life

Kathdhara village is a riot of colour as the early evening light turns the clouds the rosy hue of Himalayan salt. Bright red chillies lie drying in front of cornflower blue doorways. The pink of a sari and the orange of marigolds pop against a backdrop of verdant terraced fields, where cabbages grow in perfect rows like a picture from a Peter Rabbit book.

Just 22 families live in this remote hamlet in Binsar Wildlife Sanctuary, in the Kumaon region of Uttarakhand, north-east India. As we stroll with our guide, Deepak, taking in views of the layered hills and soaring, snow-capped Panchachuli peaks beyond, we are welcomed by villagers tending homes and gardens, strings of Diwali fairy lights adding extra sparkle to the scene.

I’m here to explore the foothills of the Himalayas and sample village life on a walking holiday with Village Ways, a pioneer of responsible, community-based tourism in India, which is celebrating its 21st anniversary this year. Dreamed up by Manisha and Himanshu Pande, the couple who run the Khali Estate, a small hotel in the reserve, the goal is to help address urban migration and support traditional rural life through low-impact tourism. Village Ways launched in 2005 with just five villages in the reserve, which guests hike between, and now more than 30 villages are involved in different parts of the country, from Madhya Pradesh to Kerala.

“The idea was to bring the community together to run something collectively, training people in all aspects of business. Everyone has a role to play,” says Manisha. “The Village Ways model has captured the attention of the government, too, and we’re collaborating on various projects in other states now, which is exciting.”

Most accommodation is in small, village-built guesthouses sleeping up to eight, rather than homestays, and money is evenly distributed to everyone from cleaners to porters, with committees making joint decisions. Back at the Kathdhara guesthouse, we join Diwali celebrations, sharing sweets, lighting lamps and praying to the goddess Lakshmi by a makeshift shrine. We feast on a delicious thali – spicy yams, dal, hemp chutney and warm roti – and sleep soundly, cocooned by the silence of the mountains.

The next day brings blue skies, and after breakfast we set out on a gentle walk to the neighbouring Gonap village. Binsar Wildlife Sanctuary was created in 1988, a 47 sq km (18 sq mile) area to help protect the broadleaf oak forest and wildlife. For the people living here, it altered their relationship with the forest, ending tree felling and hunting – tempting many to abandon village life for the cities. Village Ways offered an alternative – former hunters turned guides, sharing knowledge of the land and wildlife with guests, and seeing outsiders’ interest in local customs and traditions renewed their sense of pride.

We hike through pristine pine, oak and rhododendron forests (come in March or April to see the land painted red, pink and white when they bloom). I’m fascinated by the Himalayan oaks, which play a key role in storing and releasing water and stabilising the land with their vast root networks. We see the bright red flowers of wild turmeric and countless medicinal plants, from goat weed (some believe the juice stops bleeding) to Indian tobacco (used for toothache).

Leopards roam here too and, though they remain elusive, we spy footprints and scat, as well as porcupine quills. But the sanctuary is best known for its amazing birdlife – more than 200 species are found here – and we stop frequently as Deepak points out the crested serpent eagle, leaf warbler, black-headed jay and noisy parakeets.

Gonap itself is tiny – home to just seven families today. We’re welcomed to the guesthouse with chai and plates of warm pakora – enjoyed with staggering mountain views as Eurasian griffon vultures float on the thermals. Deepak leads us to a tiny temple, past houses with gardens heaving with jumbo lemons and air potatoes on giant stalks, the sounds of cicadas in the air.

No roads connect the five villages in the Binsar circuit, but the paths between them offer easy walking and there’s plenty of time to rest. A higher-altitude route in the nearby Saryu and Pindar valleys, close to the border with Tibet, offers more challenging hikes. But limited time means we head back to the Khali Estate from Gonap, stopping at Zero Point lookout – the highest vantage spot in the reserve, at 2,500 metres – to gawp at the 360-degree Himalayan panorama, dominated by Nanda Devi, the second highest mountain in India.

Built 150 years ago by a British commissioner, Gen Sir Henry Ramsay, the Khali Estate makes a picturesque base, with accommodation in stone rondavel cabins and a sitting room with roaring fire. During his time in Kumaon, Ramsay is credited with developing local infrastructure, founding a leper colony in the historical capital of the region, Almora, and regulating tree felling. We delve into the estate’s history on a tour with Himanshu, poring over photos and library texts, and learn how it was also a retreat for the Nehru family and an ashram for Mahatma Gandhi. Surrounded by forest, it’s utterly peaceful. Later, I fall asleep to the distant sound of barking deer.

For visitors wanting to learn more about the region’s history and the characters who shaped it, Village Ways has launched a new itinerary, Khali in Kumaon. As well as the Binsar walks, it takes in the lakeside hill station of Nainital, where we had stopped on the 270-mile journey from Delhi. Guests will also explore Almora, with its local primary school supported by Village Ways, the museum of the Anglo-Indian hunter turned conservationist Jim Corbett, and the Gandhi trail, heading into the hills to see some of the first looms he established for homespun cotton – a symbol of economic independence and resistance to British rule – at Anasakti ashram.

But our last day is very much focused on the present, as a stream of villagers arrive at Khali from far and wide to join the anniversary celebrations. Other Village Ways founders – Brits who worked in development and tourism – are here too, and there are talks, feasting and dancing. I learn about the Village Ways charitable trust, which supports healthcare in these remote villages, training local women to run mobile clinics. Since Village Ways’ inception, it has hosted 7,000 guests, benefiting about 5,000 people, from artists to taxi drivers, according to Manisha, and 470 villagers are directly involved in decision-making as members of the village tourism committees in six states.

I buy locally made scarves and handicrafts, and many of the young villagers – now guides, cooks or porters – tell me about the positive impact tourism has had on their lives. “Since I joined as a guide three years ago I’ve learned lots about Binsar and our birds – and my English has really improved,” said 23-year-old Ashirwad Joshi from Dalar village. “I’m very happy to be part of it and share my knowledge with visitors – it makes me proud.”

When we leave the next morning for the long drive to Kathgodam and onward train journey to Delhi, it’s the feeling of mutual respect and warmth that stays with me. The challenges are many, from ageing village populations to a decline in international visitor numbers to the area since Covid, but the Village Ways mission is very much full steam ahead – taking its ethos to other parts of the country. This type of tourism – one that involves communities as partners and is collaborative rather than exploitative – benefits locals and travellers alike. In these times of division, it is to be celebrated more than ever.

The trip was provided by Village Ways, which creates bespoke itineraries, tailored to travellers’ interests. The suggested 10-day Khali in Kumaon itinerary (available until 30 May, and from 15 September to 30 November 2026) costs from £1,315pp, based on a party of four, including transfers, rail travel, accommodation and most meals

Gaza City, the Gaza Strip – Shortly before the call to sunset prayer, Islam Dardouna stretches her hand towards a pot hanging over a makeshift stove fashioned from a battered metal can, with scraps of paper and pieces of wood feeding the fire beneath it.

Then she pauses. She turns her face away from the rising tongues of smoke. Her face stained with a thin layer of soot and her clothes steeped in the lingering smell of fumes, she takes a deep breath but does not immediately lift the lid.

In her right hand, Dardouna holds an asthma inhaler as though it were a ladle or tongs. With her other hand, she tries to prepare food for her three children.

“I can no longer tolerate the fire at all,” the 34-year-old says in a strained voice as she raises the inhaler to her mouth.

“We heat water on it, cook on it … everything. It completely destroyed my health,” she said, pointing to her chest.

Dardouna has been displaced from Jabalia in northern Gaza since the start of Israel’s genocidal war against Palestinians in the territory in October 2023.

She now lives with her husband – 37-year-old Muath Dardouna – and their children in Sheikh Ajleen, west of Gaza City.

A year and a half ago, their home was destroyed. Since then, the family has moved from place to place until they eventually settled in this camp alongside other displaced families.

Everything changed after the war began. But for Dardouna, having to cook daily over an open fire in the face of cooking gas and fuel ranks among the worst.

“Our entire life now is a struggle, searching for wood and things we never imagined we would need one day,” she says. “There is no cooking gas and no gas cylinders. We lost all of that during displacement.”

What makes the situation even harder is that she suffers from asthma and chronic chest allergies, conditions she says began during Israel’s 2008 war on Gaza when she inhaled the smoke of a phosphorus bomb that dropped on her house. Her situation improved over the years, but has dramatically worsened during the current war.

“I developed airway obstruction, and recently there were masses found in my lungs,” said Dardouna, who in January was hospitalised for six days after suffering from oxygen shortage.

“The doctors prescribed an oxygen cylinder for me,” she says, quietly. “But unfortunately, I cannot afford it.”

A prolonged shortage

Like so many others across Gaza, Dardouna is struggling amid a prolonged shortage of cooking gas and fuel that has persisted since the start of the war.

Supplies have remained severely limited even after a “ceasefire” came into effect in October that included provisions allowing the entry of fuel and essential goods into the territory.

However, the quantities that have entered since then remain far below the population’s actual needs, according to official sources in Gaza and United Nations agencies.

The UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs says the availability of cooking gas in Gaza remains “critically constrained”, with the limited quantities entering the territory covering less than three percent of what is required.

As a result, many families have been forced to rely on alternative and often hazardous cooking methods.

UN data indicates that about 54.5 percent of households rely on firewood for cooking, roughly 43 percent burn waste or plastic, and only around 1.5 percent are able to cook with gas.

Humanitarian groups warn that such unsafe alternatives endanger people’s health and the environment due to prolonged exposure to smoke and toxic fumes produced by burning plastic and other waste.

Amid these conditions, cooking over open fires made from wood, scrap materials or plastic has become a daily reality across displacement camps and neighbourhoods throughout Gaza.

The crisis has intensified during the Muslim holy month Ramadan, when families must prepare both suhoor meals before their daily fast and iftar meals afterwards.

Firewood has become expensive, requiring a daily budget. Lighting the fire before dawn is also often difficult due to the lack of lighting and unfavourable weather conditions, so the family often skips the pre-dawn meal entirely.

“Today, for example, it’s raining and windy. I couldn’t light the fire,” said Darduna’s husband, Muath, who is also helping out with the daily cooking.

“Even when we break our fast, we wish we could drink a cup of tea or coffee afterwards, but we can’t, because lighting the fire again is another struggle.”

A former psychosocial support worker for children, Muath says it pains him to see his children fasting without suhoor.

“Every detail of our lives is literally suffering,” he says. “Fetching water is suffering. Cooking is suffering. Even going to the bathroom is suffering. We are truly exhausted,” he added.

“Our lives are covered in soot,” Muath says, pointing to the black smoke stains left by the fire.

He describes gas as “one of our dreams”, recalling how “it felt like Eid day” when the family got a gas cylinder a few months ago. “But we don’t even have the stove to use it, and many families are like us,” he said.

“We are living on the edge of nothing. Displacement and war stripped us of everything,” he adds. “We are willing to live with the simplest rights in tents. But there is no heating, no gas, no lighting. It feels like we are living in open graves on Earth.”

Serious implications

In a statement on Wednesday, the General Petroleum Authority in Gaza warned of the “catastrophic and dangerous consequences of the continued halt in cooking gas supplies” to the territory, stressing that the crisis “directly affects the lives of more than two million residents” amid already dire humanitarian conditions.

The authority said Gaza had already been facing a shortfall of about 70 percent of its actual gas needs compared with the quantities that entered after the “ceasefire” announcement.

It added that the “complete suspension of gas supplies places the Gaza Strip before a looming disaster that threatens food and health security”, particularly during Ramadan.

The authority also said that preventing gas from entering the enclave constitutes a “clear violation of the ceasefire understandings”, calling on mediators and international actors to intervene urgently to ensure the regular flow of cooking gas into Gaza.

Across Gaza, many families now rely on ready-made meals from aid distributions and charity kitchens because of economic collapse and the difficulty of cooking.

“Even when food arrives ready hours before iftar,” Muath says, “heating it becomes another problem.”

The frustration of daily survival pushes Muath to the brink.

“As a father now, I cannot even provide the most basic things,” he says. “Imagine my son simply wants a cup of tea … even a little wind can stop me from making it.”

‘The fire suffocates you’

In a nearby tent, Amani Aed al-Bashleqi, 26, sits watching food being cooked over an open fire for iftar while her husband stirs the pot.

She said cooking on fire makes food taste “flavourless” – not because the taste changes, but because “exhaustion and suffering have become part of every bite”.

“We start cooking early so we can finish by iftar, and after breaking the fast, my husband and I are completely exhausted and covered in soot.”

Like Dardouna, al-Bashleqi says the smoke causes severe headaches and health problems.

“The fire suffocates you. All the women in the camp suffer health problems from cooking on fire,” she says. “But we have no choice.”

She has a seven-month-old baby, and her biggest worry is boiling water for his milk.

“Sometimes I boil water and keep it in a borrowed thermos, but I don’t always have one,” she says. “And sometimes when he wakes up at night, I mix the milk with water without boiling it, even though I know that’s not healthy. But what can I do?”

Nearby, Iman Junaid, 34, displaced from Jabalia to western Gaza City, sits with her husband Jihad, 36, in front of the fire preparing food.

Junaid blows on the flames while she pushes an empty plastic oil bottle under the fire.

Behind them, bags full of plastic bottles are piled up. The family collected them to fuel the fire because cooking gas has been unavailable for months.

A mother of six, Junaid says she knows the health dangers of burning plastic, but has “no other choice”.

“My little daughter is one year old, and her chest always hurts because she inhales the smoke,” she says. “Our life is collecting and burning plastic and nylon.”

“With the price of wood rising, we now wish we could even find wood. Gas has become almost impossible … we’ve forgotten it.”

She said there were many promises that gas would enter Gaza after the “ceasefire”, but “nothing happened”.

For Dardounah, the solution is not simply bringing cooking gas into Gaza. “What we need is for life to become possible again,” she says.

“Let gas enter. Let goods enter at reasonable prices. Let there be basic necessities for a normal life.”

CORTINA D’AMPEZZO, Italy — Patrick Halgren, the self-proclaimed “rock star” of the Milan Cortina Paralympics, said he could feel the presence of his late twin brother in his silver medal-winning Para alpine ski run on Monday.

“He made this happen for real. He is the ski god and he has blessed me with speed today,” Halgren said of his brother Lucas Sven Halgren.

Lucas Sven died in a motorcycle accident in New Zealand in 2016, three years after Patrick nearly died and lost most of his left leg in another motorcycle accident.

Patrick has been plastering blue-and-yellow stickers that read “ SvendIt ” around Cortina d’Ampezzo, a play on “send-it,” which is Patrick’s mantra on life and a reference to his brother who went by Sven.

“He’s the reason I’m here. I’m just a vessel to cram love and combat hate down your throats. He inspired me to live life, but life is fragile. You can die,” Patrick said. “It’s all for him. It’s for my family. It’s for the people that have struggled. He’s dead. I’m here living, talking to you guys. I’m going to have who knows how many women and champagne after this. He liked that, too, but he doesn’t get that, and I do. I recognize that.”

Halgren celebrated in front of his parents, Peter and Kathy, which he said was “pretty cool.”

“But also, it sucks not having Sven here, so ups and downs,” the 33-year-old Halgren said after winning his first medal in his second Paralympics appearance.

“They went to Tijuana, Mexico, for their honeymoon 50 years ago. They picked up their dead kid in New Zealand, and they’ve watched me win the Paralympics at the most beautiful ski valley in the world,” Halgren told the Olympics website. “This is a surreal moment for them. This is an experience that will create a memory lasting a lifetime and such a good moment.”

Halgren said it was Sven who steered him to Para alpine skiing after the 2013 crash that nearly killed him and resulted in the above-the-knee amputation of his left leg.

“I died myself. I was in a coma for a month. I died four times,” he said. “They used a defibrillator to start my heart. Blood transfusion. I get it, and I’m lucky that I have that because I know what it’s like. Not many people do.”

Now it’s hard not to miss Halgren, and not only because of his long braids that are dyed red, white and blue. Always entertaining and joking with those around him, the outspoken American has taken on a showman personality at the Games.

At the podium ceremony, he performed an air guitar solo using his crutch. He said it was just “another Monday” for him.

“I am a rock star,” he added. “I always wanted to be this guy, Jim Brown, he was my idol. He was a professional football player, played lacrosse at Syracuse. I did both those sports, and he retired at the peak of his career and became basically the first Black action movie star. I always wanted to be him, and now I am him.”

Halgren said he “learned to be un-irritable, un-embarrassable.”

“It’s about being vulnerable in this life. It’s about trying things and failing. It’s OK to be embarrassed. It’s OK to look weird.”

As he talked to the media, Halgren was congratulated by nearly every rival that passed by. He was second to Switzerland’s Robin Cuche in the men’s super-G standing.

“Medals don’t mean anything to me. The love from all the people supporting me is what means anything to me,” he said. “I can feel, I can literally feel all the people who have ever given me well wishes and ‘Thanks’ and ‘Good lucks.’ I can feel them loving me and they’re the reason I won.

“You celebrate the victories the same as the defeats. I’ve been blessed to have to develop my character over the last 11 years, losing my leg and could either roll over and die, or I could become the greatest Patrick Halgren on Earth, and that’s what you’re seeing.”

His future plans?

“I would like to dominate the Earth in every category with one leg.”

Anything else? “My horse is thirsty, I’m out.”

Joshua Jackson says he knows he was “really just a footnote” in James Van Der Beek’s life, despite the “amazing” time they spent together as stars of the series “Dawson’s Creek.”

The star of “The Affair” is reflecting publicly for the first time about his former castmate, who died Feb. 11 at age 48 after a battle with colorectal cancer.

The time they shared on set was “formational” for them, Jackson said on “Today.” When the “Dawson’s Creek” pilot aired in January 1998, he was 19 and Van Der Beek was almost 21, playing characters who were 15.

“I know both of us look back on that time with great fondness, but I will also say that I know that I’m really just a footnote in what he actually accomplished in his life.”

Jackson spoke with great respect for his friend, who he said “became what we used to just call a good man, a man of the kind of belief, the kind of faith that allowed him to face the impossible with grace, an unbelievable partner and husband, just a real man who showed up for his family and a beautiful, kind, curious, interested, dedicated father.”

On the one hand, the 47-year-old said, “that’s beautiful.” On the other, “The tragedy of that loss for his family is enormous.”

Since Jackson and Van Der Beek played Pacey Witter and Dawson Leery three decades ago, both men had kids of their own — a 5-year-old daughter for Jackson, born during the pandemic with ex-wife Jodie Turner-Smith, and six kids for Van Der Beek with second wife Kimberly Brook. The latter couple’s children — two boys and four girls, ranging in age from 4 to 15 — were what Van Der Beek said changed everything for him.

“Your life becomes shared, and your joys become shared joys in a really beautiful way that expands your level of circuitry out to other people instead of just keeping it all for your own gratification,” the actor told “Good Morning America” in May 2023. “And the lessons, they keep on coming. It’s the craziest, craziest thing I’ve ever done, and it’s the thing that’s made me happiest.”

Knowing his colleague’s love for his family, Jackson said on “Today” that “for me as a father now, I think the enormity of that tragedy hits me in a very different way than just as a colleague, so I think the processing [of Van Der Beek’s death] is ongoing.”

The “Little Fires Everywhere” actor was on the morning show Tuesday to bring attention to colorectal cancer screenings.

Van Der Beek’s diagnosis, which went public in November 2024, was among the factors prompting Jackson to get involved with drugmaker AstraZeneca’s “Get Body Checked Against Cancer” campaign, which takes a lighter approach to a serious subject — cancer screening — through a partnership with Jackson, the National Hockey League and the Philadelphia Flyers’ furry orange mascot, Gritty.

“It is … true, the earlier you find something,” said “The Mighty Ducks” actor, “the better your possible outcomes are.”

One of the biggest takeaways from the biography “Judy Blume: A Life” may not be in the story itself but in its author. Because of her frank talk about puberty and sexual awakenings, Blume’s work is usually associated with young female readers. Her biographer, Mark Oppenheimer, is a middle-aged father of five.

He says he received minimal pushback on the idea that a man should be allowed to write Blume’s definitive life story. If the whole point of her books is that there should be no shame in body awareness, what service does it do to say only a woman has the authority to write her story? Plus, although her books aren’t selling as well as they used to — who’s are? — Oppenheimer’s biography points out that there are still plenty of parents who will throw a copy of her seminal “Are You There God? It’s Me, Margaret.” at their kids rather than have the menstruation talk or risk any misinformation that may be online.

“No good writer should be ghettoized,” Oppenheimer says during a recent Zoom call with The Times. “If you’re a good writer, you shouldn’t be marketed just to girls or just to boys or just to white people or just to straight people. Good art should be for everyone.”

It is intrinsic and impossible not to parlay Blume’s stories of sibling rivalries, first loves, friends and frenemies, and (most famously) puberty with what was going on in your life when you read them. Books like “Deenie” and “Superfudge” and “Margaret” are also remarkably malleable enough so that, even if a kid picks them up decades after their release or cannot relate with a parallel experience, they can become placeholders and explainers for what must be going on in the minds of their classmates. Last year, TV creator Mara Brock Akil adapted “Forever,” Blume’s 1975 story of the kind of mutually shared devotion that feels like it will last eternally, into a miniseries set in 2018 Los Angeles.

“I think for many of us, Judy’s books are our first crush or our first love and they do hold a special place that no book we read in our world-weary, cynical 40s can hold,” says Oppenheimer.

Some of this can be attributed to time and brain space. Oppenheimer discovered Blume’s work when he was a child. He’s now a parent, with a career and all the other time-sucks that come with adulthood.

“The books I read as a child imprinted on me in a way that books today don’t,” he says. “I probably remember more plot points of the first Judy Blume books that I read than I do of any book I’ve read in the past five years.”

But what of Blume herself? Can America’s mom also be a three-dimensional person who makes her own mistakes? Discovering her four adult novels — especially “Wifey,” a book about a gilded-caged suburban housewife that even Oppenheimer describes as “a very salacious, one might say, smutty, adult novel” that even some of Blume’s collaborators wanted her to publish under a pseudonym — or watching documentaries about her like 2023’s “Judy Blume Forever,” in which she is seen joking about masturbation with employees at her Key West, Fla., bookstore, can seem as evasive and dangerous as reading your mom’s diary.

Author Mark Oppenheimer

(Lu Arie)

There have been other books about Blume and her work, most notably Rachelle Bergstein’s 2024 deep-dive “The Genius of Judy: How Judy Blume Rewrote Childhood for All of Us.” But Oppenheimer’s biography is a more straightforward tracing of Blume’s life and career. He starts with her childhood when she was encouraged to read Philip Roth at home and went to sleepovers at friends’ houses that were more about body awakenings. He discusses her stifling first marriage, which gave her the last name she carries with her to this day and her two children but is also where she hung her college diploma and another award over her washing machine as reminders of her intellect. There’s talk of her second marriage, which Blume has always been reluctant to discuss, as well as the two abortions that resulted from it. And there are details on her life with her third husband, the polymath George Cooper.

Oppenheimer relied on past news stories about Blume, as well as a collection of her work and professional correspondences that are archived at Yale’s Beinecke Rare Book & Manuscript Library and, probably most informatively, his own interviews with Blume and her friends and family. (Although Blume did agree to speak with Oppenheimer for his book, she declined our request to interview her for this story about that book).

“I think that the difficult subjects are sometimes the ones that make her more relatable,” Oppenheimer says of his subject. “I think most of her fans will find it interesting and admirable that she speaks so candidly about her abortions, about especially her divorce from her first husband, which came as she was getting involved in the [second-wave] women’s movement, about her early same-sex experiences, about masturbation as a girl; these are things we would expect Judy Blume to be candid about.”

Oppenheimer matches how these life events correspond with the ones of Blume’s characters because, for better or for worse, she almost always was an author who wrote what she knew even if her fandom transcended it. What her books lack in character diversity, they make up for in specificity. And that, in turn, also makes them relatable.

“Judy found incredibly compelling human drama in books about the New Jersey suburbs, and that’s a testament to her strength as an artist,” Oppenheimer says.

Writer Judy Blume at her nonprofit bookstore Books and Books on March 26, 2023, in Key West, Fla.

(Mary Martin / Associated Press)

Examining and reexamining Blume’s work as an adult also gave Oppenheimer a better perspective of her writing style. Blume didn’t begin to try to write professionally until she was a married mother of two and some have criticized her work for not being as flowery and polished as others’.

“All of her books tend to take a fairly tight focus on the characters,” Oppenheimer says. “They don’t tend to pull back and look at large societal forces or changes going on in the country or the world. And that’s fine. You know, the same could be said of Jane Austen.”

Perhaps the best example of this is Blume’s own religious foundation. Her most autobiographical novel, “Starring Sally J. Freedman as Herself,” has a protagonist who is paranoid that she sees Adolf Hitler on park benches and whose life is imprinted with stories of a relative who followed her mother into the concentration camps and the neighbors sitting shiva (a time of mourning) for their daughter who got pregnant with her non-Jewish boyfriend. And yet, Oppenheimer notes, Blume is not always immediately thought of as a Jewish writer. Nor have most of her readers been Jewish.

“I think that her Judaism is there, if you know where to look,” says Oppenheimer, who spends the early part of his biography looking at how the synagogue and religious community were a normal part of a young Blume’s life. He adds that “she is somebody who speaks really, really well across religious, cultural and racial differences, and that’s partly why she has sold tens of millions of books.”

Oppenheimer acknowledges that Blume’s characters may not be diverse enough by today’s standards; that they don’t usually discuss “gender identities or sexualities; children of multiracial backgrounds; children who have disabilities.” They can also feel like time capsules to other dimensions; his 12-year-old daughter was scandalized by how normative bullying was after she read “Blubber,” Blume’s 1974 novel about tween mean girls and body shaming.

He adds that some of today’s bestselling young adult novels, like Rick Riordan’s Percy Jackson series about a teen demigod or Suzanne Collins’ dystopia-set “Hunger Games” books, are “contemporary realism [that] focus on extraordinary or unusual circumstances.” And while he’s happy for these books’ popularities, he says that some subjects may be better told by kids who also aren’t tasked with saving the world. (I am pretty sure I learned more about male puberty from Blume’s 1971 story “Then Again, Maybe I Won’t,” which is as much about wealth divides and questionable friend choices as it is about a 13-year-old boy’s inner monologues about her awkward adolescence).

“If what you’re looking for is realism that isn’t focused on obvious external differences, but rather on interiority,” Oppenheimer says, “then Judy Blume still remains one of the premier novelists that you would want to read.”

Friedlander is a pop culture and entertainment journalist based in Los Angeles who hates coffee but loves Coke Zero.

Jennifer Runyon, a film and television actor known best for her roles on “Ghostbusters,” “A Very Brady Christmas” and “Charles in Charge,” has died. She was 65.

Runyon died Friday, according to a Sunday statement reportedly posted to her social media account, which has since gone private.

“This past Friday, our beloved Jennifer passed away. It was a long and arduous journey that ended with her surrounded by her family,” the statement read, according to ABC7. “She will always be remembered for her love of life and her devotion to her family and friends. Rest in peace our Jenn.”

“Bewitched” actor Erin Murphy shared in a Sunday post on Facebook and Instagram that Runyon died “after a brief battle with cancer.”

“Some people you just know you’ll be friends with before you even meet,” Murphy wrote in her tribute. “She was a special lady.”

On the 1980s sitcom “Charles in Charge,” Runyon portrayed Gwendolyn Pierce, a fellow college student of the show’s titular live-in housekeeper (portrayed by Scott Baio) and the target of his affections.

In his Facebook tribute, fellow “Charles in Charge” actor Willie Aames described Runyon as a “dear dear friend, muse, and encourager.”

“From the moment we met on set all those decades ago- I knew you ‘got me,’” wrote Aames. “Watching you slip away these last few months was one of the hardest times of my life… I can still hear your voice so clearly. No one will ever be able to fill the massive hole that’s been left in our hearts… ever.”

A Chicago native, Runyon made her television debut as Sally Frame in the long-running soap opera “Another World.” She also appeared in episodes of “Magnum, P.I.,” “Quantum Leap” and “Murder, She Wrote.” Runyon also portrayed the grown-up Cindy Brady in “A Very Brady Christmas.”

Her film credits include the 1984 classic “Ghostbusters,” where she appeared as one of the students participating in the ESP study conducted by Bill Murray’s Peter Venkman.

On Instagram, Runyon’s daughter Bayley Corman, an actor who has appeared on TV shows such as “Chilling Adventures of Sabrina,” “Bel-Air” and “Running Point,” described her mother as “the kindest most compassionate person i’ve ever known.”

“All of the best parts of me came from you,” Corman wrote in her tribute. “i would give anything for one more day together.”

Tommy DeCarlo, a longtime fan of Boston who became the classic rock band’s lead singer in the late 2000s, has died. He was 60.

DeCarlo died Monday following a battle with brain cancer, his family announced on Facebook.

“[H]e fought with incredible strength and courage right up until the very end,” the family’s statement said. “During this difficult time, we kindly ask that friends and fans respect our family’s privacy as we grieve and support one another.”

Born April 23, 1965, in Utica, N.Y., DeCarlo said he first started listening to Boston — the 1970s rock band known for its instrumental overtures and hits including “More Than a Feeling,” “Don’t Look Back” and “Peace of Mind” — as a young teenager, according to the group’s website. The vocalist credited his love for Boston’s original frontman Brad Delp and his desire to sing along with him on the radio for helping to develop his own singing voice.

After Delp’s death in 2007, DeCarlo, then a manager at a Home Depot, sent a link to his MySpace page filled with Boston covers as well as an original song in tribute to Delp to the Boston camp, hoping for a chance to participate in a tribute show for the singer. They kindly turned down his offer.

But eventually, Boston founder and lead songwriter Tom Scholz heard DeCarlo’s cover of “Don’t Look Back” and invited the singer to perform a few songs with the band at the tribute. That tribute show would be DeCarlo’s first time ever performing with any band in front of a crowd, but it wouldn’t be his last. He continued to perform with the band at live shows for years, and even joined them on some tracks for their 2013 album, “Life, Love & Hope.”

DeCarlo also formed the band Decarlo with his son, guitarist Tommy DeCarlo Jr. In October, the singer announced he was stepping away from performing due to “unexpected health issues.”

“[P]erforming and sharing music with all of you around the world has been one of the greatest joys of my life,” DeCarlo wrote in his Facebook post. “I can’t thank you all enough for the incredible love, support, and understanding you’ve shown me and my family during this time. It truly means the world to us.”

Author Diana Gabaldon knew readers had been mentally casting the timeless main couple at the center of her “Outlander” book saga since the first novel’s release in the early ‘90s — particularly its leading man, a tall and burly Scottish Highlander with striking red hair. She recalls a 50-year-old German actor who, she says, “always looked like he’d been dipped in cooking oil” among the imaginary candidates. Another was a 5-foot-4-inch race car driver. She quickly learned not to weigh in.

“They would keep asking me who I’d like to play Jamie — ‘Nobody,’ I kept saying because on the rare occasion when I mentioned some possibility, the immediate response would be shrieks of dismissive outrage and heapings of scorn that went on for days (online),” she says over email. Besides, she felt the whole notion of considering prospects was pointless because, as she puts it, it’s not like Hollywood would want to adapt a 300,000-word book anyway.

However, Ronald D. Moore and Maril Davis, longtime collaborators through their Tall Ship Productions banner under Sony Pictures Television, did. And Gabaldon was thrust back into the casting debacle, watching test videos and learning not to judge a book by its cover — or actors (in this case, Sam Heughan and Caitriona Balfe) by the photos that pop up in a Google search: “Sam doesn’t look like Jamie, and Caitriona doesn’t look like Claire, but both of them can be those people, and that’s all that matters,” she says. And they were those people.

In 2014, the duo brought to the screen the epic story of Claire Randall, a British combat nurse who is mysteriously transported back to 1743 Scotland and marries Scottish warrior Jamie Fraser to survive. Together, they ignite a passionate romance that traverses decades and endures brutal separations, wars and time travel. After spinning its own sweeping narrative for more than a decade, the Starz series is launching its eighth and final season on Friday.

In “Outlander,” Claire Randall (Caitriona Balfe) is a British combat nurse who is mysteriously transported back to 1743 Scotland and marries Scottish warrior Jamie Fraser (Sam Heughan) to survive.

(Ed Miller / Starz)

And it won’t exactly be a by-the-book ending. The final season pulls from the remaining material in Book 8, as well as Book 9 — Gabaldon is working on a 10th installment, “A Blessing for a Warrior Going Out” — leaving Matthew B. Roberts, the showrunner, and the writing team to craft an original ending for television. In a signal of how much pressure there was to do right by the beloved fictional couple, four endings were written and filmed.

“Diana’s been involved since Day 1 — she reads everything, she sees everything,” Roberts said by video conference. “I told all the endings that were going to be written. She briefed me a little bit of where she might be going, not the ending of the books, but just where the book might be going. I wanted to at least incorporate some of that in some of the endings that were written.”

Can it be anything other than a happy ending? Maybe the clue is in “I Love Lucy.” Lucy and Ricky Ricardo‘s love story was often a reference point for Roberts throughout his time on “Outlander.”

“No matter what trouble Lucy got in, no matter what she was doing, never did you think they were ever going to break up,” he says. “That’s Jamie and Claire, no matter what happens, no matter what he goes through or what she goes through, no matter what trouble or what they tell each other sometimes, we’ll never think they break up. And the audience knows that too, and we knew, if you just stayed true to that, then that love story would be successful.”

Ahead of the show’s final season premiere, The Times spoke with Balfe and Heughan to get their thoughts on bringing the historical romance to life and the journey to reach the final chapter.

In the spirit of the Season 8 premiere, which has a moment where Claire and Jamie reflect on the early days of their story, let’s travel back in time. Do you remember how this series was first presented to you and what went through your mind?

Balfe: I think the logline I saw was “nurse goes back to Scotland and then goes back 200 years in time and meets a Highlander.” I think I had two lines. That was all I had.

Heughan: It sounded like it was never gonna work. I found out it was a book series, and I think we both read it, didn’t we?

Balfe: Yeah, I read the book in four days before we tested. You’d already been cast at that point … I was living in L.A. I had tiny bit parts in a few films, and I was definitely struggling. I had booked to go on a trip to India, sent my passport into the Indian embassy. Of course, that’s exactly when I found out that maybe I had to travel to London for this test.

Heughan: At the time, I had failed attempts at pilot season, and I was back in London working in a bar and thinking, “I can’t afford to do this and I’m 34 years old. I should probably think about giving up.” Because there was no way I could support myself. I wasn’t loving it.

Balfe: You were 33, by the way.

Heughan: Oh, yes. I was younger. Then this thing came through. And actually, to be honest, the logline and perhaps the dialogue, when I read it, I just thought, “I know this guy.” There just was something very familiar.

“At the time, I had failed attempts at pilot season, and I was back in London working in a bar and thinking, ‘I can’t afford to do this and I’m 34 years old. I should probably think about giving up,’” says Heughan. (Sophia Spring / For The Times)

Tell me about the decision to say goodbye to this show and these characters. Does it feel like the right time?

Balfe: By the time we got to Season 7, that was our last season that we were contracted for, and there were conversations going around that they — the writers — felt that they had eight seasons [for this story]; that that was sort of an organic finish to it. But we were more than halfway through Season 7 before anyone came to talk to us. Actually, we had all scripts, bar the last two. And it wasn’t ending. Before they came to us, it was like, “How is this gonna happen? Are they going to wrap it up in two episodes or are they coming to us?” It was a lot of pressure in a very short amount of time to decide, “OK, do we just wrap this up in two episodes or do we try and give it a season to properly say goodbye?” There’s a lot of people’s jobs, and there’s a lot of people’s livelihoods, and there’s a whole ecosystem around it. We felt that it needed that kind of time.

Heughan: A lot of thought went into it. I think we were ready to move on or do something else. But also, there was this itch, like we hadn’t finished it and it didn’t feel satisfying for us and for the fans. We wanted to come back and really tie it up properly.

The final season focuses on Claire and Jamie’s struggles during the Revolutionary War, with the war having followed them home. What intrigued you about this final onscreen chapter of their story?

Heughan: Jamie’s concerned about himself in the foremost because he has this information that he’s going to die. But they’ve fought for eight seasons to stay together and to protect everyone they love and the greater community and I think that continues, but there’s so many more distractions or more challenges along the way in this season from the inside.

Balfe: And the Revolutionary War has been circling them for a very long time. It was time for the culmination —

Heughan: [Laughs] Instead of saying “War is coming,” it’s “War is here.’

“There’s a lot of people’s jobs, and there’s a lot of people’s livelihoods, and there’s a whole ecosystem around it. We felt that it needed that kind of time,” says Caitriona Balfe, right, with Sam Heughan, about finishing the “Outlander” story with an eighth season.

(Sophia Spring / For The Times)

The fandom around this property is active and devoted. There’s good that can come from that — the engagement, the creativity — but some bad too, like when things get toxic. What was the learning curve of playing this beloved fictional couple and navigating the fandom?

Balfe: It was a bit of a baptism of fire.

Heughan: We were both quite green when we were thrust into it and engaged wholeheartedly.

Balfe: The landscape is very different. Twitter was Twitter before it was death pit, Instagram was far more innocent as well. In the beginning, it was really nice. I wasn’t a mom. I had loads of time on my hands — well, not really, because we were shooting all the time — but anytime I did, it used to be nice and we would do these quick Q and As. That one-on-one connection with the fans was really, really lovely. I do think there was a moment where … the tide shifted, and this sort of shipper-dom got very intense. I was getting married, and that was having an impact on the people in my life and and I think I had to then step away because I was like, “OK, this doesn’t feel good for everyone in my life.”

Heughan: Look, I think it’s still there. It is a strange one to get your head around. People, in one way, are uber fans of the show, but in other ways, they’re overtly intrusive in your life. But it is a small minority. I think … perhaps we’ve done our job that well? It’s not just about Jamie and Claire, it’s about that person behind it and their life behind it, and their family behind it, that people want to get invested in. I don’t know if it’s a great thing for actors, to be honest, but in this current environment, we’re always asked to give more of ourselves to engage with fans, but it’s been something we’ve had to learn on the job.

Balfe: And I think there are times in your life when you have more capacity to be more open, and there’s times in your life where you need to shut off a little bit more. The overall reception from the fans have been so positive and so supportive of things that we’ve done in our lives, and that is the thing that I choose to focus on with it.

“Outlander” isn’t strictly a romance, but that’s what gives it power. You’ve spent more than a decade in this space. What have you learned about how that romance space functions and what the fans seek from these stories?

Balfe: I was sort of unaware of the need and the appetite that people have for it. Nowadays it’s served an awful lot better, but I think it was an underserved demographic. Or it was not given the due that people needed. It’s sometimes looked on as the second-class citizen of storytelling, in many ways, but I think it’s a genre that allows you to really look at the beauty of humanity and … the core things that we care about, which is love and family and connection.

Heughan: And comfort. It’s comforting. This show proves that there’s a real appetite.

Balfe: There’s many more shows now. Everybody’s talking about “Heated Rivalry.” There’s “Bridgerton.” Maybe it’s the emancipation of women in the last 50 years. It’s like they are finally like, “Well, we want our TV that speaks to us as sexual beings and as mothers and as matriarchs and as professionals and whole round of people.” Our show did that a lot.

“There’s many more shows now,” Balfe says of series that serve up romance. “Everybody’s talking about ‘Heated Rivalry.’ There’s ‘Bridgerton.’ It’s like they are finally like, ‘Well, we want our TV that speaks to us as sexual beings and as mothers and as matriarchs and as professionals and whole round of people.’ Our show did that a lot.” (Sophia Spring / For The Times)

Have you taken stock of just how much Claire and Jamie have gone through as a couple?

Balfe: How many near-death experiences?

Heughan: Yeah, how many times they’ve nearly died or been attacked or assaulted.

Balfe: How many people they’ve killed. Claire, she’s like a serial killer.

I was wondering, because it’s the last season, you can’t get in trouble now, where would Caitriona or Sam have called it quits in this relationship? Like, this is too much, I need to move on.

Balfe: I don’t know if Caitriona would have gone back 200 years in time.

Heughan: When she fixes his shoulder — that’s pretty painful. She gets him in a lot of trouble and he puts himself in a lot of trouble. I wouldn’t have gone past Episode 1 [he mumbles].

Balfe: See! I would have gone to Season 3.

Heughan: No, I think when he sends her through the stones and is like, “That’s it. She’s gone.” But she keeps coming back. I thought I got rid of her, finally!

Caitriona, you make your directorial debut on the show this season with Episode 2. Tell me about that experience.

Balfe: It was so fun. They gave me Episode 2, which allowed me to do my prep before we started. I was so lucky that Jan Matthys, who is the director of Episode 1, was an incredible mentor to me throughout the process. I just got to work with these guys in a totally new way, which was so amazing. I was buzzing. The whole first 10 weeks [of this season] felt like the very first 10 weeks again because you’re learning all these new skills and you’re just in such high operating point; you have to make decisions on the fly, I was also in scenes. It was just mad, but brilliant.

Heughan: You were also probably happy to take the corset off.

Balfe: To be able to walk around in proper wet weather gear and trousers and be able to go to the bathroom — not to be TMI, but it was so good.

They did not give me the easiest episode. Every day had its thing — obviously, the bear attack sequence. Three days before we were filming that, that was a cougar; we were going to have a live cougar. There was a whole thing planned. And a cougar attacks in a very different way than a bear does. So my whole shot list had to go out of the window and I had to rethink the whole thing. But that was kind of fun.

The final season of “Outlander” focuses on Claire (Balfe) and Jamie’s (Heughan) struggles during the Revolutionary War, with the war having followed them home.

(Robert Wilson / Starz)

Finales can be tough, given how viewers chime in on social media. You can’t please everyone. But what was your vision for the ending of “Outlander”?

Balfe: I didn’t really have one. I would not want to have had Matt’s job because that’s a really heavy load to bear, trying to finish this out. But I would say the season was unusual. Normally, we would get an overview of the season before we start. This season, we went into it blind so we weren’t getting sort of any info about what was going to happen. Through the whole season, it was like finding out as the scripts came what was happening. And to be honest, we still don’t really know the ending. We know bits that were filmed, but [not] how he’s going to edit it.

Heughan: I definitely had a firm belief about a certain element of it. I spoke to a few people — few other execs and producers — and there was a common consensus, and I think that might be one of the directions, but it’s going to be a surprise for us when we watch it. I don’t know when we are going to watch it.

Multiple endings were filmed.

Balfe: There was a few different things filmed.

Heughan: Hard to know what’s [going to make it] — it’s all in a same direction. But what direction that is …

Would you call it a happy ending?

Heughan: I don’t know. It was such a secret on the call sheets and stuff.

Balfe: There was different versions of scripts that went out.

Heughan: There were fake people put in. There was a reduced crew.

Khan Younis, Gaza Strip – On the blue, wavy surface off the Khan Younis seaport, two Palestinian fishermen paddled their small, battered boat nearly 200 metres (656 feet) into the sea. On the shore, Dawood Sehwail, a 72-year-old Palestinian fisherman, stood inspecting a torn net, his eyes fixed on the waves as if reading a language only he understands.

Displaced from Rafah, further to the south, in May 2024 as a result of Israel’s genocidal war on Gaza, Sehwail now comes daily to the water’s edge, not just to fish, but to have an escape, to study the sea, and to remember.

“The feeling never gets old,” he said, with a sparkle in his eye that defies his age. “You come to see what wonders the sea might still have for you.”

“We were always shackled [by Israel],” Sehwail said quietly. “But one period was less harsh than another.”

Even before October 2023, when Israel started its genocidal war on Gaza, the Palestinian enclave’s fishermen operated under heavy restrictions imposed by Israel. Fishing zones were repeatedly reduced. Maritime boundaries outlined in agreements since the 1993 Oslo Accords were rarely implemented on the water. The distances fishermen were permitted to travel in the sea constantly shifted, often shrinking without warning.

“After every Israeli aggression, the consequences fell on us,” Sehwail explained. “We were supposed to [be allowed to] go further into the sea, but the occupation kept pushing us back.”

Controlling the sea

For a coastal territory, the sea should have been a source of wealth, stability, and fresh food. Instead, under Israel’s blockade that controls Gaza’s land, air, and sea since 2007, it has become another mechanism of control and persecution.

Sehwail once owned a stone distribution business, but was forced to shut it down after the Israeli blockade on Gaza tightened in 2007. He eventually turned to fishing, a skill he had learned as a child, and which he once thought he had abandoned.

“Our profession is day by day,” he said. “It used to be that, if you work, and are lucky, you can sell your catch and feed your family. If you’re very lucky, you save a little for the future of your children.”

But within a few days of Israel’s genocidal war, everything changed. Gaza’s seaport was destroyed by Israeli air strikes. Israel also bombed fishing installations from north to south. Boats were burned or sunk. The sector collapsed almost instantly.

“The Rafah fishermen had six fishing trawlers,” Sehwail recalled. “All of them were bombed and burned. I tried to keep my own small boat and nets for as long as I could, but they were destroyed by the occupation just days before we were displaced in May 2024.”

At Khan Younis port, the aftermath is no different. The harbour has turned into a crowded displacement site. Broken or burned boats are no longer vessels but tent supports, tied with ropes to hold fragile shelters in place.

A rusted metal skeleton of a trawler protrudes from the sand where displaced children now play around. But even in ruin, fishermen improvise.

“What we do now is try not to die,” Sehwail said. “We borrow tools. Some even turn refrigerator parts into floating boards. We have no motors, only paddles. We use whatever is left.”

Originally from the coastal village of Jourat Asqalan, depopulated of its Palestinian residents during the 1948 Nakba and the formation of Israel, Sehwail’s bond with the sea runs generations deep. “The connection is powerful,” he said. “My home in Rafah was also near the beach. Even in displacement, the sea keeps me company. But now my children and their families are scattered across displacement camps.”

No safety

Material destruction has been only part of the toll for Gaza’s fishermen. According to the Gaza Fishermen’s Syndicate, at least 238 fishermen have been killed by Israel since October 2023, whether at sea or on land, among more than 72,000 Palestinians.

The sector once consisted of more than 5,000 fishermen providing for more than 50,000 family members, who depended on fishing as a primary source of income. And Israeli violations have continued since the “ceasefire” began in October, with more than 20 fishermen reported to have been killed or detained.

“The sea is practically closed,” said Zakaria Baker, the head of Gaza’s Fishermen Syndicate, in a recent interview with Al Jazeera.

Baker explained that some fishermen do not risk venturing more than 800 metres (2,625 feet) offshore in small boats, as there is still uncertainty over how far they can go into the sea.

Standing on the shore, Sehwail pointed toward an Israeli naval boat.

“They are always there,” he said. “There is no official clearance for us. We enter at our own risk. The farthest we can go is about 800 metres, and even that depends on their mood.”

He described sudden chases by the Israeli navy: boats shot at or sunk, fishermen detained.

“They can see clearly what we are doing,” he said. “But it depends on the soldier’s mood whether he lets you fish or decides to shoot you dead.”

“Israel ‘executed’ fishing in Gaza,” Sehwail said, repeating the phrase in pain. “What we do now is not real fishing. It’s risking your life for the hope of bringing back one or two fish to your tent.”

Critical source of food

Before the genocide, Gaza’s fisheries sector played a vital role in food security and poverty alleviation. According to the United Nations, by the end of 2024, the sector was operating at less than 7.3 percent of its pre-October 2023 production capacity. The UN also estimated that 72 percent of Gaza’s fishing fleet had been damaged or destroyed.

The collapse has severely affected food availability, income generation, and community resilience. The reduction of fishing access to less than a nautical mile (1.85km) has drastically limited both quantity and species variety.

“The further west we used to go, the more variety [of fish] we could find,” Sehwail explained. “But now in shallow waters, you find only small quantities and mostly juvenile sardines that should be left to grow. But people needed whatever they could find.”

Months of Israeli starvation have turned fresh protein into a rarity; thus, fish is a special luxury.

Even now, with the relative relief brought by the “ceasefire”, fish seen in Gaza’s markets are largely frozen imports, often more expensive than fresh local fish was before the genocide. Catastrophic economic collapse means many families cannot afford them.

Baker emphasised that rehabilitation and recovery require more than ceasefire declarations. “No materials or compensation have been allowed in so far,” he said, “Israeli restrictions continue to block the entry of equipment. Fishermen need stable and safe conditions to return to work without fear of Israeli bullets.”

“The fishermen are simple, poor people,” Sehwail said. “We only want to live with dignity and provide for our families. Across Gaza from north to south, we’re all in need of support to finally fish as we actually deserve.”

For decades, Iranian novelist and memoirist Shahrnush Parsipur wrote under the threat of her country’s oppressive laws. Parsipur was imprisoned for her work four separate times: once under the shah, who ruled Iran before the Islamic Revolution of 1979, and three times under the regime that took power that year.

Despite this Damoclean sword hanging over her, she managed in 1989 to publish “Touba and the Meaning of Night,” a sweeping historical novel that lays bare Iran’s crushing patriarchal culture. In 1990, she wrote “Women Without Men,” a book of connected stories that trace the lives of five women, including a sex worker and schoolteacher, in search of liberation and self-actualization.

Shortly after the book’s publication, the Iranian government threw Parsipur in prison for a fourth time, where she remained for over four years.

Flash forward 36 years, and an English translation of “Women Without Men” has published in the U.K. for the first time. (The first U.S. English translation was published by Feminist Press in 2011.)

Now, the U.K. book has been nominated for this year’s International Booker Prize. In an email exchange, Parsipur, who presently lives in exile in Northern California, expounded on her career, Iran and the recent developments there.

✍️ Author Chat

(The L.A. Times may earn a commission from bookshop.org links.)

Women Without Men was longlisted for the 2026 International Booker Prize

(The Feminist Press)

What is your feeling about the U.S. air attack against Iran?

I am very sorry for my country. People suffer and the country becomes ruined. I will never forgive Israel and the U.S. I am an American also and as an American I want to stop the war. I do not think that Americans and Israelis can bring liberty to Iran. The people of Iran must try for themselves.

The government threw you in prison shortly after you published “Women Without Men.”

I was never a political activist and they did not torture me. But one time they put me in a grave for two months in Ghezel Hesar Prison. There, we always had to sit without speaking and our eyes were closed by a cover and we listened to Islamic slogans.

So it was solitary confinement?

We were sitting in a space the size of a grave and there was a wooden wall between every grave, so you could not see anything except your grave.

Did you write in prison?

Yes, I began to write my novel “Touba and the Meaning of Night.” I wrote half of it and suddenly they took it and after one year the men of Ayatollah Montazeri came to prison and they gave me the novel. They had destroyed two pages that were about the killing of a girl. I thought the virginity of my book was ruined. So I burned it. I wrote my memoirs when I came to the U.S.

So you burned the book and then rewrote it?

When my prison term finished I wrote “Touba” again.

Do you still have family in Iran?

Yes, I have some family in Iran and I cannot contact them. The internet does not work and mobiles are silent.

Do you think change in Iran will come soon? Will the U.S. help to liberalize the country?

The Islamic laws must change and a country like Israel cannot do that. So, the Iranian must change the situation. All my books are banned in Iran, except ones that they change themselves. But “Women Without Men” is published in more than 30 countries. The Booker International Prize is an English prize and if they give it to me there is no relation with banning the book in Iran. I am not surprised about the situation.

(This Q&A was edited for length and clarity.)

📰 The Week(s) in Books

“‘Second Skin’ is more sociological than sexy; more anthropological than animalistic,” writes Meredith Maran.

(Los Angeles Times illustration; book jacket from Catapult)

Julia M. Klein is fascinated by Loubna Mrie’s memoir “Defiance,” which, she writes, “offers a prism on Syria’s authoritarian society before the 2011 uprising and subsequent civil war, and vivid snapshots of the devastation that the war unleashed.”

Mark Athitakis considers two books that tackle the old “New Hollywood” of the late ’60s and early ’70s: Paul Fischer’s “The Last Kings of Hollywood,” which spotlights the Coppola, Lucas and Spielberg pantheon, and Kirk Ellis’ “They Kill People,” about the making of “Bonnie and Clyde.” Athitakis calls Ellis’ history “a meaty yet accessible book that captures the lightning-in-a-bottle nature of the generation’s ur-text,” while Fischer’s book “has a gift for highlighting the ways that moments that we now accept as inevitable were often the product of dumb luck.”

Diane Garrett has a chat with Elizabeth Arnott about her novel “The Secret Lives of Murderers’ Wives,” which she calls “an empathetic and at times bracing mystery tale about unlikely crime solvers circa 1966.”

Finally, Costa Beavin Pappas considers Brian Raftery’s curiously titled “Hannibal Lecter: A Life,” which is really a biography of Lecter’s creator, author Thomas Harris. “For fans of true crime, Raftery has written a fascinating biography and origin story about one of pop culture’s most emblematic serial killers, and his lasting bite on society,” writes Pappas.

📖 Bookstore Faves

Taschen Beverly Hills sells eye-catching artistic works

(TASCHEN)

Taschen Beverly Hills may well be the most gorgeous bookstore in Los Angeles, all gleaming, polished wood and ambient light illuminating the store’s lavishly illustrated art and design books. The shop opened over two decades ago as a showcase for the German publisher’s catalog, and it remains a popular destination for tourists and Taschen cultists who collect the company’s highly collectible titles. I spoke with Taschen Executive Director Creed Poulson about what’s selling right now.

What is the store’s clientele?

At the risk of sounding like a marketing manager, we have something for everyone, because our price points range from $10 up to thousands of dollars. Which allows us to have a mixed clientele in the store.

I know there is a kind of Taschen cult, folks who will buy your books because of your reputation.

That comes from our owner Benedikt Taschen, who is a collector and understands the mindset of a collector. Our books become collectible, regardless of the cost.

What is selling right now?

“Ferrari” by Pino Allievi, who is one of Formula One’s best known correspondents. “The James Bond Archives,” which is edited by Paul Duncan, and “Ultimate Collector Watches” by Charlotte and Peter Fiell.

Lately, there has been a turn among Gen Z into all things analog. Have you seen younger customers come into the store?

Yes, absolutely. I’m seeing a lot of the younger generation coming, especially during our annual sales — fans that are migrating away from just looking at images online, into book collecting. They want a tactile object they can hold and feel, and they want something they can enjoy as an object.

Daryl Hannah is no fan of FX’s “Love Story: John F. Kennedy Jr. & Carolyn Bessette.” She made that abundantly clear in an op-ed for the New York Times that also criticized the series for what she claims is a misogynistic portrayal of her younger self.

“It’s appalling to me that I even have to defend myself against a television show,” Hannah, 65, wrote in the op-ed published Friday. “These are not creative embellishments of personality. They are assertions about conduct — and they are false.”

A representative for FX did not immediately respond to a request for comment Friday.

“Splash” and “Kill Bill” star Hannah, whose romance with Kennedy in the 1990s made for tabloid fodder before his marriage to Bessette, wrote that the Ryan Murphy-produced project depicted her as “irritating, self-absorbed, whiny and inappropriate.” She wrote that the show also depicted her as a cocaine-loving, selfish obstacle in the way of the series’ late lovers. Kennedy and Bessette Kennedy died in a plane crash in 1999.

These creative choices, she claimed, were “no accident.”

Hannah decried her story being used as a “narrative device” to drive tension in the series and as a result, the series fell into “textbook misogyny” by pitting two women — in this case, actor Dree Hemingway’s Daryl Hannah and Sarah Pidgeon’s Carolyn Bessette — against each other.

The actor, also a filmmaker and advocate for environmental and senior health causes, also distanced herself from the series’ “untrue” depictions of her life, behavior, actions and relationship with Kennedy.

“I have never desecrated any family heirloom or intruded upon anyone’s private memorial,” she wrote. “I have never planted any story in the press. I never compared Jacqueline Onassis’ death to a dog’s.”

“Love Story,” created by Connor Hines, premiered in February with Paul Anthony Kelly starring as Kennedy. Hannah wrote that since the show’s debut, she received many “hostile and even threatening” messages from viewers who believe the series’ depictions.

Before Hannah’s op-ed, Murphy received criticism from Jack Schlossberg, the grandson of John F. Kennedy and nephew of John F. Kennedy Jr. In an interview with “CBS News Sunday Morning,” the 33-year-old political commentator said Murphy “knows nothing” about his family and that the prolific TV creator is making a “ton of money on a grotesque display of someone else’s life.”

While she has often chosen not to address “outrageous lies, crappy stories and unflattering characterizations,” Hannah wrote her “silence should not be mistaken for agreement with lies.” She said she felt compelled to speak out against the series’ depiction of her because continuing her “good work,” including her philanthropic efforts, “requires an intact reputation.”

Hannah said she has respected the Kennedy family’s privacy and, like Schlossberg, condemned “self-serving sensationalists trading in gossip, innuendo and speculation.”

“In a digital era, entertainment often becomes collective memory,” she wrote. “Real names are not fictional tools. They belong to real lives.”

In its second week of release, the sophomore season of “Paradise” is already at its midpoint. And it just delivered one of the season’s shocking twists with the death of — don’t worry, we won’t spoil it for you.

The post-apocalyptic drama, which dropped its fourth episode this week, has ventured outside bunker life this season as our Secret Service protagonist Xavier (Sterling K. Brown) continues his journey through Atlanta to find his wife — and now, he’s got a baby to keep safe in the process. Meanwhile, back inside the idyllic simulated town in the depths of Colorado, which anchored the first season, things have started to unravel and the fight for control intensifies. And the mastermind behind it all — Samantha “Sinatra” Redmond (Julianne Nicholson), the tech billionaire who set up the bunker town after a massive catastrophe threatened the extinction of the human race — isn’t MIA anymore. Last seen unconscious in a hospital bed after being shot, she’s awake and ready to regain order and control. Nicholson stopped by Guest Spot to talk about what she finds intriguing about her character’s motivations.

Also in this week’s Screen Gab, our recommendations include an ever timely reminder from Anthony Bourdain on the gift and privilege of discovering a new culture and engaging it without judgment, as well as a suburban noir starring a trio of TV heavyweights that spins middle-age malaise, swinging and murder into an addictive tale.

Read on. Then press play and give your thumb a break from all the fast-forwarding you did while watching the wedding episode of this season’s “Love is Blind.” See you next week.

— Yvonne Villarreal

Turn on

Recommendations from the film and TV experts at The Times

Anthony Bourdain visits Havana in 2015 for an episode of “Anthony Bourdain: Parts Unknown.”

(David Scott Holloway / CNN / Turner Entertainment)

“Anthony Bourdain: Parts Unknown” (HBO Max)

It was Bourdain’s masterpiece, the last and best of his several series, and arguably the greatest travel show ever. Bourdain will occasionally fetch up at some fancy eatery, but the heart of any cuisine is formed on the street, or in the country, or along the sea. As a story of how people live, with a good bit of historical context thrown in, the series is explicitly and implicitly political, philosophical and autobiographical; Bourdain has no time for bigots, fascists or bullies — or, one would imagine, McDonald’s cheeseburgers — but he revels in complexity and contradiction. (See Season 4, Episode 6, “Iran.”) The episode on Massachusetts encompasses clambakes and heroin. “I visited and learned to love many places not my own,” says the host, “cultures and beliefs very different from the Upper East Side of Manhattan.” They include, among many other places, Cuba, Ethiopia, Beirut, Buenos Aires, Hanoi, Sri Lanka, Puerto Rico, Scotland, Borneo, Los Angeles and Hanoi, where he sits down with then-president Barack Obama in a family-run noodle shop. Gorgeously filmed, the series can be heartbreakingly beautiful, and sometimes plain heartbreaking. There are 12 seasons running from 2014 to Bourdain’s death in 2018, and I can’t help but believe that anyone who watches them attentively will come out a better person. — Robert Lloyd

Jason Bateman, Linda Cardellini and David Harbour in “DTF St. Louis.”

(Tina Rowden / HBO)

“DTF St. Louis” (HBO Max)

The true-ish crime series about a deadly love triangle is so wonderfully twisted and unexpectedly deep, it’d be criminal to miss this dark comedy starring David Harbour, Jason Bateman and Linda Cardellini. Initially inspired by a real scandal (covered in the 2017 New Yorker article “My Dentist’s Murder Trial: Adultery, False Identities, and a Lethal Sedation”), it evolved into something else. Set in the suburbs of St. Louis, the seven-part series follows fastidious local news weatherman Clark (Bateman), the TV station’s guileless sign language interpreter Floyd (Harbour) and Floyd’s calculating wife, Carol (Cardellini), as each grapples with a middle-age identity crisis. Seeking to spice up their sex life, the men join the discreet, eponymous hook-up app, and one of them ends up dead. Solving this peculiar whodunit is anything but predictable, and the case consumes seasoned detective Homer (Richard Jenkins) as well as young crimes officer Jodie (Joy Sunday). But it’s the quest for connection among all these misfit characters, including Floyd and Carol’s troubled son Richard (Arlan Ruf ) and an unlikely hookup (Peter Sarsgaard), that makes this series so powerful. — Lorraine Ali

Guest spot

A weekly chat with actors, writers, directors and more about what they’re working on — and what they’re watching

Julianne Nicholson as Sinatra in a scene from Season 2 of “Paradise.”

(Ser Baffo / Disney)

If you see Nicholson on screen, you know things are about to get good. She consistently and compellingly delivers strong performances in some of your favorite films and TV shows, whether she’s expressing both quiet strength and palpable desperation as a mother in “Mare of Easttown” or bringing comedic pizzazz as a social media star in “Hacks.” Her latest captivating performance, in Hulu’s “Paradise,” brings power to a complicated character. She plays Samantha “Sinatra” Redmond, a deeply emotional and eerily ruthless billionaire mastermind responsible for the underground bunker city that grounds the series. Driven by the intense grief of losing a son and a desire to control her environment to protect her family, the character is faced with trying to regain order of the simulated utopia after tension and chaos erupts. Over email, Nicholson shared her thoughts on the morally ambiguous character and the Dustin Hoffman film that brings her comfort. — Yvonne Villarreal

Sinatra is not the usual “villain” in a post-apocalyptic story. Despite her approach, there is an altruistic motive, at least initially, that drives her actions. Which version of her fascinates you the most: pre-global disaster Samantha, who is trying to figure out a way to protect her remaining family, or post-apocalyptic Sinatra, who is closer to facing a reckoning in the aftermath of what she’s created?

I am especially interested in Sinatra after she wakes from the coma. Finding the balance between vulnerability and control. Taking back her power while also recognizing no amount of it or money will necessarily keep herself/her family safe. And then the idea that the bigger picture she’s been working towards the whole time may actually be coming true with the introduction of Link [Thomas Doherty], and who he may be to her, cracks her wide open.

There have been real-life assessments of the power billionaires wield and their influence in the White House — those figures are primarily men. How have those conversations shaped your performance or how you think about the power dynamics of “Paradise’s” fictional world?

I love that Dan Fogelman wrote the most powerful person in the room as a woman. Normalizing women in power can only be a good thing. Even if we don’t necessarily agree with her tactics, she sure is fun to play. I love her take no prisoners/no apologies attitude.

This season Sinatra wakes from her coma and faces a new obstacle in Jane (Nicole Brydon Bloom). What intrigues you about how they play off each other and how Sinatra is navigating the threat Jane may pose?

One of the most fun scenes to play in Season 2 was when Jane is trying to find out what Sinatra remembers of the shooting. The wonderful director, Ken Olin, really encouraged us to make a cat and mouse game of it with neither giving anything away. And I love we don’t ever find out what Sinatra remembers. I think it’s a real case of keep your friend close here. Sinatra realizes Jane is much more valuable as an ally than an adversary.

In “Paradise,” Sinatra (Julianne Nicholson), left, was last seen in a coma after being shot.

(Ser Baffo / Disney)

You delivered a brilliant performance in Season 4 of “Hacks” as TikTok sensation “Dance Mom.” What’s a memory that stands out from filming those scenes? And did you find yourself giving a dance lesson on the set of “Paradise”?

I loved every moment of working on “Hacks.” I loved having dance/choreography sessions with Cory Baker in the run up to filming and the utter absurdity of the “boofing” scene. I also almost lost it when DM was passed out on the stoop on Wisteria Lane and Jimmy [Paul W. Downs] and Kayla [Megan Stalter] come driving around in the golf cart looking for her and shouting, “Dance Mom!” That name alone is so funny to me. Alas, there were no dance lessons in “Paradise.”

What have you watched recently that you are recommending to everyone you know?

I was blown away this year by the film “Sirât.” I recommend but also warn as it is a deeply affecting, intense film and not for the faint of heart. I love its exploration of a world I know nothing about (a traveling rave culture set in Morocco), the humanity in it and the real faces and performances of the actors. [And] its originality and bravery.

What’s your go-to “comfort watch,” the movie or TV show you go back to again and again?

“Tootsie” is one of my favorite films and I can watch that any time. It’s partially nostalgic as I remember watching it in the theater when it came out and I was so taken with NYC at that time. The tall buildings, yellow cabs and hustle and bustle. It’s such a smart comedy with brilliant performances across the board, starting with Dustin Hoffman but each actor is as perfect as the next! So much heart and depth without ever taking itself too seriously. And just very, very funny.

ICYMI

Must-read stories you might have missed

As a child in Newark, N.J., Narciso Rodriguez was often transported back to Cuba by the stories from his family and their friends. He walked the halls of El Encanto, a Havana department store and fashion mecca on the island — one that drew in celebrity clientele and featured haute-couture designs and fragrances from the far-flung fashion capitals of Paris and Milan.

“I don’t know that they could have afforded any of those things when they were in Cuba,” he tells De Los. “But they certainly filled my imagination with beautiful stories and laid the foundation for my work.”

It was the women in his life — the “amazing, powerful, loud, colorful dynamos,” as he describes them — who inspired him to pursue a career in fashion.

“Their stories, their lives, their power, their curves, it all influenced me,” he says. “They’re the reason I wanted to create things.”

Over the last three decades, the renowned designer has earned a reputation for sleek, flattering lines and effortless shapes, most famously seen on the career-launching dress he designed for his friend Carolyn Bessette-Kennedy to wear on her wedding day. The bias-cut silk slip has remained a source of inspiration for generations of brides since, and has been making waves again thanks to the FX series “Love Story: John F. Kennedy Jr. and Carolyn Bessette.”

Omari K. Chancellor as Gordon Henderson, from left, Sarah Pidgeon as Carolyn Bessette, Tonatiuh as Narciso Rodriguez in FX’s “Love Story: John F. Kennedy Jr. & Carolyn Bessette”

(Eric Liebowitz / FX)

“Love Story” will follow the couple’s wedding in the latest episode, out March 5. (Rodriguez is portrayed by Tonatiuh on the show.)

After designing Bessette-Kennedy’s dress, Rodriguez launched his own label and a fragrance line, and has continued to create designs that are woven into the fabric of American history — Michelle Obama wore his dress on election night in 2008.

De Los spoke with Rodriguez about his career, upbringing and memories of designing Bessette-Kennedy’s dress.

You’ve spoken about how inspired you were by the women in your life growing up. Are there any “fashion icons” from your family or neighborhood that you could point to from your childhood?

You know, I’m so lucky because I was raised in a very Cuban household in a very culturally rich community in Newark. I mean, it was Italian, Spanish, Cuban, Puerto Rican, Black. It was everything. But I always think back to when I was very, very young, there was a kind of matriarch here in the neighborhood. Her name was Concha and she was kind of this lightning rod. My dad’s sister was married to her son, so when my parents came to the U.S., she gave them a place to stay. She would teach all of the young women how to cook and gave everyone a place to stay until they got on their feet. She was larger than life, she was like “Auntie Mame.” She had these great ‘60s beehive wigs in amazing wig boxes, she made these beautiful Chanel suits for herself, and had all these gold bangles, great lipstick and stilettos. When she came into the room, she just radiated power, joy and style. I always think of her as being my first signpost on the road.

They were all beautiful, you know? My aunts and my mom were the most beautiful, glamorous women. None of them were wearing designer clothes, but they took great pride and great care in how they looked, and that really made an impression on me.

How did that impression translate into a concrete passion? How did you go about actually pursuing a career in fashion?

I loved architecture. I loved building things, so I was always drawing, sketching and sculpting. Then I would see my mom take a piece of fabric and the way she could take something flat and shapeless and turn it into a garment was fascinating. By the time I was 13, I was doing fashion illustration, and I got a job in a tailor shop. Later, I enrolled myself in Saturday courses at Parsons [School of Design], and I kind of had to hide it from my parents at first. I felt like I couldn’t be a fashion designer, you know, because of the whole “macho” idea, but I just kept going. I was lucky that I was someone who always knew what they wanted to do, and that Parsons recognized I had talent for it at a young age.

I was exposed to really great people there, too. Donna Karan was a critic, Calvin Klein was a critic, Oscar de la Renta too. I got to do projects with all of them, and then I was hired after school by Donna Karan while she was still at Anne Klein. It was an amazing experience, and then I got poached by Calvin Klein, which was a very different experience.

How so?

It was incredible, but just very different. Whereas Anne Klein was this melting pot of creativity, Calvin was much more image-driven and precision-driven. He brought in great talents to collaborate with, so on any given day, you’d be working with the most amazing photographers, stylists and art directors. It was a really great finishing school as a young person.

You arrived at Calvin Klein during a period of reinvention for the brand. This was in the era of Kate Moss, and the famous “Marky Mark” print ads. We see a version of it in “Love Story,” but what was it like to actually be there?

When I got there, I think around 1989, it hadn’t really started to change yet. And I thought, “Wow, I made a really big mistake. This is not my aesthetic, not my thing.” But it changed very quickly, and it was very exciting. [Calvin] worked very hard. He was very focused, and he appreciated that I could keep up. Like everybody, there was a rough initiation period, but afterward, he gave me the opportunity to work on some tailored pieces that sold really well at retail, so I was rewarded with more opportunities.

But it was the ‘90s, and it was New York, and it was brilliant. It felt like the whole city was reinventing itself, and Calvin was a leader in that. All the best photographers, the most brilliant artists were there. Jacky Marshall, Zack Carr, Carolyn — the talent was endless. I was really fortunate to experience it and build friendships that were lifelong.

I’m curious if you remember your first impressions of Carolyn. How did you two connect?

We were quite friendly immediately, and then we became the best of friends. We lived in the same building, so the rest was history. You know, she’s an incredible person, and she had great style. She was bigger than life.

Carolyn has been regarded as a fashion icon, and especially now, everyone is trying to re–create her look. There was something more subtle and interesting going on than just “minimalist” fashion, so how would you describe what made her style so special?

Carolyn was so authentic in so many ways, and I think that she was very pragmatic about her choices. She had a great eye. She knew what worked for her, and she knew how to present herself. She never wanted to be uncomfortable. She was very connected to herself. I think so many people have this relationship to fashion and what they think they should look like based on the ideas they see in a magazine or being sold to you by the industry, and Carolyn never fell into that trap.

I have this conversation often with young designers, with people, with journalists. Today, everything that we see is inauthentic. Celebrities are paid to wear designer clothes. They’re styled by a stylist, and nothing is innate. That is the opposite of Carolyn. She was 100% real.

Narciso Rodriguez in 1997.

(Paolo Roversi)

We have to talk about her wedding dress. If you’re a bride, it’s impossible to look for inspiration without coming across her dress. What was it like to have a friend ask you to create something for such a special, important moment?

You know, until my children were born, Carolyn was the love of my life. We were very close, and she asked me, as you said, to make the dress that she would marry the love of her life in. It was very personal for me. It wasn’t a press event, it was a conversation between two people who were very close. I knew what looked good on her, she knew what looked good on her. I knew that she would never want to be bogged down with trains and lace. It wouldn’t be her.

What was the actual design process like?

It was an effortless collaboration. She came to fittings in Paris, we pulled the neckline down a bit lower, and the dress was born. I added the gloves, the veil and the shoe. It was just magical, and exactly the way it should be. It really made her the focus. You know, she was the one who pointed that out to me about my work. She always said, “You create a frame for a woman’s beauty and personality to shine through.” I’ve always thought that was a really beautiful thing that she gave me, because it’s true. I never want my work to be what you see first. I think the success of that dress is that you see her and her happiness and the purity of it all.

Everything about the wedding, including the dress, had to be kept a secret. Was it a challenge to make sure that no one knew what you were working on?

I was working in Paris, and I got approval from the owner of [Cerruti]. He was discreet about it. I worked with one pattern maker. I had a fit model who was lovely. Nobody knew who it was for. They always asked. But because I was working in Paris, they didn’t really connect me to her. I was also quite cautious when the dress was in work, I remember I had become quite friendly with Azzedine Alaïa. I asked, “Can I take this dress over to you and have you check it out to see what I’m doing?” I went over and he looked at the prototype, and said, “Why don’t you move this seam over the bum by a centimeter. I think it’ll be more flattering.” And I did, because he was the master, and he tortured me to know who it was for, but I never told him. Later, when it was all over the press, he would call and pretend he was a fancy lady looking for a wedding dress for her daughter. [Laughs] He tricked me a few times into believing some of his gags, but he was an amazing person.

It was just a magical time in all of our lives. And then I flew to America with the dress and went to the wedding, and it was that simple. You know, I’ve heard all these amazing stories about how the dress didn’t fit, and I had to sew her into it, and that she was hours late because of it, and none of this is true. But I love that people have made up all these stories.

Maybe the dress on her seems so effortless that people want to invent a way to complicate it.

[Laughs] I really have heard so many crazy stories, but when you look at the pictures, it certainly doesn’t look like it didn’t fit. That’s for sure.

As you mentioned, the dress was all over the press later. How did that moment impact your career?

Well, I went from Paris to my best friend’s wedding, and then I flew home to New York to do a pit stop at my apartment. When I arrived, there was a huge crowd outside the building with news trucks. I kind of walked through the crowd and into the building, and I said to the doorman, “What’s all that about?” And he looked at me, and he said, “They’re here to see you.”

Oh, wow.

It was a very big, kind of scary, unexpected change in my life. I remember going up to my apartment and trying to navigate that when Anna Wintour’s office called and said, “Anna would like for you to come to the Princess [Diana] benefit in Washington.” And I said I couldn’t go, I needed to be back in Paris, I didn’t even have a white shirt. And they said, “It’s Princess Di and Anna Wintour. You’re going. We’ll send you a shirt.” So I went, and I met Princess Diana, and it was really strange to be at such a big event and have so many eyes on me, because I didn’t expect that, and everyone was curious. I remember they were shady journalists trying to sit next to me and get information about where [John and Carolyn] went on their honeymoon. Life changed dramatically, but it brought great attention to the work that I was doing in Paris, and I was able to then go off and start my own business and do my own thing.

I’m sure you had an understanding through Carolyn about what it felt like to be hounded or followed by photographers and press, but did that firsthand experience in New York give you another layer of understanding for what she was going through?

It’s so funny because society today will do anything for that. But it was a very different time, and she was a very private person. I was a very private person. It’s very invasive, and I was kind of stuck in the middle, because while I needed to promote my work and my shows, and sort of be in the press, it wasn’t something that I was very comfortable with. I mean, I love doing the work more than I like the things attached to it. It can be debilitating, and it was difficult for me, but I adjusted, because I could hide behind my work, but as a private citizen, it was more difficult for her.

Narciso Rodriguez.

(Sølve Sundsbø)

You’ve been a part of fashion history on numerous occasions. Michelle Obama frequently wore your designs, but most famously, on election night in 2008, and then during her final appearance as first lady. How does it feel to have been a part of those moments?

It’s hard to put into words. You know, you spend so much time in it, and you have these amazing moments, like designing a dress that became legendary for brides, or getting to dress the first lady, and it wasn’t until COVID that I took a step back. I think about my mother and father coming here to give their son a chance to live out his dreams. And to have been able to sit with my friends on election night and watch her appear in my dress on such a historic moment — the first African American elected president of the United States — words fail. [Michelle Obama] is such an incredible human being who I admire so much, and to have been a part of that night, I feel so lucky.

I don’t talk about my work with my children, but the other day, when they were on the bus headed to school, they told one of their friends, “My dad went to the Obama White House.” They were proud of me. My parents’ dreams came true, and now I get to share that with my children. It’s very special.

It’s really powerful to hear you frame it that way — that these moments mean so much because of your experience being the child of immigrants. How does it feel to be in the midst of a revival right now?

It makes me want to create more. It means a lot to me that people remember these pieces, and that they’re still part of the conversation. But it also means a really great deal to me because I think it’s an important story to tell today. I think it’s important that young people hear that this kind of thing can happen to the children of immigrants, especially as I’m watching all of the horrible things happening to immigrants now.

I could never do what my parents did. When I think about it now, my parents were so much more successful than I could ever be, because they left behind their home for a cold climate, in a place where they couldn’t speak the language, and they really struggled for a long time before I was born. And now, the idea that we’re trying to take that opportunity away from people? It just blows my mind.

My parents faced so many hardships, their life wasn’t easy, but I can’t imagine if they had been put through what immigrants are put through today. I am the “American Dream,” right? I got the chance I got to do the work that I love and succeed because of them. I want that for everyone. I want that to be the world we live in.

Call the Midwife fan favourite Helen George has revealed why BBC viewers can resonate with the hit period drama as the latest series comes to an end

Helen George has made a heartfelt admission as the countdown to the final episode of Call the Midwife series 15 begins.

The last episode of the current season airs this Sunday (March 8) before the BBC drama is rested to make way for a Second World War spin-off prequel and a film.

Ahead of the farewell before the residents of Poplar take a well-deserved break, Helen, who stars as Trixie Aylward, revealed how the believes programme is so popular because it shows the “truthful” side to real-life which many viewers relate too.

She told Radio Times: “It’s ugly and it’s dirty and it’s painful and it’s hard – it’s f***ing hard -and all that is shown on Call the Midwife. Not grotesquely glamorised and not sensationalised. Just truthfully.”

Helen added the period drama, which follows a group of midwives working in the East End of London around the 1950s and 60s and now early 70s “won’t be the same” when the series returns.

The 41-year-old actress added: “It is just a pause, because we know it’s coming back but it won’t be the same, with different characters leaving and whatever.”

Writer Heidi Thomas previously told Yours last month: “I don’t think it’s the last series in the classic form but we are going to take a break from it for a couple of years.”

“We’re going to do a film that involves most the current cast, set in 1972, possibly 1973.

“We’re going to do that first, then we’ll return to the current style.

“Series 16 will have a slightly different setting because of changes in NHS. It’ll still be in the East End of London but possibly something like a small community hospital or a GP practice, but that’s something I’ll be working on later this year.”

The synopsis for the final episode of series 15 teases: ““Sister Veronica must decide her future now she is not currently a nun, but not fully part of the world either.

“The Maternity Home prepares to close its doors, but Dr Turner is determined to preserve equipment and resources for his patients until the last possible moment. The Mullucks fight for the rights of all Thalidomide victims, while Cyril and Rosalind prepare for their wedding.”

The BBC has also released a photo of Sister Monica Joan lying in bed, eyes closed, with her hands by her side.

Is this the end for the adored sister? Viewers will have to wait and see what lies ahead for Sister Monica Joan.

Call the Midwife continues Sunday, March 8 at 8pm on BBC One and iPlayer

For the latest showbiz, TV, movie and streaming news, go to the new **Everything Gossip** website.

Ensure our latest headlines always appear at the top of your Google Search by making us a Preferred Source.** Click here to activate**** or add us as your Preferred Source in your Google search settings.**