S01.E05: Crêpes Suzette

[Pallas]

In San Francisco, Julia tests the waters of her newfound celebrity status alongside celebrated chef James Beard.

[Words]

This episode was simply delightful!  I smiled throughout the entire time.  We're getting to see different layers to the various characters.  Bringing on James Beard made for a fun diversion.  Is anyone else picking up some vibes between Russ and Judith?

[Starchild]

Was Julia a gay icon in real life?

[amarante]

I thought this was a very odd episode considering in the previous episode there had been a very interesting article regarding Julia's homophobia - or at least very complicated outlook on homosexuality and how she despised effeminate men but loved James Beard and had gay friends and in the midst of the AIDS's crisis took a stance in terms of supporting it. 

I really don't know much about Julia aside from the obvious stuff that anyone with a basic familiarity with culinary stuff and popular culture would know as I never delved into her autobiography.

I know she was supposed to have had a very strong marriage but this series seems to be placing "hints" that on some level it might have been somewhat of a "bearded" (no pun intended) relationship. They do seem to have a strong physical attraction and sex life but in this episode there is the conversation on the pier in which Paul alludes to his relationship with his overbearing mother and says that he married Julia after she died. And James Beard says he wishes he had been the "man" in her life like Paul - again implying that her marriage has some veiled homosexuality aspects. 

I am not one to think that "real" men have to behave in a certain way or have certain interests that aren't effect but the series seems to be dropping odd tidbits. 

[Cinnabon]

2 hours ago, amarante said:

I thought this was a very odd episode considering in the previous episode there had been a very interesting article regarding Julia's homophobia - or at least very complicated outlook on homosexuality and how she despised effeminate men but loved James Beard and had gay friends and in the midst of the AIDS's crisis took a stance in terms of supporting it. 

I really don't know much about Julia aside from the obvious stuff that anyone with a basic familiarity with culinary stuff and popular culture would know as I never delved into her autobiography.

I know she was supposed to have had a very strong marriage but this series seems to be placing "hints" that on some level it might have been somewhat of a "bearded" (no pun intended) relationship. They do seem to have a strong physical attraction and sex life but in this episode there is the conversation on the pier in which Paul alludes to his relationship with his overbearing mother and says that he married Julia after she died. And James Beard says he wishes he had been the "man" in her life like Paul - again implying that her marriage has some veiled homosexuality aspects. 

I am not one to think that "real" men have to behave in a certain way or have certain interests that aren't effect but the series seems to be dropping odd tidbits. 

Or maybe she was bisexual but didn’t feel comfortable acknowledging that part of her? Who knows.

[amarante]

1 hour ago, Cinnabon said:

Or maybe she was bisexual but didn’t feel comfortable acknowledging that part of her? Who knows.

I am just commenting based on her biography - an article excerpting the issue of her attitude toward homosexuality was excerpted in that article and based on that article, this *take* on Julia doesn't comport with that. Of course perhaps the show is relying on newer information. If you go to the discussion on Episode 3 the article is linked and is excerpted from a well reviewed biography of Julia.

Obviously people can have all kinds of suppressed feelings but there is nothing to indicate based - at least on her biography - that she had anything but a traditional heterosexual marriage and had very "old fashioned" views of gender - although obviously things must have become turned around somewhat when she became a celebrity.

There is nothing to suggest that she had anything like the relationship Eleanor Roosevelt had with her Lorena Hickman which is well documented.

 

[Cinnabon]

1 hour ago, amarante said:

I am just commenting based on her biography - an article excerpting the issue of her attitude toward homosexuality was excerpted in that article and based on that article, this *take* on Julia doesn't comport with that. Of course perhaps the show is relying on newer information. If you go to the discussion on Episode 3 the article is linked and is excerpted from a well reviewed biography of Julia.

Obviously people can have all kinds of suppressed feelings but there is nothing to indicate based - at least on her biography - that she had anything but a traditional heterosexual marriage and had very "old fashioned" views of gender - although obviously things must have become turned around somewhat when she became a celebrity.

There is nothing to suggest that she had anything like the relationship Eleanor Roosevelt had with her Lorena Hickman which is well documented.

 

There was that interesting scene a couple of episodes ago in which her dad said “be a lady,” and she responded that she WAS a lady, just not his kind of lady.

[amarante]

34 minutes ago, Cinnabon said:

There was that interesting scene a couple of episodes ago in which her dad said “be a lady,” and she responded that she WAS a lady, just not his kind of lady.

Along with the scene where the father implied that Paul had married her for her money and Paul showed quite a lovely photograph of her and said he (the father) just didn't see her the way Paul did, I interpreted it to mean that Julia had never been conventionally ladylike because she was so large and exuberant - not that that she wasn't heterosexual especially since she had reacted with a kind of disbelief that her gay classmate at the reunion had taken the episode in college so seriously. 

Again I don't have any knowledge of her life beyond the surface kind of stuff but I am finding it interesting that this series seems to be taking quite a different view of her opinion on gender roles that the biography did - at least in terms of the excerpt which was linked which went into quite explicit detail in terms of her statements regarding very traditional gender roles and distaste for effeminate men. Of course - at least per the article - she also was champion of individual gay men like James Beard who she truly admired and had a great friendship with.

[shrewd.buddha]

17 hours ago, amarante said:

I thought this was a very odd episode considering in the previous episode there had been a very interesting article regarding Julia's homophobia - or at least very complicated outlook on homosexuality and how she despised effeminate men but loved James Beard and had gay friends and in the midst of the AIDS's crisis took a stance in terms of supporting it. 

It could be that Julia was uncomfortable around drag queens and the like because she was a physically large woman -- thus having to deal with a lot of opinions as to how manly she was.  Maybe that self-consciousness was threatened when actual men could create a more feminine version of her.  
... but then they (the producers) followed through with a  muddled message when Julia embraced the drag queen scene and had a wonderful time at the club. 

I am enjoying the show, but not enjoying some of the revisionist history, like the fictional character of Alice Naman (though well played by Brittany Bradford).  Instead of exploring the reality that some Caucasian men of the 60's could see, and champion, the potential of Julia Child, the powers-that-be of 'Julia'  want to fall back on the easily triggering tropes of racism and sexism. 
I do like characters such as Blanche Knopf (Judith Light) who have business agendas that Julia doesn't fit into. 

[amarante]

5 minutes ago, shrewd.buddha said:

It could be that Julia was uncomfortable around drag queens and the like because she was a physically large woman -- thus having to deal with a lot of opinions as to how manly she was.  Maybe that self-consciousness was threatened when actual men could create a more feminine version of her.  
... but then they (the producers) followed through with a  muddled message when Julia embraced the drag queen scene and had a wonderful time at the club. 

I am enjoying the show, but not enjoying some of the revisionist history, like the fictional character of Alice Naman (though well played by Brittany Bradford).  Instead of exploring the reality that some Caucasian men of the 60's could see, and champion, the potential of Julia Child, the powers-that-be of 'Julia'  want to fall back on the easily triggering tropes of racism and sexism. 
I do like characters such as Blanche Knopf (Judith Light) who have business agendas that Julia doesn't fit into. 

I don't disagree with your analysis. People are complicated and Julia was a complex woman.

I am just not sure whether this production is obfuscating deliberately or whether they unearthed additional research - hence my confusion as to what the point of all of these seemingly conflicting messages are if they aren't accurate.

Paul Child was quite a bit smaller in physical size than Julia - not that there is anything wrong at all with that but they certainly don't fit the stereotypical imagery of traditional gender roles. 

I don't think the show is pandering but I also think they feel the need to perhaps educate people about how difficult it was for women and women of color even more so to operate in the business world. Sixty years ago is more than a lifetime. Not quite the same thing but I am well versed in New York cultural history as portrayed (for example) in the novels of Edith Wharton and more recently Louis Auchincloss and so when I watched The Gilded Age I realized that many people watching the show had no contextual basis in which to place the rise of the newly rich industrial class - no memory of the old Met on 39th Street let alone the Academy of Music being "the" opera house - for example.

[Cinnabon]

2 hours ago, shrewd.buddha said:

It could be that Julia was uncomfortable around drag queens and the like because she was a physically large woman -- thus having to deal with a lot of opinions as to how manly she was.  Maybe that self-consciousness was threatened when actual men could create a more feminine version of her.  
... but then they (the producers) followed through with a  muddled message when Julia embraced the drag queen scene and had a wonderful time at the club. 

I am enjoying the show, but not enjoying some of the revisionist history, like the fictional character of Alice Naman (though well played by Brittany Bradford).  Instead of exploring the reality that some Caucasian men of the 60's could see, and champion, the potential of Julia Child, the powers-that-be of 'Julia'  want to fall back on the easily triggering tropes of racism and sexism. 
I do like characters such as Blanche Knopf (Judith Light) who have business agendas that Julia doesn't fit into. 

I love the Alice character and unaware of anyone who’s been “triggered” by it. 🤷‍♀️

2 hours ago, amarante said:

I don't disagree with your analysis. People are complicated and Julia was a complex woman.

I am just not sure whether this production is obfuscating deliberately or whether they unearthed additional research - hence my confusion as to what the point of all of these seemingly conflicting messages are if they aren't accurate.

Paul Child was quite a bit smaller in physical size than Julia - not that there is anything wrong at all with that but they certainly don't fit the stereotypical imagery of traditional gender roles. 

I don't think the show is pandering but I also think they feel the need to perhaps educate people about how difficult it was for women and women of color even more so to operate in the business world. Sixty years ago is more than a lifetime. Not quite the same thing but I am well versed in New York cultural history as portrayed (for example) in the novels of Edith Wharton and more recently Louis Auchincloss and so when I watched The Gilded Age I realized that many people watching the show had no contextual basis in which to place the rise of the newly rich industrial class - no memory of the old Met on 39th Street let alone the Academy of Music being "the" opera house - for example.

Not quite “more than a lifetime” for many. My mom (still alive and well) watched Julia’s shows as young married woman.

Edited April 16, 2022 by Cinnabon

[Joe Bacigaloop]

I feel that the show is definitely pandering and inserting a subtext. They are just subtle compared to other show runners.

[Cinnabon]

13 minutes ago, Joe Bacigaloop said:

I feel that the show is definitely pandering and inserting a subtext. They are just subtle compared to other show runners.

What is the alleged subtext?

[amarante]

An interesting article from the Los Angeles Times in which Alice is discussed in terms of her not being an actual character but she COULD have been an actual character since there were women of color working at the station during that time period. 

Fascinating that Russ went on to produce another iconic PBC show - This Old House

https://www.latimes.com/entertainment-arts/julia-child-hbo-cast-the-french-chef-obama-netflix-our-great-national-parks

In the breezy HBO Max comedy “Julia,” the great Sarah Lancashire stars as renowned chef Julia Child, who introduced a generation of ialized at the Smithsonian. “He’s responsible for everything I did,” Julia told The Times in 1989. “We worked together very closely.”

Alice Naman (Brittany Bradford): An ambitious young Black producer and big believer in Child’s appeal to TV viewers, Alice is a fictional character, though one seemingly inspired by several female producers who were instrumental in bringing “The French Chef” to air, including Ruth Lockwood, who helped pick out the show’s theme music, and Miffy Goodhart, who booked Child in her omelette-making debut on “People are Reading” and pushed a skeptical Russ Morash to get her on the network again, according to Bob Spitz’s biography “Dearie.” As series creator Daniel Goldfarb and showrunner Chris Keyser told The Washington Post, there were Black producers at WGBH in this time period, so in theory there could have been a woman like Alice on “The French Chef.”

An ambitious young Black producer and big believer in Child’s appeal to audience, Alice is a fictional character, though one seemingly inspired by Ruth Lockwood, an assistant producer at WGBH who played a key role behind the scenes at “The French Chef.” Lockwood was white, but, as series creator Daniel Goldfarb and showrunner Chris Keyser told the Washington Post, there were Black producers at WGBH in this time period.

Russ Morash (Fran Kranz): As portrayed in “Julia,” Morash trained to work in the theater but landed a job at the Boston public TV station WGBH, where he went on to have a long and influential career in TV. In addition to his role as a producer-director on “The French Chef,” he created the public TV staple “This Old House,” helping spawn the now-flourishing home-improvement genre. Working with Child was “wonderful,” he told The Times in 2019. “I always called Julia a ‘today’ person. She didn’t much care about what happened yesterday. She was only interested in moving it forward, which is a great tactic to get through a complex life.” He still lives in Massachusetts. —Meredith Blake

And an article from 1989 describing a party held for Paul Child with an exhibit of his paintings and photography. There is a description of the menu with recipes which also capture a moment in time in terms of California cuisine in 1989

https://www.latimes.com/food/la-fo-paul-child-s-story.html

[Yeah No]

On 4/15/2022 at 9:15 PM, Cinnabon said:

There was that interesting scene a couple of episodes ago in which her dad said “be a lady,” and she responded that she WAS a lady, just not his kind of lady.

I don't think that comment alludes to anything about her sexuality whatsoever.  It is well known that Julia was not the typical woman looking for a typical stockbroker or businessman husband like her father wanted her to be.  She was known as a "party girl" and free spirit in a way and wanted a more interesting life for herself, which is what lead her to the OSS.

[Yeah No]

10 hours ago, amarante said:

I don't think the show is pandering but I also think they feel the need to perhaps educate people about how difficult it was for women and women of color even more so to operate in the business world. Sixty years ago is more than a lifetime. Not quite the same thing but I am well versed in New York cultural history as portrayed (for example) in the novels of Edith Wharton and more recently Louis Auchincloss and so when I watched The Gilded Age I realized that many people watching the show had no contextual basis in which to place the rise of the newly rich industrial class - no memory of the old Met on 39th Street let alone the Academy of Music being "the" opera house - for example.

I am almost 64 and watched Julia from her very first episode.  My mother was a huge fan and learned about her show from reading James Beard columns.  So "more than a lifetime", is not more than mine.  Also, I'm a native New Yorker and know of its culture firsthand not from novels.  Same with Julia.  I've known her almost all of my life.  I feel like there's a lot of speculation going on in this show and here that is going way out on a limb to insert popular modern day social issues and not in a way that Julia herself might have appreciated, IMHO.

[Yeah No]

On 4/15/2022 at 7:26 PM, amarante said:

I am just commenting based on her biography - an article excerpting the issue of her attitude toward homosexuality was excerpted in that article and based on that article, this *take* on Julia doesn't comport with that. Of course perhaps the show is relying on newer information. If you go to the discussion on Episode 3 the article is linked and is excerpted from a well reviewed biography of Julia.

Obviously people can have all kinds of suppressed feelings but there is nothing to indicate based - at least on her biography - that she had anything but a traditional heterosexual marriage and had very "old fashioned" views of gender - although obviously things must have become turned around somewhat when she became a celebrity.

There is nothing to suggest that she had anything like the relationship Eleanor Roosevelt had with her Lorena Hickman which is well documented.

I agree with you.  I think that like a lot of people from older generations, she generally recoiled at the idea of homosexuality but was able to make exceptions for good friends.  She would have been conflicted.  Everyone was very closeted back then.  I don't know for sure but I would have a hard time believing that James Beard would have ever admitted his homosexuality to her let alone take her to a gay club.  We are talking about the early '60s here.  I lived through it, those things did not happen.  No one knew he was gay.  I read that he didn't even come out of the closet until late in his life.  We didn't even know that people in our own families were gay back then much less James Beard. 

This show seems to want to insert modern day social issues at every turn where they would not have been in real life at the time nor with these people.  It's reminding me of the "Sex and the City" reboot all over again, only this time they're doing it with real historical people.

I can't help but feel let down by some of this because if they are going to the extent to recreate Julia, her life, her kitchen to this degree why are they taking these liberties?  Especially when it's being done to in effect rewrite the history of a real person or people.  Why does everything these days have to come back to social issues, even a series about Julia Child?

As to her sexuality, there has never been any reason to wonder about it.  She was famously hetero., even had crushes on other chefs, like Jasper White, which she admitted freely.  Why even allude to any kind of same sex college experience?  Because she went to Smith, LOL?

I have so much to say - Although I love David Hyde Pierce, I don't love some of the writing for his character.  Paul was famous for having very little ego and devoting himself to Julia's career almost selflessly so it seemed really out of character for him to be brooding alone in a hotel room and pouting about not having his career anymore while she went off to engage in hers.  Maybe the show is going to make him change in time.  At least I hope it will.

I actually felt that the spirit of their relationship as told in bios was more accurate in the movie "Julie and Julia".  

As to the fictional black producer, she does feel shoehorned in, again, to address social issues, but I know that there were black people working in TV back then so it doesn't feel implausible.  It's too bad that they left out Ruth Lockwood, though.  At least I am liking Alice's character and how she's fitting into the show, which is more than I can say for some of its other aspects.  Like I don't love how they're writing Russell Morash.  I am pretty sure from interviews that while he needed convincing to be on board with her show, he was not the dick he's being portrayed as here.  He and Julia appear to have had an affectionate relationship and he seems to be a nicer guy (he's still alive).  The actor does look like Morash and is also dead ringer for my orthopedic surgeon, LOL.

Speaking of dead ringers, I gasped when I saw the actor playing James Beard.  What an amazing resemblance!

Edited April 17, 2022 by Yeah No

[amarante]

Well I was completely wrong about who the mysterious Claire was in this episode as I assumed she was Paul's sister based on his reference to "Mother" dying. The reality is that Paul had a long term relationship (10 years) with a woman 20 years his senior and Claire was her daughter. 

The New Yorker has quite an interesting little piece on Paul's photographs and the beginning of his relationship with Julia. Quite the serendipitous meeting where two people truly had a partnership greater than their individual selves as there would have been no "Julia" without Paul.

Paul was leading a design team in WW II which included Eero Saarinen and Theodore White. I guess that provided sufficient background for his personal design of Julia's kitchen 

https://www.newyorker.com/culture/photo-booth/portrait-of-a-marriage-julia-child-captured-in-paul-childs-shimmering-photographs

 

'He could draw and paint, and tried living in Paris, but eventually took a job at a boarding school in the Dordogne. Back in New England, he taught first at the Shady Hill School, in Cambridge, and then at Avon Old Farms School, in Connecticut. Along the way, he fell in love with the mother of one of his students, twenty years his senior, with whom he lived for ten years. Her death devastated him. From Kandy, he wrote to Charles, “When am I going to meet a grown-up dame with beauty, character, sophistication, and sensibility?”' 

[Yeah No]

1 hour ago, amarante said:

'He could draw and paint, and tried living in Paris, but eventually took a job at a boarding school in the Dordogne. Back in New England, he taught first at the Shady Hill School, in Cambridge, and then at Avon Old Farms School, in Connecticut. Along the way, he fell in love with the mother of one of his students, twenty years his senior, with whom he lived for ten years. Her death devastated him. From Kandy, he wrote to Charles, “When am I going to meet a grown-up dame with beauty, character, sophistication, and sensibility?”' 

Thanks for posting this.  I had no idea he taught at the Avon Old Farms School.  I live only a couple of miles from there!  

This is from Wikipedia:

Quote

In 1941, while at Avon Old Farms School, he was a teacher and mentor to future poet John Gillespie Magee Jr. Child was a fourth degree black belt in judo as well as a judo instructor.

He was a fascinating person and the more I learn about him the more fascinating he gets.

[txhorns79]

On 4/15/2022 at 3:43 PM, amarante said:

I thought this was a very odd episode considering in the previous episode there had been a very interesting article regarding Julia's homophobia - or at least very complicated outlook on homosexuality and how she despised effeminate men but loved James Beard and had gay friends and in the midst of the AIDS's crisis took a stance in terms of supporting it. 

I did really question whether Julia would be offended or flattered by a drag version of herself.  I lean towards the idea she would be offended because it would bring up all her insecurities.  

I also thought it was interesting that Judith Jones told James Beard that she really didn't edit cookbooks, implying that Julia was such a presence and Mastering the Art of French Cooking was such a masterpiece, that an exception was made.  Apparently, in real life, Jones edited cook books for a number of prominent cooks/chefs during her career.        

[amarante]

4 minutes ago, txhorns79 said:

I did really question whether Julia would be offended or flattered by a drag version of herself.  I lean towards the idea she would be offended because it would bring up all her insecurities.  

I also thought it was interesting that Judith Jones told James Beard that she really didn't edit cookbooks, implying that Julia was such a presence and Mastering the Art of French Cooking was such a masterpiece, that an exception was made.  Apparently, in real life, Jones edited cook books for a number of prominent cooks/chefs during her career.        

Perhaps at the time she assumed it was a one off because who could have predicted the phenomena.

Ultimately she did wind up editing James Beard

NY Times' obituary had interesting information on the scope of her editing. FWIW her husband was a food editor and so it was another serendipitous coupling as Jones had that background and was versed in French food since she had lived in France for awhile.

In my personal six degrees of separation I worked at Atheneum Publishers as my first job which was founded by Alfred Knopf's son because the company had become too mainstream and corporate. Atheneum published literary fiction and poetry as well as some lovely children books. They published the first Mario Puzo book which didn't sell too well but turned down The Godfather 

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/08/02/us/judith-jones-dead.html

For Ms. Jones, who had previously edited translations of the French philosophers Albert Camus and Jean-Paul Sartre, the Child book opened a new career path, editing culinary writers: James Beard and Marion Cunningham on American fare, Madhur Jaffrey (Indian food), Claudia Roden (Middle Eastern), Edna Lewis (Southern), Lidia Bastianich and Marcella Hazan (Italian), and many others. Ms. Jones also commissioned and edited regional and ethnic food books for the “Knopf Cooks American” series.

A Knopf vice president, Ms. Jones edited some of America’s best novelists and nonfiction writers. She shepherded all but one of Mr. Updike’s scores of books of fiction, short stories, poetry and essays to publication, and edited Ms. Tyler’s novels on the American family and works by Mr. Hersey, Elizabeth Bowen, Peter Taylor and William Maxwell.

Ms. Jones and her husband, Evan, an American food writer she met in Paris in 1948, wrote three books together, two of them on breads and one on New England cooking. They also collaborated in the kitchen on dinners for friends at their homes on Manhattan’s Upper East Side and at Bryn Teg Farm, in Walden Township in northern Vermont. The film and theater critic Stanley Kauffmann once called their New York apartment “the best restaurant in New York.”

After her husband died in 1996, Ms. Jones began cooking for herself and wrote a book about it, “The Pleasures of Cooking for One” (2009). It was a blend of kitchen advice and encouragement for people who live alone in their final years.

[Corgi-ears]

This episode mostly made me want a film/TV show about James Beard. 

[Cinnabon]

1 hour ago, Corgi-ears said:

This episode mostly made me want a film/TV show about James Beard. 

Me, too. He was fabulous!

[J-Man]

On 4/17/2022 at 1:07 PM, txhorns79 said:

I did really question whether Julia would be offended or flattered by a drag version of herself. 

It seemed unlikely that Julia was well-known enough in San Francisco at that time for someone to be performing as her in a drag show.  The timeline suggests that the show may have just begun to air in SF, and clearly no one would have become a cultural icon worthy of impersonation based on their picture on a book jacket.

I was actually surprised no one walked up to her in the club and mistook her for a drag queen herself.

[Yeah No]

8 hours ago, J-Man said:

It seemed unlikely that Julia was well-known enough in San Francisco at that time for someone to be performing as her in a drag show.  The timeline suggests that the show may have just begun to air in SF, and clearly no one would have become a cultural icon worthy of impersonation based on their picture on a book jacket.

I was actually surprised no one walked up to her in the club and mistook her for a drag queen herself.

LOL, I had both thoughts myself.  Although I think the actress looks more like a drag queen in this role that than Julia ever did in real life.  But I can still see it given her height.

[Kirsty]

That's really interesting about Judith Jones. I didn't realise she was such a powerful player; those literary writers and cookery writers she worked with are world renowned.

On the show, I get the impression that the Judith Jones character is gay, and also that she has a crush on Julia. I wonder if I'm misunderstanding it, or if the show is choosing to present her as queer even though the real woman had a husband and kids.

On another note, I love Sarah Lancashire's version of Julia laughing! Especially when Julia is taken by surprise by something funny. It's a scream.

Edited April 29, 2022 by Kirsty

[purist]

On 4/17/2022 at 2:06 PM, Yeah No said:

I don't know for sure but I would have a hard time believing that James Beard would have ever admitted his homosexuality to her let alone take her to a gay club.

Really good article here about the 'pinkwashing' of Julia in this episode, by John Birdsall, a biographer of James Beard.

[paramitch]

I didn't really like this episode precisely because it was so heavily fictionalized -- I mean, it's a ridiculously over-the-top presentation of a saintlike, gay-accepting Julia Child that's just total BS. Yes, Julia was very fond of Beard, and a few other gay men in her circle, but as other posters and articles have pointed out, she was also pretty openly homophobic, as was Paul, and it took them decades to evolve past their bigotry on that front.

So the image of Julia delightedly getting makeup tips and then belting out a number with Coco Van in a drag show just felt absurd to me here. It's too much, and it's dishonest, especially given Julia's open homophobia at the time.

On 4/16/2022 at 9:06 PM, Yeah No said:

As to her sexuality, there has never been any reason to wonder about it.  She was famously hetero., even had crushes on other chefs, like Jasper White, which she admitted freely.  Why even allude to any kind of same sex college experience?  Because she went to Smith, LOL?

I have so much to say - Although I love David Hyde Pierce, I don't love some of the writing for his character.  Paul was famous for having very little ego and devoting himself to Julia's career almost selflessly so it seemed really out of character for him to be brooding alone in a hotel room and pouting about not having his career anymore while she went off to engage in hers.  Maybe the show is going to make him change in time.  At least I hope it will.

I actually felt that the spirit of their relationship as told in bios was more accurate in the movie "Julie and Julia".  

I really don't think the show has been leaning into questioning Julia's sexuality. I really felt the scene with the college friend was in fact a representation of how Julia could be rather tone-deaf on that front (and it did come across as subtly homophobic to me, since she reacts in distaste in the scene, then pretty promptly leaves the reunion).

Paul was definitely all the things you describe in supporting Julia's career, to an incredible degree, but he was also a proud man who had to make some adjustments to his own vanity at this point, so I like and appreciate the presentation of Paul here. To me he feels far more real and complex than the Paul in Julie & Julia (but then again, I really dislike that film -- Julia and Paul are basically Disney caricatures of themselves). I find it believable that Paul -- for all his unswerving devotion to Julia -- needed to find ways to adjust as her TV career skyrocketed.