yearn for a spa mother. But I mean, Cher can’t be everywhere a shabby Cher fan exists. Listen, I’ve been to some of the Cher conventions. There’s just too many of a motley bunch.  No offense to my Cher friends. I get it. I haven’t even brushed my hair yet today and it’s already 10 am. And I can’t honestly remember if I brushed it yesterday. But I love beauty products and beauty talk and I still have dreams of a West Hollywood/New Beverly Cinema, good-lookin Cher convention.

Anyway, Xochitl finds a treasure chest (and can I say we still don’t know where the hell we are?) She opens in and sees a bottle of Garnier’s Diamond Sleek spray on a bed of cartoonish-looking diamonds. Cher knows they’re not real by Xochitl gets distracted by the diamonds and wonders if this is the gift. This is an attempt at humor here but it’s not a good look for Garnier because it makes their product look overlookable.

Cher has to correct Xochitl and tell her it’s the bottle that’s the treasure. Xochitl immediately knows what it is and says, “I need to find a mirror.” Cher says, restroom. Inexplicably, we need to go to another location. This is all pointless action and dialogue because why didn’t we just set the whole thing in a restroom and then we wouldn’t have to waste time giving directions.

Xochitl goes into like the most poshest restroom you’ve ever seen, where women are just milling and there’s a curtain of diamond-esque beads hanging. Cher advises Xochitl to “become the diamond.” I don’t…know…what that means. Xochitl says “I don’t know what that means.”

And then Cher says, “When you shine, the whole world is possible” which is actually a good tag line and good beauty advice. But we had to work really, really hard to get there.

Then we spend too many seconds watching Xochitl blow dry her hair. Cher then appears and makes reference to Xochitl’s t-shirt and says, “I love the t-shirt but I’m not crazy about the girl.” And this is confusing because Cher is, I’m 100% sure, talking about herself here (this is self-deprecation) but it can also be interpreted as Cher saying I like your t-shirt, Xochitl, but not the girl wearing it. Because that’s the way I first heard it (and I know better). The language just leaves it kind of open to who “the girl” is. And this is not after an over-analyzing it, this was my first shocking reaction, which is all a commercial allows. And Cher kind of delivers it without much oomph.

This is a farewell-era shirt and I’m not sure if it’s official merch or a bootleg. The official merch had the Living Proof album cover on it. This might have been legit. That was over 20 years ago. Whatever it is, it’s vintage.

Cher waves her arm. Can’t Cher get a wand or a prop? But then again, maybe Cher is the wand. And before Cher is even finished waving (sloppy), Xochitl gets a full makeover. Cher surprises herself, “that actually worked.” Xochitl walks back through this mysterious place full of radiance and confidence.

Cher tells us, “Now it’s your time to shine.” From your lips to God’s ears, Cher. Another great tag line. Credits roll. At then end Cher says, “that was fun.” And makeovers are fun. But there was too much business and not enough makeover in this.

Couldn’t this have taken place in a beauty salon?  Xochitl’s bedroom before a big night out? Even at a skateboard park. I’m thinking the ad was fun to make at this location but it says more about the ad’s creators than its potential audience. It’s basically setting the product in a location most Garnier-buyers will never visit. This is often the disconnect between Cher goods and Cher fans, a tax-bracket gap. On the other hand, Uber Eats, Equal, even Vic Tanny (those gym memberships can be pricey) tapped into Cher’s core base.

I’m not a typical Cher fan. I bought the perfumes and the Cher-designed scarf, all the Burlesque MAC merch and the knock-off Versace tshirt (i’m not “rich as Roosevelt,” as Rose Castorini says in Moonstruck) but I remember the days when I couldn’t afford to buy anything in the Sanctuary catalog and couldn’t hop on board to the Acquasentials monthly skin care club.

Besides, luxury-scale is becoming a bubble. Fortunately, this product is only $7-8 dollars so we can all try it.

This is a great shot (right) and can’t this just be the print ad and we forget all about the commercial?

Cher likes to appear in ads with young people. There’s a mutual benefit here: they get some Icon-dust sparkled on them and Cher gets some youth-cred sprinkled back on her. But we’re developing quite a roster of hip young commercial costars again (also why the Uber Eats was so refreshing…and food, the food). But the formula must be working because we’re all still here.

But I kind of miss context around Cher, like her contemporaries. Even her movie co-stars. A commercial with Meryl Streep or well, I guess a lot of them are no longer with us (or working).

But these ads with young kids always feels like time travel to me. Like the ad becomes about closing the age gap. Maybe Cher needs no co-star.

So the ahem “film” left a lot to be desired. But that’s okay because the other assets are good. Cher did a Q&A at launch that was much more adorably Cher-like.

Here are the questions and answers I’ve transcribed, so thrilled was I about this beauty blast of information:

  1. Your sleek, straight hair has been part of your signature look for decades – what does it represent for you personally?
    Cher: I don’t know. It’s always what I’ve felt. You know my mom had long hair. My sister had long hair. My mom used to threaten to cut my hair [chuckle] if I was bad. It’s kinda crazy.
  2. At what point did your hair stop being hair and more like a cultural icon?
    Cher: You know I didn’t plan it that way. I just had it long. it’s just what I feel, how I feel. You know, it’s how I feel.
  3. What’s a beauty rule you completely ignore?
    Cher: Almost everything. I just don’t believe in rules. I just don’t. It’s like I don’t want it, you know. Tell someone else.
  4. What is the secret to Cher hair?
    Cher: I blow dry it upside down. My mother did the same thing.
  5. You had so many iconic hair looks. Which was your all-time favorite?
    Cher: My own, you know. Just my own plain.
  6. What’s something most people don’t know about you?
    Cher: Oh. I’m shy. [Nods.] Yeah.
  7. Down and sleek or bouncy blow-out?
    Cher: Both
  8. Red carpet or after-party?
    Cher: They’re the same.
  9. Full glam or natural look?
    Cher: Aw no! Both. They’re both. These questions are all both!
  10. Diamonds or leather.
    Cher: Oh leather.
  11. Bangs or never again?
    Cher: Always fabulous. Just depends on how you feel.
  12. Cappuccino or champagne?
    Cher: I don’t like either one.
  13. Night in or night out?
    Cher: It depends on who I’m with.
  14. Do blondes or brunettes have more fun?
    Cher: I don’t know! You’re asking me all these questions and all I think of is both. They’re both. It doesn’t make any difference. It’s how you feel.
  15. Neutrals or bold colors?
    Cher: I like the look of what it is. I don’t like color or I mean I don’t like bright colors but it’s the way it feels, the way it looks, like if you feel great in it. That’s the only thing that matters. Like, do you feel great in it?

Beauty Packaging article – This is mostly advertising copy around the campaign:

“Garnier is ushering in a bold new era of sleek hair” (is it that new, though?)  “The campaign features a short film….bridging timeless glamour” [Cher] “with modern self-expression” [skateboarding Xochitl ?]….[bringing] “the iconic ‘Cher Hair’ look to an entirely new generation…” The US Brand President says the product was “built on the belief” of “mirror-like shine” and that “pairing Cher with Xochitl Gomez through Dave Meyers’ lens isn’t just a campaign; it’s a statement. ‘Cher Hair’ has captivated the world for decades. Now we’re handing everyone the secret. No barriers. No gatekeeping. Just transformative beauty…”

Oy vay.

There was a VIP evening celebration “honoring transformation, confidence and iconic beauty” and Garnier is also joining with Cherlato for a special “limited-edition” flavor and a hair pop-up bar in Los Angeles with product samplings, styling stations and touch-ups, “interactive content creation opportunities.”

People Magazine article – This is much better, just a conversation with Cher about her mother’s core hair values, her favorite hair clips and trying “to stay myself.” Cher also talks about wigs, the times when your hair gets in the way, and how she couldn’t Scrunchie to “save her ass.” (Is this aesthetically or functionally?) She says she’s used the product and “it works.”

Cher Is 80! (and Magazines Celebrating Cher)

So Cher turned 80 on 20 May and I did not have a post ready. I was working on a big poetry project and a friend asked me what I was doing for Cher’s big birthday (a few people asked me actually). And I was like…err.  Was I supposed to do something? Should I have prepared something early? I did not do this. Million reasons but there it is.

But it’s not that I wasn’t thinking about the milestone and, to be honest, it is quite a big deal. At every milestone year I can’t help but think about how lucky we are, as Cher fans, to still be enjoying Cher stuff after all this time. Especially us older fans who got on board in the 1960s and 1970s. But when you think about it, even the 1980s fans are now old-time fans now. It’s crazy these decades that keep flying by.

But also just for Cher, as an entertainer, to not have succumbed to all the pitfalls of show business: from short-lived fame (despite all the critics who predicted this) to all the health issues she has or could have had and all the mind-f**ks of of fame. It is an extraordinary thing. And just to live 80 years. To be one of the humans who can get there….is a lucky thing.

And another point I want to make: when male celebrities cross these milestones, nobody seems to notice or make such a big deal about it. Is this because women are not supposed to last this long? Old women should be disposable after 40, 50, 60, 70? Whenever their sex appeal starts to diminish out there on the market? So Cher being treated like a sexy 80 year old is a good thing for all of us.

It was originally my intention to make my next Cher blog post about exclusive, collector’s Cher magazines through the years; and this seems to fit nicely with an 80th birthday post. Because People Magazine just issued another collector’s exclusive Cher magazine and because these magazines are a great retrospective of Cher through the years,  each magazine in its unique way.

Let’s get started on the features of each one and if re-issues are really identical magazines or what the differences are.

(If I’m missing any U.S. publications or if any magazines that were published in other countries, let me know. I’ll try to find them and catch up.)

But first of all I want to say that the very idea of a whole magazine devoted to Cher was an unimaginable treat when I was younger, like a new biography out, except full of pictures. So maybe even better. I found out about the 1970s magazines from the early days of scanning eBay auctions. In some cases, I waited for years to find and win copies. This was in the late 1990s while I was a broke Sarah Lawrence College student. My friends famously remember a time I arrived at a Red Robin diner in Yonkers with a stack of quarters because I spent all my money on Cher picture discs that Cher superfan Ward Lamb was selling on eBay. Later I met him at a Cher Convention and told him all about it. That first year I was running the Cher Trivia game and he won. He had just given a lecture on Cher records I think. Good times.

Cher Superstar (1975)

91 pages, black and white, Sterling’s Magazines

The table of contents pages are always illuminating. In this magazine, there are articles. There are pin-up pages you can tear out and tack to your bedroom walls. There’s biography. Never-before-seen photos. There’s a beauty section! (More on that in a later post.) There are four color photos (the cover pages) and the rest is in black-and-white.

Some interesting photos:

And unusual photo of Cher’s mother with Cher in the 1960s (I haven’t seen many of these, more of them together in the 1970s) and a rare photo of Cher’s father in the 1970s (turns out he’s suing her at this time):

The Chastity Birthday Party:

The photograph of this birthday party blew my mind when I first saw this magazine. I think Photoplay had a whole issue on this party (I’ll look for it). It was photographs of Chastity’s birthday party at The Big House, Carolwood. This is when it occurred to me that the back cover of the All I Ever Need Is You album was taken at their house and not some fancy Italian shopping mall.

Sonny’s girlfriends after the breakup:

Interesting Sonny & Cher photos:

See? Stars Are Just Like Us:

The Sonny and Cher divorce day pics and speculation about their getting back together.

America was so sad about this divorce.

A candid with Gregg Allman and Fred Silverman:

Can I just say I miss paperback bookstores.

Cher Beauty Secrets:

A whole section on this! (We’ll come back to this later.) And I love any photos of Cher without makeup. Unlike for Dolly Parton, Cher was never afraid to go out in public without makeup.

Quotes About Cher, Quotes by Cher and Pet Peeves:

It’s interesting that Gregg Allman’s sexist quotes are always worse than Sonny’s sexist quotes. That quote from Gregg Allman’s grandmother is pretty funny, though.

Other significant quotes from Cher:

  • “I could never stop loving Sonny.” There! She said it way back in 1975. She didn’t just say it at Sonny’s funeral. She said it in the 1980s. She said it in the 1990s. But Sonny never did say he would never stop loving Cher. Not once.
  • “Feel my ass, it’s as hard as a rock” – Cher was always a proponent of fitness so…plastic surgery didn’t negate that.
  • “I’m not an easy lay.” (We should all use that one.)

“I’m not really a big advocate of women’s liberation…” and then she says something precisely feminist…This is typical of the things Cher was saying in the early 1970s. “Woman’s World,” among other more current things, has made up for this.

When she decides to sell Carolwood: “Now now man, I got the house inside of me.” Yes!

On Cher’s least and most favorite things: I don’t like scratchy sweaters either. But I never did understand that whole Backgammon craze of the 1970s (or how to play Backgammon for that matter).

Cher, TV’s Dazzling Superstar (1975)

71 pages, black and white, Beauty Secrets Inc.

The magazine has the nicest design of these 1970s collector’s magazines. It’s all black and white except for the 4 cover photos and the 4 high-quality pin-up photos in the middle. The magazine calls Cher “TV’s first sex symbol” but I don’t think that’s really true. There was Goldie Hawn and I Dream of Jeannie. Maybe Cher was the first non-blonde sex symbol on TV.

Cher in the 1960s:

The Chastity Birthday Party and the Album Cover from the same patio!

Sonny & Cher, A Family Again (1977)

75 pages, black and white, Ideal Publishing Corp.

The very title of this clearly shows America’s obsession with this couple and a kind of yearning that existed for a reunion after the divorce. One section is titled “They Changed America, America Changed Them.”

This magazine has good pics and a Beauty Book (more later on that) but it’s also full of errors and ads and has a tabloid-y feel.

Sonny & Cher in the 1960s:

Sonny & Cher in the 1970s:

Photos of Cher trying to needlepoint all the sad away:

The lookalike contest:

I wonder who won.

Cher in the kitchen:

The Beauty Book

Can’t wait to get to these!

Sonny & Cher Partying:

Cher Exposed (2000)

73 pages, color, AMI Specials

“Rock N Roll’s Dream Girl” Yeah she is. This issue reviews the Sonny & Cher years, her iconic outfits, albums, Gregg Allman, Cher’s favorite products, Chastity coming out, Cher lovers, her TV shows, tattoos, movies and a final breakout box of her quotes about Cher.

The most infuriating quote is from Peter Bogdanovich who in other interviews said Cher had NO talent. Here he says “Cher is one of the most talented women I’ve ever met. She’s got depth and emotion that haven’t even been touched.” Totally unreliable.

A better quote is from Robert Altman: “She has guts–if Cher says she’s going to do something, she will do it.”

Meryl Streep calls Cher “Very real. Very honest.”

Childhood:

Cher in the 1960s:

Cher in the 1970s with Gene Simmons:

These were the tabloid photos I kept seeing when I first became old enough to start tracking Cher-abouts in magazines. Always with Gene Simmons. Always with the stupid face hanky. In her memoir, Cher said it was hard for them to eat out with that thing. I mean the hanky, not Gene Simmons.

Cher in the 1980s:

Growing kids:

Cher charts and graphs:

These are great. They call her the Comeback Kid and this chart shows her early ups and downs.

Is this my childhood bedroom wall? No, it’s the album page (with a few mistakes).

A great graph of the real and dumb accusations for plastic surgery. It was a no-win argument for Cher and somewhere around here she stopped divulging her “improvements” including some tattoo removals.

The first magazine to highlight the dolls.

Cher (2018 and 2019)

Both 97 pages, color, Closer Weekly

The 2018 and 2019 contents pages:

The childhood sections are the same.

The “I Got You Babe” section is the same text with some different pictures. 2018 vs. 2019:

The “Beat Goes On” section is identical.

The sections for Sonny & Cher “at home” and the TV shows are the same text with different pictures. The 2018 TV section is longer.

One of my favorite photos from The Sonny & Cher Comedy Hour:

“The Men” sections are totally different pictures.

The music section is mostly the same but has different live pictures. 2018 vs. 2019:

The Motherhood sections are the same. The Movies section has different opening pictures but the rest is the same. The section on Cher’s mother Georgia is the same.

The Life After Sonny and Behind the Scenes sections have different pictures. 2018 vs. 2019:

The Bob Mackie, Fashion Forward and Drag Queen sections have different pics.

This 2018 opening Drag Queen picture, a shot from The Talk, is the better one. That was a great episode.

The section on the Classic Cher Las Vegas is the same. The Cher in her 70s sections are the same (and include a picture of Elijah’s wife.)

The Year of Cher section is new to the 2019 magazine and includes information about the movie Mama Mia II, the Dancing Queen album, the Kennedy Center Honors and the Broadway musical.

Instead of that, the 2018 edition has a spread of Cher’s iconic magazine covers.

The Memorabilia section is the same. The last page of Cher quotes are the same. But the back covers are different.

These magazines love to end on quotes. This from Cher: “Until you risk doing something foolish, you’ll never have the possibility of being great.”

Cher at 75 and Cher at 80 (2021 and 2026)

Both 97 pages, color, People Magazine

I re-read the 80th issue a few weeks ago and have some notes. On page 22 (both) there’s a picture of Georganne on that first London trip with Sonny & Cher and their managers, proving that Georganne is the one who can resolve the argument between the Sonny and Cher memoirs over whether Cher was thrilled or miserable on that trip.  The 80th issue does not correct the fake Tijuana marriage story and does not correctly state when Sonny & Cher started wearing hippie clothes when performing live. They should have, after Cher’s memoir. And has the hit “All I Ever Need Is You” in the wrong spot chronologically, stuffed with the 1960s S&C hits.

We talk all the time about seeing Cher’s belly button on TV but we don’t talk enough about how many times we saw Sonny’s belly button on TV.

On page 31, that iconic Sonny & Cher album cover photo is incorrectly given the date of 1975 instead of 1971. The magazine states that at their least popular, Sonny & Cher played to crowds as few as 45 people but in Cher’s memoir she had that number as low as 4 or 5 people.

The magazine talks about the Sonny & Cher Comedy Hour’s “thrust and parry repartee” which is a good way to describe their comedy. Cher is quoted as saying she learned from Sonny “a gut feeling.”

The Movies section has this sentence to introduce it: “Watch out, world, director Robert Altman warned in 1982.” (Yeah, he did.)

Robert Altman also predicted Cher would surprise audiences. Roger Ebert called her performance for Altman, “a revelation.” Her performance in Silkwood is called a “starkly unadorned performance.” The New York Times says “When you take away those wild wigs she wears on television…there’s an honest, complex screen presence underneath” (because yeah there is).

Of people’s preconceived ideas about her, Cher says, “People are so limited” (because yeah they are).

Of her performance in Tea With Mussolini The New York Times said Cher was “as likeable as ever, dispensing her blend of gawky true grit and zany regality.”

Of Cher in Mama Mia II according to Meryl Streep, “She steals the movie.” (She does.)

There’s a section on the Broadway show that reminds us that show won two Tonys and ran for 296 shows. Not exactly a long-running Broadway musical but one that is still playing in Europe and the U.S. (after years of delays, the magazine says).  One of the bad reviews called the show “dramatically threadbare” and is that a comment on her life? Because that makes no sense. Or just these jukebox musicals?

There’s a section called “Tour de Force” about her live shows and a funny story about a 30-thousand dollar laser butterfly that malfunctioned on the Take Me Home tour. (I hope she got a refund for that. No, she says, “we really ate it.”) They totally skip the D2K tour.

But they do cover her charity work, including her 1993 trip to Armenia in support of the United Armenian Fund and her support of animals, veterans, the people of Flint, Michigan and kids with craniofacial disorders. The 80 issue catches up with recent support of New York City’s City of Hope.

The music section talks about her “60-year genre-hopping recording career” on 34 albums which includes folk, power rock, new wave and disco and “a vocal style that remains unique despite many imitators.” (I just said that in a new music blog.) According to People, Time Magazine called Sonny & Cher “the first-family of folk rock.” The album section is shockingly accurate and includes a note of highlight for each album. According to a 1972 issue of Rolling Stone, a critic called the music on the album Foxy Lady, for example, “dynamite work.” (Because it is!)

Of her advancing age, People says “she can still rock black leather bodysuits” and describes her as regal yet fully human.

The 80th issue catches up with her Saturday Night Live appearance and Cherlato venture. Both issues have sections on her houses, her other boyfriends and husbands and her work with Bob Mackie.

Now the differences:

The 75th issue has a section on her children that the 80th has removed.

The 80th issue instead adds six pages to the first section, “Cher Through the Years,” with new material about Alexander, her mom and sister and her appearance with Chaz at the premiere of the movie Little Bites. There’s also catch up about her icon awards and a great photo of her singing and holding hands with Jennifer Hudson.

These sections are the same: Sonny and Cher, Cher Solo, Movies, Bob Mackie, Cher homes, the tours, the charities.

The music section, “The Beat Goes On,” is completely overhauled and the 80th issue includes the latest interviews and appearances. The album list catches up with the Christmas album and includes information about an app you can download to see evidence of Cher being candid in interviews.

The back covers are the same, but the final image is different.

So anyway, that is a tour of all the Collector’s Cher magazines I know about. These are some of my favorite pieces of Cher memorabilia. And again, how lucky to have a spread of them from 1975 to 2026! 50 Years! That puts Cher up there with stars like Katharine Hepburn, who until the day she passed, was also getting the full magazine treatment.

It’s a significant milestone, 80, just the number. But also all the more amazing because Cher continues to be a relevant cultural touchstone not only because of her stories about her past but because of her ability to break through career limitations that were once based on a women’s age or behavior.

This reminds me, recently I broke down and did my first on-camera interview as Cher Scholar for a French documentary on Cher. The whole process made me think about my four year old, five year old self. Could she have imagined that one day she would grow up to one day end up as a talking head on a documentary about Cher, alongside legit critics and biographers?

I think that four year old me would have said, “Of course, I will.”

But she would have been nuts is the thing.

I’m thrilled to still be a Cher fan, thrilled for all the other Cher fans out there, and thrilled that Cher has made it 80-spins around the sun.

Happy birthday, Cher.

Sonny & Cher Find Their Way Into a 2022 Gothic Horror Novel

So one of the most pleasurable tags for me to activate on this blog is “Cher in Art & Literature” because this is a cross-hatch of my jams. So when I’m reading a random novel and a Cher reference comes up, I make sure everyone in the room is aware of this.

And this is for a lot of reasons: it signifies Cher’s broader cultural relevance, it speaks to my inner child having her aesthetic choices justified against all the naysayers (mostly her two older brothers) and also because it’s just fun.

The first time this happened was in Junior High when I came across the popular girl’s 1970s library book Lisa, Bright and Dark by John Neufeld about a preteen girl with a burgeoning mental illness. She was a Cher fan, as I recall, and as the novel was published in 1969 this pop cultural reference gave Lisa a place in pop-cultural time. By the time I read the book, Cher was already passe again and so it felt good to read about another young girl Cher fan out there somewhere in the Universe (albeit one with a mental illness).

Lately, (50 years later), I’ve been reading gothic horror as a kind of mental sorbet between my more literary and socially-heavy book-club novels. I think I’ve read most of Darcy Coates’ haunted house ouvre, really simple fiction with a lot of haunted house scares deployed really efficiently. When I was at Barnes & Nobles a month ago trying to find Cher’s 80th birthday issue of People Magazine (more on that later), I took a quick spin through the haunted house shelf and found Ghost Woods billed as a  “feminist gothic.” This has actually come up in one of my book clubs so it wasn’t a new genre idea (Silvia Moreno-Garcia’s Mexican Gothic and Anna Biller’s horrifying Bluebeard’s Castle) but there aren’t that many of these books out there yet.

What made C.J. Cooke’s Ghost Woods a feminist story is that it explores the harrowing and cruel experiences unwed mother’s once went through while staying at British and Irish care homes in the 1950s and 1960s.

So it’s a period novel dealing with a group of women sequestered beyond the reach of pop culture. This is an important point of the novel. They’re without a TV. Their mail has been cut off. They’re not allowed to leave. Plenty scary without the ghosts, if you ask me. So the book takes some small pains to let us know what these girls are missing. Just an aside to place us in pop-cultural time, not a big part of the novel.

For the 1950s unwed mother Mabel, this means Elvis. For the 1960s unwed mother Pearl, this means Sonny & Cher’s appearance on Top of the Pops. I figure this could have been in August 1965, when they appeared to lip synch “I Got You Babe” or a year later in August 1966 when they came on to do “Little Man.” It’s hard to say which is more likely. Pearl knows they are set to appear ahead of time and she knows she will miss it. Sonny & Cher are mentioned three times in the novel, the last time when she speaks to her mother on the phone and her mother says her parents watched Top of the Pops without her.

“Sonny and Cher are due to be on Top of the Pops tomorrow night.” (22)

“Another day, another missed episode of Doctor Who. I know there are worse things and I should be grateful to be here….I imagine the world beyond the gate of Lichen Hall turning without me, a whirlwind of discos and drama, Sonny and Cher, new movies at the cinema….” (90)

“I swallow back a sob and change the subject, asking about Top of the Pops. She tells me about Sonny and Cher, but I’m not listening. I dig my nails into my palm.” (201)

This makes me think it was the second appearance if the author, a poet and novelist from Belfast who was born in 1978, even thought those references through in very much detail.

Another page references the “Cher look” popular in the mid-to-late 1960s:

“The style nowadays is very much a full face of makeup, with false eyelashes and heavy eyeliner, but I never have time for that kind of thing.” (26)

This is the character letting us know she’s too no-nonsense for this look. She’s the independent character who will cause plot changes in the story, the sort of “last girl” in a story full of mostly cooperative girls (what a relief) fighting an evil presence in the woods that has to do with sinister mushrooms and evil fairies, which means something much scarier in a British/Irish novel than it would in a U.S. novel where most of us read fairy and think “aww Tinkerbell!” Our Disneyfied fairies are neurotic at worst but not sinister or scary. I only know British fairies are supposed to be scary because I learned all about them on a podcast. But frankly, it’s still hard for me to take them seriously. Culture.

Anyway, that’s neither here nor there because I kept getting stumped on Sonny & Cher being used as a cultural reference for a 1960s Scotland kid. Not to be confusing, but is where the story takes place. Based on English/Irish care homes but set in Scotland so we can make use of what I assume is a higher density of evil fairies.

I know Sonny & Cher made a big splash in London in 1965 and had a few hits there: “I Got You Babe” (#1), “Baby Don’t Go” (#11), “What Now My Love” (#13), “Little Man” (#4), but just doesn’t seem like they would be THE thing Pearl would miss the most on television, I mean considering there are so many other pop-stars to choose from. Like the Beatles or Tom Jones or Petula Clark or Marianne Faithfull.

It just seems to me that Cher looks bigger in the 1960s to this author looking back, as someone who wasn’t there, who was born in 1978.  I feel like Cher has become a much bigger star in the UK in the last decades. “All I Really Want to Do” (#9), “Bang Bang” (#3) and “Gypsies” (#4) were hits but then we don’t have much after that until the 1980s and 1990s where her monster hits happened with “Dead Ringer” and “I Found Someone” (both #4), “Turn Back Time” (#6) and all her #1s with “Shoop Shoop,” “Love Can Build a Bridge” and “Believe.”

So to use Sonny & Cher as the touchstone here feels more like an act of somewhat skewed hindsight. Especially when after one of the male characters grows up a bit, we get the touchstones of Willy Wonka & the Chocolate Factory, and finally the Beatles and Bob Dylan. But this is around 1973 and so the Beatles and Bob Dylan now feel incorrectly late.

“He likes the Beatles, though his passions are Bob Dylan, rugby, photography, and the cinema….Dad must have taken Sylvan to see Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory nine times.” (361)

I’m having a hard time with the crossover of Willy Wonka and Bob Dylan.

This is an interesting new genre I will keep exploring and I wasn’t expecting something as experimentally gothic for a light read, which was a nice surprise. And the Sonny & Cher references are such a small part of it, not really a big deal as references go, but also it’s not likely for me to read past them without fixating on them.

What We Met At the Met

Last year on Cher Scholar I made a lot of recipes from Cher books and created a new space for Cher foods and I refreshed the Dolls section (including all the doll outfits, which seemed so extravagant and were very fashion-forward for their late-1970s time). And then I re-read her beauty book Forever Fit and was going to make this year all about refreshing my Cher Scholar beauty pages.

Fashion and beauty are a huge part of the Cher cosmos and so it’s ironic that this year’s first big blog post on beauty and fashion should be so polemical.

Cher recently made a big splash on the red carpet of the Met Gala on 4 May 2026. She and Stevie Nicks were cited as highlights of the event.

Cher wore a dress designed by Daniel Lee, the creative director of Burberry. She was joined on the red carpet by her stylist for the event, Patti Wilson. Here is a video showing the press insanity, Patti Wilson and how the dress moves.

Cher with people:

Cher getting made up for the event (this was a treat):

Cher showing off her earrings:

And this was my favorite photo of Cher alone in front of the photographers. Nothing shows continued cultural relevance like a hoard of rabid photographers in a frenzy over your appearance. This picture reminds me of a very similar and famous picture taken of Elizabeth Taylor and Richard Burton at the Lawrence of Arabia premiere in 1962.

Cher in 2026:

Taylor and Burton in 1962:

And because Jeff Bezos and his wife were the lead sponsors of this year’s gala (spending $10 million on the event), the event has received some criticism and re-evaluation

So although the criticism was limited to Jeff Bezos and not at Cher directly, it was a kind of landmark event in showing how people are starting to feel about celebrity culture, especially display of extreme wealth paraded in a grotesque way.

Someone asked on a Facebook Cher-fan page what people thought about Cher attending. This person was shortly was accused of “trying to start an argument.” But I thought it was a fair question for a fan to ask, especially since non-Cher fans are talking about the Met Gala. There’s a bigger world out there. If you want to live under a rock as a Cher fan, I cannot do the same. Often I’m in the position of being a fan of something and yet not being able to tow-the-line among the fan group. But liking everything is just unrealistic and inauthentic, not to mention impossible.

Plus, I want to try to understand Cher in the context of the larger culture.

Some fans responded to that questioning thread with knee-jerk defenses. One person I know claimed Cher was not political implying should be except from criticism here for that reason. Which is just silly because Cher has always been political, since at least the 1970s.

She might have been less interested in politics than Sonny in the 1960s but she showed up to protests a few times with him. She famously spared with Sonny about presidential candidates in 1977 and in the 1990s and afterwards repeatedly phoned in to CNN to express political opinions and vocally supported many presidential candidates over the years including Ross Perot, Hillary Clinton and Joe Biden. She has been consistently outspoken about her dislike of Donald Trump in interviews. So to say she’s not political is just incorrect.

As a fan, I understand that it’s easy to feel uncomfortable when you’re happy about something other people are unhappy about. We like to see Cher show up at these fashion events. See what she’s wearing. See how’s she’s wearing her hair. Who is she taking photos with?

I also like to see Cher doing what I think she enjoys doing. And she loves fashion design. In interviews at the event, she seemed genuinely interested in finding out what the younger people were doing in fashion and where things were heading creatively. Along with fashion week, this might be one of Cher’s favorite events and it’s understandable she might not want to miss it. Clothes and fashion are definitely part of her creative work.

As I fan I’m sympathetic to that but I am feeling equally sympathetic to the mood of the world.

We are squarely set in the turmoil of another Gilded Age, with income disparity at an all-time high and with political corruption just as pervasive. Our tech gurus have sold us out. Wages have stagnated for decades. Inflation has skyrocketed.  Basic health care is out of reach for more and more people every day. Affordable rents are a thing of the past. All this while the billionaire class keeps compounding their bloated on the backs of the lower classes, phasing good jobs out of existence and squeezing all the value out of all corporate products just so that stockholders can continue to see growth in their mutual funds every year. It you can’t see all this by now, you’re living in a bubble.

After the Met Gala, a friend of mine forwarded this anonymous post that’s been going around publicly on Facebook. It’s  from “a private group” and shows a photo of Sarah Paulson wearing a mask made out of a dollar bill, a sort of protest from the inside that some found hypocritical. (However you gotta do it, I say, from the inside, from the outside, all the things.)

But here is the bottom line: times are changing and the suffering is becoming untenable. Events like this are becoming bad optics. As a Cher fan, we might love them but we’re a shrinking island of “common people” who think these events are cool.

There’s a lot in this anonymous Facebook statement that is truth. I’ve bolded some parts of it.

“There’s something about watching people spend $100,000 on a single evening while others struggle to afford groceries that just doesn’t resonate anymore.

And it’s not about hating success, beauty, art, or celebration.

It’s the disconnect people are feeling.

The normalization of extreme luxury beside everyday survival. The way spectacle is amplified while real human struggle becomes background noise..

What’s strange is that we’ve been conditioned to see these events as aspirational…but more and more people are looking at them and feeling absolutely nothing.

Not inspired. Not connected. Just aware of how disconnected modern celebrity culture has become from ordinary human life.

And yes fashion is art. I don’t think most people disagree with that.

Fashion can be expressive, symbolic, emotional, creative, and deeply human.

But somewhere along the way, parts of modern celebrity culture stopped feeling artistic…and started feeling performative.

Not creative in a grounded way. Just louder. More excessive. More shocking. More detached from ordinary life.

At some point, it stops feeling like genuine artistic expression and starts feeling like spectacle for the sake of virality and attention, even symbolic to deeper truths.

And I think that’s why so many people look at events like the Met Gala now and feel disconnected instead of inspired.

Because at some point, spectacle replaced substance.

It stopped feeling human.

I think more people are beginning to realize they don’t crave excess the way culture taught them to.

They crave depth. Authenticity. Community. Meaning. A life that actually feels human again.

Because at some point, many of us stopped being impressed by status…and started paying attention to energy instead

Young people are having a completely different experience withmoney than we had. They no longer see a path to upward mobility. It’s like their new term parasocial, an idea that should make all my pop-musings obsolete before long. Why are we talking about people we don’t even know?

I think, politically speaking, that the move to focus on more local communities will actually be a positive change for everybody. In any case, kids are not as celebrity obsessed as Gen X and Boomer kids were. Big glamour doesn’t impress them anymore.

And you can dismiss that if you want.  But you’ll be fully ensconced in a reality of your own fantasies.

Besides, fashion is political. It just is. As much for the haves as the have-nots. And the world is considerably less safe in so many ways for many people Cher cares about, not just fans and other Americans but people in her own family group. So it’s impossible to believe she is not feeling political, now more than ever. Despite fashion and because of fashion.

It’s like seeing Cher sometimes sitting next to Anna Wintour and then realizing Wintour is the devilish inspiration behind The Devil Wears Prada movies. But I’m 100% sure, Ann Wintour is delightfully nice to Cher.  Because, well Mom, Cher is a rich man. And a rich man who dresses well.

Yes, Cher is a rich man, a fact Republicans love to point out any time Cher makes a political statement they don’t like. Even though they more often rich themselves. Cher can demure from these big wealthy events (but I doubt she would want to) but she can’t really act performatively poor.

(Speaking of the days when Cher was poor, as I was writing this I had to hire a tree service in Albuquerque and the owner proudly stated to me that he was born in El Centro, California. He said he knew who Cher was but had no idea Cher was also born in El Centro).

Anyway, I do not know what the answer is to all this but I do know that whatever social currency you once received by telling your non-Cher-fan friends or your Met-Gala-fashion friends that Cher killed it at the Met Gala in 2026, well that social currency has likely gone down in value today, just like the value of everything else.

Reel Roots and Other Scary Things

This year some Cher things have been going on that I haven’t had a chance to write about. But considering some of these are mostly private matters (the happenings of her children) I don’t think we really need to really rehash them here except to wish Chaz and his new wife Shara Blue Mathes (married on 8 March 2026) all the best in their marriage and pretty much the same for Elijah who has had some new health and legal troubles.

Wedding pictures that were released to People Magazine showing a family really enjoying Chaz’s wedding. And what a sweet respite from all the national and personal dramas right now.

Anyway, last year on Cher’s recommendation from her 1992 book Forever Fit, I started working through the book and workbook for The Child Within by Charles L. Whitefield.

To be honest, I wasn’t sure which platform or blog I should even be writing about this experience. Substack seemed appropriate (non-Cher or poetry related) but since the idea came from Cher’s fitness book, here we are.

I’m going through the workbook very slowly with a friend of mine Natalie who lives near Oakland. And let me just say: it has been harrowing. An old LA boyfriend (from Belfast) taught me the saying about looking (in this case feeling) as if you’ve been dragged through a hedge backwards. And that’s the phrase I always think of after every phone call with Natalie. Hedge bedraggled.

And we both agree the process has made us question a lot of our own responses and requirements from others. It has forced us to dig deep into our respective childhood experiences and explore the stories we tell ourselves about what happens to us now and how we respond. And this has been shocking. I can’t explain to you these phone calls we’ve been having. And we’ve done about 30 self-help books of one kind or another already.

Late last year we came to a similar conclusions about ourselves: that some of our frustrations with other people reflect back on ourselves.

For example here are the questions I’ve been asking myself. Before wanting someone else to step out of their comfort zone, am I stepping out of my comfort zone? Before expecting someone else to stick it out through their discomfort, are I sticking it out through mine? (The answer was no, btw.) Am I also intractable? Am I also stubborn? Am I the closed one? Am I the one saying yes to life? Am I open enough? Am I answering the call?

Digging through the closet where all our baggage is stored turns up interesting things and I’m finding you have to  look closely at your criticisms of others (and what that hides about yourself) with some pretty scary honesty.

But if you’re stuck in your life, what else is there left to try? It’s a veritable Barry Manilow moment. Living in a shell and doing okay but not very well. No jolts or surprises and it’s all “very nice but not very good.”

For so long I’ve been in a bad situation and I’ve had no idea what to do about it. For the last few years, I’ve struggled though all sorts of other messes and crises as well until I finally just felt stuck and numb. So last December while my mother was still alive but ailing, I decided to join this thing called Reel Roots. I would describe it as a kind of dating-site/app but for friends. Instead of using your interest panel to match you with a mate, an algorithm (allegedly) is used to set up a girl group for you.

Reel Roots sets you up in cohorts based on Meet and Greets and it takes a few months to set this up and find the group you want to join for a 7-week weekly adventure. And by the time my assigned Meet and Greet came around (February), my mother had then passed, which has not only complicated my journey through The Child Within but I also wondered if this was any time to be perusing such a heavy (for me) social calendar.

But I signed up to say yes to things this year. And committing to new adventures means not only having dinner with new people but also that I should stop saying ‘no’ to Cher documentaries when they contact me. (Another story for another day.)

Thankfully I’ve had Natalie to talk me through all of this. And it’s as if Reel Roots has triggered the very things (emotions and insecurities) I needed to work through and have avoided my whole life.

Sigh.

One of the first challenges, and one of the biggest, has been just dealing with 12 other women and their female energy. (And I’m not the only woman in the group with this problem.)

I grew up with two older brothers. Sibling experience is crucial experience. If I had lived with a sister, maybe I would be more comfortable with and less mystified by female energy. Until recently, most of my close relationships have been with boys and then men. They aren’t competitive with you, as judgmental of you, as most women are with other women. It’s made me act gingerly with all new female coworkers and women bosses and I’m sure a lot of it goes back to my relationship with my mother. But I also have to admit that I have some amazing women friends, co-workers and bosses. And some former bosses and co-workers who have turned into some of my best friends.

And that’s because I have made inroads on this over the last 20 years but by basically gravitating to women who, like me, follow the beat of a somewhat different drummer. Basically, I’ve found my safe-space women. But that has not helped me with the kind of women I don’t understand or the kind of women who make me uncomfortable.

And yes, my girl group has a few of those.

There is a cognitive burden that happens when trying to work on my safe space friendships while at the same time working on my not-safe-space friendships (sometimes happening simultaneously during the same dinner while we’re all in one whole group conversation). Oy.

The next biggest challenge has been explaining myself to new people. My life experiences have been kind of unbelievable and I don’t sell them well.

What? Can that be possible? I blog myself constantly. The thing is what seems open and easy explaining here on a blog is just the fact that I have plenty of time (or the time I need anyway) to edit my way into specificity and getting as close to truth as I can.

Plus there’s the fact that nobody reads it. I have the stats of a monk. There’s that.  To be open in art is good and well; but it’s quite another thing to be open out there in the meat space.

Some girl dates didn’t go so well. Many of the days I felt mismatched. Four of us started in an earlier group of older ladies but because Albuquerque is such a small city, our pool of women is also small and our initial group didn’t have the numbers and was merged into a group of younger women. Much younger women. Girls who are still wanting to call each other up at 2 am and go out and break some shit all while yelling out “Ride or Die.”

I love and admire that about them, I really do. But I am not looking for a girl gang as much as someone to go to lunch with. Camping. Board games. Small diners. So this disjunction was potentially an issue. And I might be the oldest girl in my group. And although my innate immaturity helps a lot, there is a big difference between me (60 years old in three years) and a 30 year-old. There’s a big experience and interest gap there. This really becomes clear when talking about how to handle work challenges. Anyone who has ever contemplated how they handled career challenges in the beginning as a young person as opposed to how they were doing it at the end as an older person will know exactly what I mean.

And going round-robin with conversation prompts, I mishandled it often and feel misunderstood. Big trigger. Helpful trigger.

I told Natalie that I had to learn to sit in the discomfort of being misunderstood. On top of that, I had to learn to sit in the discomfort of possibly never being understood. For someone who spends so much time working through my head and definition of self (as ethereal as that idea even is), this was going to take practice.

So every week, more or less, that’s what I’ve been doing. Practicing letting go of my idea of self and the need to be seen. The mantras have been Stay on the path, Keep showing up, Breathe.

Because into the void (of self), all the darkness rushes.

Paradoxically, another part of the struggle is fighting my gray-rocking and just letting myself be seen. (And I think my distaste of cameras is all about that…but more on this later.)

Stepping out. Digging out.  It shines a light on things. Light exposes things. It reveals and that’s the point of it.

You can’t have it both ways. If you want to be in the light you have to be open and vulnerable.

As I’ve done one-on-one meetups with some of these ladies outside of the group experiences, I’ve learned from their perspectives that the situation not an either or, black or white. That’s been valuable and I’ve loved trying new restaurants in different parts of town, activities like art night, the one-on-one dates with deeper conversations and connections, and the amazing diversity of the women, their wide-ranging jobs: lawyer, therapist, engineers, scientists, student, teachers, women in business and technology.

Last week I was reviewing a book on celebrity narcissism by Dr. S. Mark Young and Dr. Drew Pinsky and strangely it reflected back on this whole uncomfortable experience:

“Spending time with people you’re closest to can be an important source of emotional nourishment. However, such relationships can be so deeply familiar that their ultimate value in enhancing our emotional landscape is limited. Spending all your time with the same five people does little to change your basic system of relating to others, and can be an outright obstacle to making significant changes in your life.”

***mind exploding ***

“The opportunity for real change, particularly in how you experience yourself in relation to others, comes from spending time with people who aren’t deeply familiar to you, and who are therefore more challenging to connect with. When I meet people who have made major changes in their behavior and sense of self, they often tell me that their willingness to change developed after spending a significant amount of time with someone new and different. Rather than repeatedly experiencing themselves as they always had, these people literally allowed themselves to be seen through a new pair of eyes.”

Wow.

“The great benefit of broadening your circle of interacting is that it allows you to experience yourself in a new context, and quite literally across a wider range of emotions. Many people who have done this say that it allowed them finally to see themselves as they truly are, and that their habits of denial diminished; they gained new insights into their behavior and the impact it was having on others around them.”

There it is. And from a book about something completely different. Serendipitous reading.

So putting myself in a situation that was purposely triggering was necessary to work through the ideas I was exploring in The Child Within. Especially to let go of explaining myself (at least in the meat space).

And it’s hard. (I’m doing it now.)

Natalie and I are calling these things AFGE, which is our code text for sticking it through a new extreme discomfort: another fucking growth experience.

Dax Shepard and Other Bric-a-Brac

So I’m a little behind. I had a thing. Or two. It was not a pleasant turn-over from 2025 to 2026. Trying to catchup is my therapy right now.

Armchair Expert

I want to start with the Dax Shepard controversy. While I was in Cleveland one morning in January, my sister-in-law asked me if I had heard what Cher said about Dax Shepard. And I answered Who is Dax Shepard? And then I looked him up and I remembered his face right away. I did not know he was the husband of Kristen Bell.

Dax Shepard is an actor who also has a podcast called Armchair Expert with Dax Shepard (and Monica Padman is the co-host). Four weeks ago they interviewed Cher. On the podcast Cher, now infamously, called Kristen Bell “definitely the better half” and said then said, “the truth is, I trust her. So you must have something that I don’t see.”

Cue the hysteria.

It came at the end of a very good interview, I have to say, one that asked some novel questions and went deeper into Cher’s recent memoir than most of the interviews in 2024. And kudos to Dax Shepard (and Monica Padman) for circling back with follow-up questions like a real conversation. I mean he read the book. And had feelings about it!! One of their good questions was trying to nail down with Cher whether Sonny was so restrictive with her for love or for money. No one before had the large stones to ask her that before. And Cher was tactful in the interview except for the question about Kristen Bell, who is one of her friends from the tumultuous filming of the flawed movie Burlesque.

And I think this contrived-seeming scandal detracts from the quality of the interview itself.

I say contrived because Dax Shepard himself brought up the fact that Cher had mentioned prior to this interview that she didn’t believe Shepard was a  good enough mate for Kristin Bell. So Shepard knew the answer before he asked the question and was never at any point offended about it. In fact he said mock-seriously that he even agreed with Cher’s assessment adding that no one was good enough for her. He challenged Cher to list someone she did think was good enough for her. Kristen Bell herself interjects at this point to instruct Cher that Shepard is being self-deprecating.

Is it, of course, a pure example of Cher pulling no punches. It’s also ironic because Cher, more than anyone else I can think of, has been in this position of defending her heart over and over again. Remember Sonny (a relationship that was impossible to explain to people) and Gregg Allman (“nobody understood it”) and all the younger boyfriends. She predictably sees things in men her family, fans and co-workers do not see. And that’s as it should be. We can’t all like the same people. Love is irrelevant to translation and transference. (“Love don’t make things nice” and all that.)

That Cher would put anyone on the defensive about their heart is very interesting.

But it all made me look more closely at Dax Shepard; and he struck me as charming. I woke up early one morning thinking about this whole thing and Shepard’s way of downgrading his stock, (as Bell advised Cher he was doing). At one point, he joked about what a terrible father he was. Bell kept trying to explain him to Cher, his sense of humor.

And all that seems to indicate he might be exhibiting what they call  gray rocking. Not a likely thing for an entertainer to do (they usually try to make themselves bigger) but not unheard of either. Folks today are calling it “reverse catfishing.” Back in the day we just called it self-deprecation. It is, in a nutshell, to undermine or undersell your value…on purpose.

Sometimes people seem like they’re underselling but they’re not. This is to set up an expectation they can come back and defend. Like the bad lover who says, “I’m no good, baby!” Oprah then quotes Maya Angelou to say, “They tell you who they are.” You just didn’t believe it. It’s the bad ones who often do this. The good ones sometimes do not tell you who they are and for a reason.

And that reason could be gray rocking (or reverse catfishing or whatever). It’s often initially a defense mechanism to deflect against unwanted attention from various situations or people, like narcissists, for example, or manipulators or too much affection coming at you that you can’t return or just waiting to see who’s willing to look a little closer (in order to weed out the unserious or unobservant or to confuse the constantly self-promoting).

There’s an Easter Egg effect about it (like those secret doors in video games or DVD home screens that lead to a secret entrance to a fabulous room).

And it can become, like in Dax Shepard’s case, a comedic trick.

I mean I guess. I don’t know Dax Shepard. Seeing him in person with all his real room vibes is a lot different than watching a podcast on YouTube. But he strikes me as a strategic underseller.

It’s a thing. There’s a club. Don’t ask me how I know.

The Cher Zines

The Cher Zines (1, 2 and 3) are back up for sale for digital download only on Etsy.

Cher Weddings

Cher and Alexander Edwards suffered wedding rumors at the end of last year and even some local network news shows picked it up. These never cease, boyfriend to boyfriend.

The Grammys

Cher was awarded a lifetime achievement award at this year’s Grammys along with Carlos Santana, Chaka Khan, Fela Kuti, Paul Simon and Whitney Houston. These were presented at an earlier ceremony on Saturday, 31 January 2026. Cher did not attend but her friend Loree Rodkin did and posted most of the Cher reel on Facebook.

Cher did show up at the Grammys main broadcast on Sunday, 1 February 2026, to give her acceptance speech and present the award for Record of the Year.

I haven’t seen the full show so I’m not sure about the context of her appearance. Was she the only lifetime achievement winner allowed this televised acceptance moment? Was it conditional to her presenting? She wasn’t billed as a presenter ahead of time so that kind of limits the value of her presenting (if that was the condition).

Entertainment Tonight posted her acceptance speech as a short on Facebook.

Apparently there was confusion and Cher said she was going to walk off. As she was walking off the host called her back to present the Record of the Year award.


But then she has trouble reading it probably due to dyslexia and who knows, maybe having the wrong eye-wear in (or out).

She announced Luther Vandross (because his name was on the card) as the winning song. Samples of his 1982 song If This World Were Mine” were part of the true winning song “Luther” by Kendrick Lamar and SZA. Cher corrected the mistake but…cue the hysteria.

See Entertainment Tonight’s YouTube title for the segment:

According to A.I. “the mix-up highlighted the deep connection between the late R&B legend and the winning track.”

See? Even A.I. is cutting Cher some f**king slack!

And A.I. wasn’t the only one, as the Entertainment Weekly roundup shows. SZA defends Cher to Entertainment Tonight later when they asked her if she knew what was happening. She said, “a legend was speaking. That’s what I understood.”

I find it very heartwarming how supportive the black community is even after Cher flubs.

More SZA defending Cher from:

Helen Mirren

Helen Mirren recently won the Cecil B. Demille award at the Golden Globes and in her acceptance speech she provided a list of “women that inspire me” which included Monica Vitii, Ana Manani, Jane Fonda, Bette Davis, Judy Garland and a list of women who can be recognized by just one name: Madonna, Barbra (Streisand I think), Cher, Sarah Jessica (Parker), Meryl (Streep), Kate  (Hepburn I presume), Cate (Blanchett probably) and her “ultimate Goddess” Viola (Davis).

That was nice.

Defining Cher

As I was reading Annie Zaleski’s 2025 Cher book I tracked down some of her sources for quotes I didn’t recognize. That led me to this Elle article from back in 2018, an interview with Cher about her new Broadway musical.

It had some good quotes and conceptualizations by Abbie Aquirre on Cher.

“Have you ever stopped to think about Cher? You are aware of her, of course, the way you are aware of the sun, with its blinding light, its rising and setting. But have you ever considered the totality of Cher—not just the celestial body herself, and not just the epic arc she has traveled, but the sheer range of stellar explosions she has undergone?”

She goes through all the Cher variants: the ones from Sonny & Cher Cher (pop star Cher and then TV star—the Cher, pulling in “30 million viewers” a week), along side the 1960s and 70s solo career Cher.

“Many more Chers followed,” she said, including Disco Cher, Roller-Skating Cher, Punk Cher and Rock ‘n’ Roll Cher. Then Best-Actress Cher working with the likes of Meryl Streep, Jack Nicholson and Nicolas Cage [not to mention the directors]. Then there was Battleship-Thong Cher, fashion icon Cher and much later Autotune Cher.

And this is what I mean when I describe Cher’s performance width as being vaudevillian versus a career of particular depth in one area. (Both are good, it’s just that vaudevillian types are more rare these days since the death of the variety show.)

When Aguirre talks about her feelings interviewing Cher she has an almost existential crisis, “Wait, Cher is also an actual human.” She describes Cher’s strong presence that is also “quiet, still calm, even delicate…open and listening, and thus exposed. If in her work she is an output, in person she is on input. Powerful but not overpowering.”

She says, “Nicolas Cage gets at this quality when I ask him to describe her acting talent. ‘Cher is a person with a huge heart, and that really comes through not only in her music but as a screen performer. She has an extraordinary blend of strength and vulnerability on-camera,’ he says.”

She quotes young Broadway Cher actress, Micaela Diamond, to say about Cher, “To be so vulnerable and yet have the most power in the room, that’s a really hard place to stand in.”

Aguirre decides Cher is “both otherworldly and relatable.”

She quotes Meryl Streep admiring Cher’s “deep, velvet, mature [singing] voice” and to say that Cher’s crooked teeth “made her even more perfect.”

Meryl Streep is one of the few great actresses to defend Cher’s television work: “She made everybody else on TV look like they were trying too hard, pushing. She was so immediate, free, and she was canny about landing the jokes. Skilled, but it was invisible.”

Aguirre covers the trials of Sonny and confirms what Cher says: “Cher walked away with nothing.” And explains how it was worse than nothing.

I wonder if that’s why Cher wore shredded pants at the Grammys Sunday night, to symbolize her eras of poverty. (I kid.) But honestly, I bet the cost of her outfit could pay for my roof that is being replaced right now over my head as we speak.

Yes, literally (and figuratively) my roof is falling down, but at least Cher is still giving me some bits of diversion.

Alive From New York…It’s Saturday Night

For those of you who know me personally, you’ve already heard the news that my mother passed away at the beginning of the year after a long, depressing battle with COPD.

I had been waiting for the new year to write about Cher’s heavily-anticipated 20 December appearance on Saturday Night Live and now somehow those two things have converged.

The episode was a ratings boost for the SNL, whether you believe this was due to Ariana Grande hosting, musical guest Cher or the emotional departure of Bowen Yang, or a combination of all three. Arianna Grande did a great job. She was funny and mastered many different characters. I don’t watch the show very often, but overall it seemed like a good Christmas episode.

Cher only appeared in one extra skit, the Delta Lounge skit, and then Kenan Thomson did a spoof of “Believe” as a corrupt black Santa Claus.

I watched the show live at my brother’s house in Cleveland. My brother, sister-in-law and niece Eliza were there and one of her local friends came over to watch. It was very interesting to see the show with young women. My sister-in-law asked Eliza’s friend if she even knew who Cher was. My family is convinced Cher is a flash-in-the-pan and no statistics or living legend inductions will convince them otherwise.  Alternatively, they could be just trolling me. My family has done that in the past.

But my niece Eliza’s friend did in fact know who Cher was and was decidedly on team Cher because she thought Arianna Grande was too thin and a bad influence for young women because of it. We talked about this at length after the show and looked up pictures of Arianna Grande from years ago. My niece is a huge Arianna Grande fan going back to her early televisions shows so I could relate to what she must have been feeling, having to defend her fandom. This was what Cher fans were doing back in the mid-1970s.

A lot of discussion circled around Cher’s lip-syncing. I am usually pretty good at noting when a Cher song is too close to the album version (“DJ Play a Christmas Song” was an example of this) or when the song may have been re-recorded for the show but Cher makes mistakes in the sing-a-long (“Run Rudolph Run” matched this rubric). But my brother, an occasional live singer himself, found a new tell. He noted one time in the performance when Cher pulled the microphone away from her mouth and the vocal didn’t change to reflect this.

There was plenty of controversy about the lip-sync performances online, too. And what more can I say anyway about Cher and lip-synching or plastic surgery or autotune. Did she or didn’t she? The questions are full of schadenfreude.

I do not need to hear the opinions of other fans and non-fans about Cher controversies. For a lifetime, my own family has needled me with them. They have a particular way of asking about something with an agenda lurking in the shadows of their questions. Like over the years when the Kansas City Chiefs football team loses spectacularly. “How does John feel about the Chiefs losing?” As sports fans themselves, they don’t even need to ask the question. They just like to hear the grieving.

My ambivalence is fully on record (about football, lip-syncing, plastic surgery and autotune). I tend to like live singing, especially on a show that makes so much of its liveness. Even if the singing is not so great. But I won’t exactly rent my garments about all the American Bandstand or Solid Gold episodes of Cher lip-syncing.  Cher has sung live on hundreds of television shows in her lifetime and if she lip-syncs on every show from now until the end of her life, it won’t change the ratio all that much. But then again, the people who remember the days of Cher singing live on television are a dying cohort. And with A.I., the past is quickly becoming a fiction.

So…blah, blah, blah.

During my December visit to Cleveland, (a rush visit because my mother was suddenly declining), I learned a bit of the kids’ new slang: parasocial. For the young whipper-snappers this means a one-sided relationship with famous people who are not in any way socially related to you. I am very comforted by this new jargon because it reminds me of when my friend Christopher visited me when I lived near an Amish community in Pennsylvania. We were driving by some Amish playing volleyball and he said something like, “Imagine living your whole life not knowing who Janet Jackson is!” And I replied, “but instead, they know who their neighbors are.”

I get it, but then I’m Cher Scholar. So obviously I’m a conflicted pop-culture consumer.

So when I watched SNL again with my parents that Sunday afternoon, which was also the last moment of television I watched with my mother ever, I wasn’t surprised that she wanted to cover and recover the issue of Cher’s lip-syncing. My mother never did approve of my Cher obsession. And it’s not because she didn’t watch all of the The Sonny & Cher Comedy Hour episodes because my parents faithfully did. She just wanted me to grow out of it. Whether this was because she resented my alternate-universe fantasy of glam-parents or because she was simply annoyed by the frivolity of a celebrity obsession, I do not know.

But when she got wind that Cher might not have sung “live” on Saturday Night Live, she kept asking me about it all afternoon.

Now this was also because she was failing. Mostly alert up to the end, the lack of oxygen and build-up of CO2 in her blood was causing her to forget some things and get confused. She might have just been trying to remember if I had said Cher did or didn’t sing live.

Or maybe she was needling me about it. Like if it was the last thing she did… she would remind me of Cher lip-syncing on Saturday Night Live.

My mother and I had our problems over the 57 years. We were very different people. And those differences often chafed. Even if we had been more similar, the mother-daughter relationship is a strange brew even in the best of relationships. But we had both come a long way over the last few years. My December visit with her was very emotional. We knew the end was coming. And for the last year or so,  whenever I said goodbye to her I would say, “I love you” and she would say, “I love you too…more than you know.”

And I would always be reminded that this was one of my favorite Cher songs. Similarly, after she died I came across an article about Moonstruck quoting Loretta’s recounting of her emotions after watching the opera La Bohème:

“That was so awful. Beautiful. Sad. She died.”

And the end was indeed awful, in all the ways.

My parents didn’t laugh at any of SNL skits or seem to register seeing the show (or Cher) at all. (And they watched SNL every week.) But then again they don’t seem to watch television anymore the way the rest of us do. They can never seem to consistently remember what they have just seen even a few minutes later. It’s like they’re in their own world of dreams while the television is on.

Two Saturdays later, my mother would be gone.

These last five years have been harrowing for the family, not least of all for my mother. We’ve been up and down on a neverending roller coaster since she contracted COVID back in November of 2019. She miraculously survived that and then things were looking up. Then things were not looking good again and it was a reeling see-saw month to month. We couldn’t seem to keep a direction in sight for longer than a few weeks, good or bad. It was an endless and laborious and heartbreaking switching back and forth. It wore us all down. It wore her down terribly. She was getting better. She was getting worse. There was hope. There was no hope. She was giving up. She was fighting on. Deciding how to be in that world was hard enough but somehow manageable. It was the constant switchbacks. Years of switchbacks.

 

No, I do not obsess over lip-syncing or plastic surgery or autotune. But what I have always obsessed about is the truth. Let us all acknowledge that which is true. Just be honest about it. Like Zack Bagans’ Haunted Museum in Las Vegas, Nevada. Just cop to your amazing, next-level haunted house and drop the whole museum thing. Just own whatever it is you are doing.

I get fatigued. Especially lately around so many who can’t seem to do that. I’ve also been run down by those who can’t seem to keep track of the things I’ve said. Because after this whole thing, I have no energy left to keep repeating myself. So when for the third time during watching Saturday Night Live when my mother asked me “Did Cher sing?” I responded with a combination of frustration, futility and (in hindsight) maybe even some unintentional kindness.

In the face of her suffocating death and confusion and fear and all the insurmountable loneliness to come and the sad state of world affairs today with all the lies and obfuscations (from even those who happen to love us so), what does it even matter what truth is anymore?

So when my mother asked me for the third time “Did Cher sing? I just said, “Yeah mom, she sang.”

2025 Cher Books

As I said earlier, the fall of 2024 through 2025 was a very welcome, embarrassment-of-riches vis-a-vis Cher books.

I am reminded of something Sonny said in his memoir, that he could gauge how well Sonny & Cher were doing as an act by the way the hotels where they performed received them. If they made money for the hotel, they would be received more deferentially.

And similarly, I think you can tell how healthy a career legacy is doing judging by the quality of the writing from people who write about you. As Cher’s reputation has iconified over the last 10-15 years, the quality of mass media writing about her has improved measurably. Although this is getting harder to parse during the age of A.I. I’m not talking about grammar and sentence structure necessarily but also the thinking itself being done to conceptualize Cher as a performer, and also where this writing appears, not in A.I. results but in the mass media press.

These two books are a good example of that.

I Got You Babe: A Celebration of Cher by Annie Zaleski

By the way, Annie Zaleski also did the Cher chapter in the Hall of Fame program from 2024.

This slick-designed book of photographs and mini essays is a great overview of the Cher-universe for those who don’t have the patience to read her bios or memoirs. There’s a fun intro by Cher-friend Cyndi Lauper who talks about how professional, disciplined and encouraging Cher is, how basically pleasant she is and yet “if there was a problem, you’d hear about it,” how talking to her doesn’t feel like you’re talking to a famous person “even though she is one of the most famous people in the world.” Lauper calls Cher “sweet, kind and wise…and admirable.”

Zaleski has a good way of chunking the Cher story: breaking it up into digestible pop culture categories. She notes the multiple generations that have grown up with her and how: boomers (IGUB), Gen X (Variety shows, specials and movies, the rock diva), Millennials (Believe), Gen Z (tweets, RuPaul’s Drag Race, DJ Play a Song). Zaleski calls herself a longtime fan and music journalist. She calls Cher resilient, funny, brilliant and inspiring. The book is full of new quotes from Zaleski’s interviews with Cher and some new-old photos.

The book is color-coded by alternating chapters on Cher themes: personal life stories (much of Cher’s biography), Music, Television, Movies, Stage, Business (fitness, perfume), Fashion, Culture (being a gay and drag icon, the stuff like the dolls), Charity and Politics, and Cher stats.

Biography: Zaleski captures the core themes, that as a child “no one looked like me” and how Cher struggled for role models. There’s a great Cher’s quote about Sonny talking her “scattered energy” and “he focused the energy.” “I had such hero worship of Sonny, long after we were together…I just thought he was great.” Cher notes how they started out performing as the “100th on a bill.” Zaleski captures Cher and Tina Turner’s first impressions of each other and Zaleski notes that they “brought out the best in each other’s voices and stage presence.” She explains how David Geffen helped Cher “pivot.” “I was really, really lost,” she has Cher saying.

Zaleski has a knack for showing the iconic photographs and picking the best highlights of the Cher story.

Gregg Allman could be a “real louse” or he could build Chastity a tree house, Cher says. (There’s a Dr. Seuss poem in there with they rhyming louse/house.) “He split 9 days into the marriage.” Cher’s memoir makes it seem like the day after. Cher on Georganne: “My sister is the scholar in our family” Discussing Robert Camiletti (18 yr. difference) and Alexander Edwards (40 year difference), Cher says of younger men that they are “more supportive, less demanding” and give you more of their time.

Music: The book covers Cher’s Christmas album and major achievements.  Zaleski covers some of the early songs with her adjective-laden succinctness.

  • The swaying, harmony-rich “The Letter”
  • The Everly-Brothers-esque “Love is Strange”
  • The dramatic noir classic “Bang Bang”
  • The horn-peppered song “The Beat Goes On” – the message of which to Zaleski means “don’t’ stand still; the world is always changing and evolving.”
  • The easy-going “All I Ever Need Is You”
  • The theatrical “A Cowboy’s Work Is Never Done”
  • The dreamy “A Love Like Yours” (her vocals dusky and delicate…a perfect match for Nilsson’s own keening tone”)
  • Blazing disco-rocker “Hell on Wheels”
  • A hungry bar band singer in “Dead Ringer for Love” and she quotes Meatloaf saying “I didn’t think she could do it…I couldn’t believe it.”

She calls the music of Sonny & Cher “low-key…hewing toward kaleidoscopic ‘60s pop. She calls them “stubborn individualists” and notes one chaotic and “frenzied” concert where they had to escape by sitting in the middle of a river on a motorboat.” She quotes a journalist to say “Gypsys, Tramps and Thieves” was “one of the greatest pop songs of the last century.” And Cher’s retort: “No.” (I would argue it’s literature to boot.) Cher says it was the A&R men who brought the songs, not necessarily Snuff Garrett or Sonny.

Some songs Zaleski thinks didn’t flatter Cher like:

  • The treacly “You’d Better Sit Down Kids”

But she liked Cher’s “quiet confidence” in Dylan’s “The Times They Are a Changin’” and her “soulful performance over  scratchy electric guitars” in “Hey Joe.” She also loves the “horn-driven R&B” of the Jackson Highway album, including the “gorgeous vocals” on “Sittin’ On the Dock of the Bay” and “For What It’s Worth.” And these songs, Zaleski says, “laid the foundation for her vibrant career.”

Zaleski assembles a haphazard list of her musical successes in the charts. She talks about her “rock star phase” starting with Black Rose (and the book includes that unfortunate shirtless promo pic), opening for Hall & Oates, where Cher “held her own” with “no-frills hard rock with a dash of glam, power-pop and new wave.” (Oy, that’s some mash-up.) Theatrical howls and biting shrieks in “Never Should’ve Started,” a song which continues with “ferocious growls”. Zaleski creates her own 50-song best-of list and lists all the people Cher has collaborated with (not including studio musicians).

She does a segment on Cher’s live shows and residencies which she calls “uplifting” and notes revenues and tickets sold. There’s a separate section on soundtrack music and her guest appearances.

“Her legacy and impact are still felt today,” Zaleski says.

Television: The Television segments put Cher’s shows in context of Fred Silverman’s lineup of Mary Tyler Moore, Bob Newhart and All in the Family and him saying in 1971, “They’re the kind of young new talent we must have.”  Zaleski  talks about Sonny & Cher’s deadpan, edgy insults. She quotes Meryl Streep as saying Cher on TV was a “natural talent as an actress…she made everybody else on TV look like they were trying too hard.” (And she did.) Streep also called Cher’s acting “immediate…canny…skilled, but it was invisible.”

Zaleski also rounds up the awards and ratings and notes “The Sonny & Cher Comedy Hour would “become known as the Gold Standards by which all musical variety shows were measured.” (No one talks about that very much now but it’s true.)

Zaleski gets the name of Sonny’s solo show wrong but reviews both Sonny and Cher solo shows and has ABC president remarking that maybe it was “too soon” for Sonny’s show. And there are pictures from the first show attributed to the later day show. (Deep breath.)

There’s also a segment on the TV specials at the end of the decade and how tabloid problems with Gregg Allman meant that “mothers wouldn’t let kids watch.” (There was very little my mother wouldn’t let me watch: the movie Grease and the TV show Soap.) Zaleski calls the specials “equally amazing” and talks about Cher’s Letterman appearances. There’s a section on the music videos (including “Hell on Wheels”), the John Wilson cartoons and even the guest appearance on Pee-Wee’s Playhouse and Will and Grace among other things.

Movies: This section take us from Come Back to the Five and Dime Jimmy Dean through the aminated movies and Mama Mia 2. We begin with Cher’s struggles to break in to acting and how Jimmy Dean “gave me professional credibility for the first time.” Reviews for Silkwood include “the script was dense and smart” and “one of the most wryly clever performances on film in a good while.” Zaleski notes that Cher thanked her mom, Sonny and her children for her first Golden Globes win.

Reviews for Mask include “a sensitive, empathetic actress” and Cher saying, “I go out of my way to try to do women who are heroic people that would never make the cover of any magazine,” about Bagdanovich Cher saying, “I never did really understand what he wanted” and Bagdanovich on Cher saying, “she can’t act” and that she was “the most difficult actor I ever worked with,” that she “won best actress because I shot her well.” Zaleski  mentions Cher’s lifelong friendship with craniofacial kids. She calls Witches of Eastwick “underrated.”

Zaleski calls Moonstruck a modern classic. Zaleski also mentions the movies Cher barely missed out on including King Kong, Thelma and Louise, War of the Roses, The Drop Out and Catwoman.

She separates Cher’s main movies from her cameos and movie segments like If These Walls Could Talk. She has Cher saying she has “a narrow range. My characters, they’re me.”  (I would say this is only consistently true of the latter-day movies.)

We learn that Cher picked Andy Garcia as her mate for singing “Fernando” in Mama Mia 2.

Zaleski includes all the animations on one page (TV, video and movies, except the John Wilson ones which appear with the TV videos): her appearance with Beavis & Butthead, Zookeeper (which wasn’t animated though but does classify as voice work), Home: Adventures with Tip & Oh, Bobble Heads, and both appearances on Scooby Doo.

Stage Work: This includes the 2018 jukebox musical and a cast member saying about Cher, “to be vulnerable and yet have the most power in the room, that’s a really hard place to stand in.”

There are sections about her other cultural influences including:

Fashion and her years with Bob Mackie on stage, television and on the red carpet (and with the dolls) and how Bob Mackie said he was always “attempting to present to the world this…creature in her own right” and Cher talks about the confidence he gave her. Zaleski lists the iconic fashion moments and calls her “a fashion plate for the free wheeling, forward looking 1970s” and says she’s been pushing the envelope since the 1960s. Another great Mackie quote is “she’s a chameleon, but you can never lose her.”

There’s a whole section on Cher wigs, a whole section on the dolls. Zaleski notes that back in the 1970s they called it the Cher Barbie doll and has Cher saying “they made about 30 dolls before I was satisfied.” Zaleski interviews the Mego Toy president.

The Social Causes: There’s a section on her support of LGBTQ community and her status as a gay icon. Separately Zaleski has a section on Cher’s influence and importance to the art of drag, including how she incorporated drag into her late 1970s shows.

The Business Ventures: This includes the fitness commercials and videos, Lori Davis, Aquasentials (where Cher says she felt she lost her soul), the Sanctuary catalog, the two perfumes, MAC cosmetics, Cherlato and a roller rink Cher started that never opened. (I didn’t know that.)

The book also has a stats page that covers her auctions, awards, chartings, record sales, tour receipts, awards and honors.

Charitable Interests: This list includes AMFAR, Pediatric Aids Foundation, Habitat for Humanity, COVID Pandemic Response, a village school in Kenya, Intrepid Fallen Heroes Fund, Operation Helmet, political support to Hillary Clinton and Joe Biden, saving Kaavan, Free the Wild and her continued work to save Billy the elephant.

There are some new and rare pics, quotes and perspectives.

Some other great quotes from the book: “Cher is pop culture” and that she is “a model for staying true to yourself…brash, outspoken, unapologetic. The world is finally waking up and realizing that she’s one of the most influential and important artists of our time.” and video director David Mallet saying “she is probably one of the most unaffected people in entertainment.” (Very different from what Bagdonovich said.)

Style Codes: Cher: A Guide to Dressing Like a Fashion Icon by Natalie Hammond (2025)

I’m always looking for ways people talk about Cher’s fashion style because, like for music, I don’t feel real adept at talking about fashion. I don’t have the vocabulary. Although I do enjoy dressing up for occasions, I spend most of my time in jeans and a t-shirt. I did a lot of outrageous-wear in high school but it wasn’t modeled after Cher as much as Molly Ringwald. She wasn’t a bad guide either.

My only criticism of the book is that it’s so over-designed, it’s hard to tell where sections begin and end.

The book starts by considering Cher’s 1982 live show headdress and Hammond calls it an “extravaganza of camp” and she notes how that show’s outfit changes happened in front of an audience. She also notes the show’s “big mule sandal” and calls Cher a fashion “risk taker.”

Next she considers the 1986 Oscars dress and says Cher’s variety shows were “always source of controversy for CBS” but that Cher and Bob Mackie were adept at creating “a moment.” (An unforgettable moment at that.)

Hammond talks about how Cher’s album cover always provided a “glorious sense of escapism,” particularly Take me Home and Prisoner.

Hammond explains an episode when Cher was on a Barbara Walters special explaining what her 1988 Oscar dress would look like and it was supposed to have a motorcycle jacket instead of the wrap she eventually wore. ”I feel that’s really me.”  (I didn’t know that.)

The book is broken up in to 10 Cher codes along with tips as to how to use them yourself. “The average person has no Bob Mackie. So what’s a girl to do?” Generally this means pushing yourself out of comfort zone but still feeling like you. The book encourages you to throw in an “occasional curve ball” into the mix. Hammond talks about the word “appropriate” and how this concept doesn’t apply to Cher. To those who judge Cher’s fashion decisions, Hammond says, Cher judges you right back.

Cher says she didn’t set out to be scandalous. She was simply trying to be herself. (That’s a complicated idea.)

Hammond says first you need to take stock of your wardrobe (t-shirts and jeans) and do a cleanse and list out the gaps. (Anything that isn’t t-shirts and jeans. Jk, I have some sweaters, too.)

If Cher has only  one legacy, it would be the naked dress, Hammond says. Now naked dresses are standard practice on the red carpet. But in the 1970s nobody was showing that much skin. But Cher was already using “see-through fabrics, peekaboo lace and decolletage-clinging sides.” Hammond quotes Mackie about Cher’s fantastical armpits. There’s the comment about the appearance of Cher’s navel during television’s family hour.

Cher was accused of corrupting the morals and had to hide her navel again by 1975. Her variety shows spent $30k on the costume budget per episode. But in the process, she became a style icon in the 1970s. Not a pinup (as if to differentiate her from Farrah Fawcett). Hammond talks about the Cher silhouette,” slinky to the point of making her look statuesque”  with the elongations, the crisscross designs and the fluid maxi skirts.

Hammond provides mix-and-match options charts, tells you how to shop and what to pair with what. This book has mostly illustration and very few photos of Cher, as if the book is on a budget. But there are enough. And the illustrations are helpful.

There’s a section on makeup and Cher’s heart-shaped face and how empowering it was also to see Cher out-and-about wearing no makeup, similar to how it is also empowering to see RuPaul and Pamela Anderson without makeup today.

Hammond takes us through the decades.

1960s

After the “staid fashions” of the 1950s, “modest was out, megawatt was in.” There’s even a color-scheme page for each decade, with the primary colors of the 60s, the paisleys, Cher’s vinyl minidress in sunflower yellow.

She calls Cher “queen of the crop tops” and talks about Cher’s early use of bell bottoms.

1970s

A glamourous approach, “gone were the garish or girlish” and how Cher wore a “lustrous spectrum that dazzled under lights.” Hammond focuses on her “jewel tones,” an example being the ruby-red Ringling Brother’s outfit.

Hammond talks about the artist who worked on the first variety show (or with Cher during that time):Jim Ortel (hair), Ben Nye II (makeup), Renata Leuschner (wigs), Minnie Smith (manicurist of the stars) noting how Cher started the squared-off nail trend.

She mentions the Beatles Tribute dresses.

And “the kaleidoscope effect” of Cher’s butterflies outfit.

“By 1978 Cher had laid three shows to rest” Hammond says and she calls their next variety show in 1976 “the ex-couples second bite of the cherry as a double act.”

By the late 70s Cher is “dressing with a devotion to the razzmatazz.” She turned the volume up, Hammond says and her “outfits were brief and the colors were bold.” As Cher struggles to launch and acting career, Hammond says her clothes were “a visual sucker-punch that would have done little to quell the doubt about her suitability for cinema audiences.”

An example she notes is the 1978 turquoise body suit and its pose, “a starfish in spandex,” the silver knee high boots and the whole thing “a swaggering kind of energy” (which, btw, is where real rock and roll style resides).

But it was “the flame dress that really set pulses racing.”  Hammon notes that a version had already been made for Tina Turner inspired by the tendrils of sequins already worn by Raquel Welch.

Here’s a slide-show of women who have worn a version of the dress.

Cher as “Prime Time Queen” wore all those jewel tones and “showgirl getups” but Hammon notes all the times she wore white and later in the decade purple and pinks. And the gold on 1979’s Take Me Home.

1980s

Black was Cher’s color in the 1980s. Hammond says, because she was in her serious Hollywood phase but that she “makes the shade her own”  and that “the genius of Cher” is to turn black into a statement or even everyday wear. She notes the “Turn Back Time” leotard and that silver belt, noting this was the only outfit Cher was ever nervous about because….all those sailors.

Someone on The Phil Donahue Show asked Cher if she had shed her “Barbie doll image.” She was wearing a studded leather jacket, short shaggy hair and leather mini skirt.

Hammond provides advice on wearing all black, how to mix textures and that “black doesn’t have to mean boring.”

She talks about the “I Found Someone” video’s black peekaboo body stocking paired with a leather jacket and the chain-mail suspenders and the armor minidress.

She notes that the record label, Geffen didn’t want Robert Camilletti in the video so Cher funded it herself “and if that isn’t rock and roll, what is?” Snap. Hammond talks about how her outfits seem effortless and Cher’s “utter disregard of the rules” which is “better than leather.”

Later in the decade, Cher wears more florals.

1990s

Hammond talks about the Love Hurts bodysuit with all its rivets and charms and high cut crotch.

The was a decade of animal prints for Cher. She notes the 1993 CFDA event with the crystal buckle. She calls Cher “the mistress of I don’t give a damn.”

There’s a section explaining Cher’s use of slightly oversized biker jackets, “the definition of rock and roll,” going “loose and louche” with extra zips, belt, cuffs to the knuckles, and always falling off her shoulder.

She gives tips on vintage shopping.  She notes the 1997 Met Gala outfit.

2000s and 2010s

This was a decade with the return of color, of “Believe” silver and the 2000-2005 Living Proof Tour metalics.

She notes the 2002 MTV Icon award honoring Aerosmith.

2020s

Hammond talks about the idea of “owning your own sex appeal” and how Cher does all the “no-nos” in outfit combos.

She mentions the Versace show where Cher wore blue leather in 2021.

And her appearance at the opening of the Academy Museum of Motion Pictures wearing two prints. (One of my favorite recent ensembles.)

And her Chicken Shop Date jacket.

Hammond talks about how Cher has worn denim across all the decades and how Cher says denim is the “longest relationship I’ve ever had.” She calls out the flared jeans Cher wore on her first appearance of Will & Grace and of Jack: “He should have know better. Who could pull off those jeans but Cher.”

Or the jeans she wore opening night at Studio 54 on April 26 1977, coming downstairs with Steve Rubell.

The 1987 photo session on shag rug in her Egyptian house.

Cher can made double denim okay, Hammond says.

There’s a section on “embracing your alter ego” and Hammond calls out the outfit Cher wore on the cover of Paper Magazine in  2023.

Hammond calls Cher an “airport influencer” and how she has made airport appearances into “her own personal runway.”

She calls out a 1974 appearance with a cowboy hat.

A 1977 airport appearance wearing snake skin boots.

A 1978 appearance in a checkered shirt and a 1984 with leather pants and a 1988 appearance with a velvet scarf.

Hammond says Cher has even mastered dressing down (and I’m reminded of how she does interviews with jogging pants,  track pants or jeans and a t-shirt .

Like the outfit she wore on The Dick Cavett Show in 1982 (where she shows him all her tattoos).

Hammond talks about film roles that featured “a grittier kind of realism” and that “Cher was more than capable of playing a ‘real’ person.” She calls out Dolly Pelliker’s t-shirt, workman’s pants and cowboy boots from Silkwood which “couldn’t have been more of a departure.” Hammond calls it a “make-under.”

She calls out the 2018 Met Gala dress when she talks about how Cher has a “sparkly me” and “the quiet me.”

There’s a whole section about add-ons and her Hammond features the 1985 Met Gala dress with the black skirt and beaded top with ear cuffs. Hammond says for Cher “more is more.”

She tells us the “Believe” video head piece was an accident of walking by an artist who happened to be on set crafting to pass the time. (I did not know that.)

There’s a section on hair and hats: Charlie Tweeddle cowboy hats, cowboy hats with plumes, halos, war bonnets, headdresses.

A final section is on prints and of course Cher’s character Laverne is featured with the bra strap always exposing itself (Bob Mackie’s genius idea) and how the outfit is “loud and unapologetic.”

“Clothes never eclipse Cher,” Hamond says, whether she wears rock-and-roll studs and beads, sequins, crystals, pearls.

On page 184 Hammond promises that by following these codes “you’ll look a little like Cher” but on page 1986 she admits “there can’t be more than one Cher.” All we can do is emulate her style codes and “perhaps push yourself out of your style comfort zone….Cher didn’t take her wardrobe too seriously.” And if you do, “snap out of it.”

In Hammond’s acknowledgements she says, “this one felt personal because to me Cher is the ultimate in so many respects—a person who lives fearlessly. I hope this book encourages you do to the same.” Hammond also has done books on Dolly Parton and David Bowie. She is currently the Senior Fashion Editor of Grazie but has written for many publications about fashion.

End of 2025 Catchup

I checked Cher’s merch page and unfortunately there is not yet a Cher snow globe available. But wouldn’t that be swell?

Music

Since I’ve been working on my own Cher rabbit holes (with books and dolls), I’ve been delayed in posting the latest Cher news. And there has been quite a lot of it, the biggest of which maybe happened yesterday.

I had no idea when I woke up Sunday morning that I’d be greeted with news of new music that very day. Cher completely surprised us with a  new  Christmas single!

Some fans, me included, worried that after months of really aggressively fake Cher news on Facebook, that this too was fake news. In fact, I spent the better part of Sunday morning lying in bed trying to find confirmation on this story. I didn’t even think to go to straight to Cher’s YouTubes. Eventually I just had to rely on the reliable sources of Cher Universe and Cher Brazil. They get the scoops, those young whippersnappers.

I spoke with another Cher scholar and we wondered is this was actually a 2025 recording? There has been no context around this release (interviews, advanced press) and so it’s hard to know. Or is this an outtake of the 2023 Christmas album? Will it be resold and repackaged into the old album to tease fans into buying it once again? The song is heavy on auto-tune, which feels like Cher’s continued middle-finger into the face of auto-tunes detractors, but its also not new.

On the other hand, the lyrics speak to the from-ennui-to-anguish her fans may be dealing with in 2025 in a sort of general way that covers all of our possible scenarios.

I always appreciate the Cher-as-Mother-Figure songs. Her Cheer-Up-Kid gestures always get me. This could be because Sonny & Cher were my fantasy parents. But songs like “Chiquitita” and “Stop Crying Your Heart Out” I find very comforting. This is another song in that category. It’s been quite another rough year from this end (ending with a roof leak among other dramas), rougher probably because it’s also been rough for all my friends too.

Sometimes I feel like I’m losing my resistance and elasticity. (Don’t tell my non-Cher mother. She’s got enough to worry about.) But songs like this are very appreciated from Cher’s own brand of public surrogate motherhood.

This is also a good time to visit the Cher Scholar Christmas Page.

The new song also explains why Cher will be on Saturday Night Live on Saturday December 20, their year-end Christmas show. She’s a musical guest alongside Arianna Grande, but hopefully she’ll also appear in some of the skits. Would a duet be too much?

Let’s touch base next year on how all that turns out.

A Grammy Salute to Cyndi Lauper aired on CBS on 5 October. It was a great special all around with some fabulous and unexpected duets. Cher came out for the finale of “Girls Just Wanna Have Fun” in a visual tribute to Yayoi Kusama which I love, love, loved!

Last week, Cher also received another victory against Mary Bono but this time at the federal level. Bono plans to appeal all the way to the top! (Just wow. Will the Supreme Court eventually take on this case someday? Let’s hope not.)

Cher Books

CBS Mornings (which has confusingly rebranded since I last looked from the previous title of CBS This Morning) had Cher on the show in November to talk about the paperback version of her Memoir just out. There is an appended story at the end of the paperback version, (to get us to all buy that again) about Sonny and Cher at Martoni’s Restaurant, a very funny one but not the “Laugh In” story that was left out of the hardback version, which is significant I think. Did that even happen at all?

Cher’s Memoir part two was postponed earlier this year until spring of  2026 and now reports are saying it’s furtherly postponed until fall of 2026, which will be two years after part one came out. (That’s the way it is and you’ll like it!)

Anyway, 2025 was sort of an embarrassment of riches on the Cher book front. In another post (this week) I’ll talk about Annie Zaleski’s picture bio and Natalie Hammond’s style guide.

But this week, the children’s book on Cher (from the Little Golden Book people) came out, written by Candice Ransom and  illustrated by Laura Catrinella. It’s so brief, it didn’t have the chance to print any egregious errors. Which is nice.

Some of the best drawings include:

And then there’s this picture. I’m sure many Cher fans will fight me on this one but that is definitely me in the lower left-hand corner of this picture. That’s even my facial expression at Cher concerts!

Outings 

Cher attended the Swarovski Masters of Lighting Opening Celebration in Los Angeles with Alexander Edwards on 28 October. “On the day, Cher donned a black see-through bodysuit paired with a fur crop jacket and wide pants adorned with chain decorations on the sides, exuding her unique charisma. Her signature black wavy hair and glamorous jewelry highlighted her presence as the ‘ageless diva.'” (chosun.com)

Cher was also presented with a Bambi Legende Award in Germany on 13 November.

Cher was introduced around her iconic status and humanity. In her speech Cher said she was proud to be there and felt she had a special relationship with Germany, where people seemed to always been interested in her during her career’s low ebbs. She talked about her inability to save Billy the Elephant from the L.A. Zoo. She kept saying, “I’m just a singer; I can’t do anything.” But then after telling the successful Kavaan elephant story she ended with, “I’m not just a pretty face, am I?”

Movies

Someone reached out to me from Peru about the movie Suspect.

A man named Anthony told me he had recently watched the movie on VHS and “found it very entertaining,  full of suspense and interesting moments. For example, the scene in the library” and yes that scene was very delectable!

Anthony said he searched the internet for reviews and found my Cher Zine review “full of details and very interesting observations.”

He said he was “grateful to be able to read it and that there are unique opinions” and he hoped I could read the email “and feel grateful for filling the world with culture.”

I was indeed very grateful he reached out to me. Suspect is a bit underrated as it includes a very bookish character against Cher-type and I think she does a fine job in it alongside a young Liam Neeson.

More About Me

So my friend in San Francisco and I finished reading Healing The Child Within by Charles L. Whitfield (which Cher recommends in her book Forever Fit) and we started on the comparatively very large workbook.

Oy vey! It has been a shocking experience because when I started reading the book, it felt so dated, so 80s. My friend and I have read so many other self-help books between when this one was published and now. And it seemed very substance-abuse related, which was not my family history, (in my childhood anyway). But then it turns out the childhoods explored encapsulated many more kinds of dysfunction under “also ran” where I could find my little self. The book is full of tables and charts and I could see exactly where my therapy in Los Angeles stalled when I left to move to New Mexico. I never got to core issues! Or letting the feelings go!!

So I’ll be restarting therapy next year when my insurance is sorted out. My friend and I are now deep into documenting our true and public selves. Many surprising revelations for us, I must say.

I’ll be making an unexpected visit to Cleveland next weekend so I wasn’t going to finish putting up my Christmas trees. But then I did it anyway just to cheer myself up.

 

 

« Older posts

© 2026 I Found Some Blog

Theme by Anders NorenUp ↑