Hollywood History: The Real-Life "Feud" and More

[newyawk]

On 4/27/2017 at 5:09 PM, dcubed said:

I take anything that man said with a grain of salt;  he, the alleged rapist of Natalie Wood.  He probably had no appreciation for a woman that had sex willingly. 

And one that handed it out all over town, to boot! Anyway, he saw the strapped beds. He wasn't the only person who did and mentioned them.

A good read is The Fixers: Eddie Mannix, Howard Strickling and the MGM Publicity Machine . If you are at all interested in what really happened behind the scenes in Old Hollywood, and what got covered up, facts, not unsubstantiated blind item rumors, this is a good one.

Edited April 28, 2017 by newyawk

[dcubed]

8 hours ago, newyawk said:

And one that handed it out all over town, to boot! Anyway, he saw the strapped beds. He wasn't the only person who did and mentioned them.

I do believe the strapping to bed thing because as you said, there are a few that mentioned it.  While pretty medieval today, I've certainly heard of worse things done to children, like going out in the yard to pick out your own switch to be hit with.  Child-rearing was different then and there was more of a "children as possessions" thought process.  As for the rest of Christina's accusations, the rest of it is unsubstantiated, including the wire hangers incident, which was apparently added later when the publishers said Christina's book was too boring to publish.

As for Joan handing it out over town, I'm not into slut-shaming for women and when we don't have similar attitudes about men's behavior.  If a woman likes sex, so be it.  However, it's also important to note that sexual promiscuity is often the result of childhood sexual abuse so I'll give her sex life even a bigger pass given her history of sexual abuse. 

[Mindthinkr]

17 minutes ago, dcubed said:

However, it's also important to note that sexual promiscuity is often the result of childhood sexual abuse so I'll give her sex life even a bigger pass given her history of sexual abuse. 

Absolutely. You sometimes have to look at what might have been at the root of a behavior than the actual behavior itself. Good point. 

[newyawk]

30 minutes ago, dcubed said:

I do believe the strapping to bed thing because as you said, there are a few that mentioned it.  While pretty medieval today, I've certainly heard of worse things done to children, like going out in the yard to pick out your own switch to be hit with.  Child-rearing was different then and there was more of a "children as possessions" thought process.  As for the rest of Christina's accusations, the rest of it is unsubstantiated, including the wire hangers incident, which was apparently added later when the publishers said Christina's book was too boring to publish.

As for Joan handing it out over town, I'm not into slut-shaming for women and when we don't have similar attitudes about men's behavior.  If a woman likes sex, so be it.  However, it's also important to note that sexual promiscuity is often the result of childhood sexual abuse so I'll give her sex life even a bigger pass given her history of sexual abuse. 

Christina's story was substantiated By Christopher, who grew up in the house with her.  There are other witnesses who have come out to support Christina's side. Who witnessed Joan's abuse? Is that substantiated by anyone other than Joan? She probably was, but come on..you're going to assume it was true about one but not the other?  Joan's substantial promiscuity might not have been as jawdropping if she didn't have a pattern of aggressively going after married men as part of it. Interestingly, Elizabeth Taylor said that when she was making he transition from child star to grown up roles, she was invited to met Joan under the pretext of Joan teaching her how to do makeup. Aside from the technique, which Liz decided she would rather do without, Joan also made sexual overtures to her.   It's also said that Joan's public slutshaming of Marilyn Monroe was the result of a one nighter between her and MM, which Marilyn afterward decided she wanted no more of,

Edited April 28, 2017 by newyawk

[dcubed]

29 minutes ago, newyawk said:

There are other witnesses who have come out to support Christina's side.

No one but Christopher has come out to support Christina's assertions that she was beaten that I'm aware of but I'm not a Joan historian. 

She did not slut shame Marilyn.  She said her dress was vulgar, which for the times, it was.  It was sewn on her and she couldn't sit or eat.  By today's standards, the dress was pretty tame. 

She hit on an adult Liz Taylor?  Everyone hit on an adult Liz Taylor.  I probably would have too.  I don't see any crime in that.  She was an adult and could say yes or no to Joan. 

I am not a big Joan fan.  I think Mildred Pierce is incredibly over-rated.  I think she was petty and controlling.  I think she was probably hostile toward toward other women who might usurp her position in Hollywood.  I just don't believe everything Christina wrote. 

As for her going after married men, yes I find that deplorable but no more so than the married men that broke their vows to sleep with her.  I don't subscribe to the "women are man-eaters and men can't help themselves" view of things.  

[sugarbaker design]

On 4/26/2017 at 11:57 PM, Marmiarmo said:

I'm fairly certain that "letter" is completely fake.

It's totally fake.

[enoughcats]

1 hour ago, newyawk said:

Joan's substantial promiscuity might not have been as jawdropping if she didn't have a pattern of aggressively going after married men as part of it.

From reading about her contemporaries, there seem to have been two, no, make that three catagories:

• gay (may or may not have been open about it)
• married once and faithful 
• married four or five times, and many,many other alliances      

Even with that I was surprised to read a divorce announcement for one person, followed in the same month by that persons next wedding announcement. 

What I don't understand is the adoptions.  Why did Helen Hayes stop with one?  Or was it that with (in the 20s and early 30s) so many movies being made each year by each 'star' and star wannabe, that there was no time for a nine month pregnacy?

[ennui]

2 hours ago, sugarbaker design said:

It's totally fake.

I can't delete it because my post has been quoted. I thought the letter was far-fetched, but it also says something about Bette that people could believe she wrote it. What I found amusing was the bit at the end ("give my love to Christina") which added a bit of humor and took the sting out of the letter. 

[Growsonwalls]

2 hours ago, enoughcats said:

 

What I don't understand is the adoptions.  Why did Helen Hayes stop with one?  Or was it that with (in the 20s and early 30s) so many movies being made each year by each 'star' and star wannabe, that there was no time for a nine month pregnacy?

From what I've read Hollywood women often got a lot of back-alley abortions which made childbirth and pregnancy difficult when they actually wanted a kid. Like Barbara Stanwyck had a back-alley abortion that made childbirth impossible. Also the constant smoking and drinking during pregnancy resulted in miscarriages. 

Like Audrey Hepburn (whom I love) had a bunch of miscarriages but she also had a 3 pack a day cigarette habit and eating disorder. Amazed she actually brought two pregnancies to term. 

[ennui]

4 hours ago, enoughcats said:

Even with that I was surprised to read a divorce announcement for one person, followed in the same month by that persons next wedding announcement. 

In those days, marriage was the norm. I remember Ava Gardner saying that she and Arte Shaw had a wonderful love affair but should never have married, but in those days, you couldn't live together. 

[12catcrazy]

Well, I just spent about an hour and a half of a slow day at work reading this thread!

I think that besides missing the enjoyment of watching "Feud", I'm going to miss all of the interesting reading in this forum.  It's great to see that there are other people who still love (and watch)  old movies and also love to discuss both the movies and the actors who were in them.   When I try and talk about this stuff at work, people look at me like I have three heads - good to find like-minded souls here.

If I may bring something up that bothers me is how in discussing Hollywood actors of the past , "truth" becomes such a slippery thing.   Rumors, lies, distortions, become "the truth" and when the people being discussed are dead, they can't defend themselves.   Whether or not Joan Crawford was the monster portrayed in "Mommie Dearest" (book and movie), the public perception of her is that she was this child abusing, control freak, obsessive about clean floors, harpy.  This has been discussed in thousands of words in this forum alone and people believe what they believe.   Who ever the REAL Joan Crawford was, this is the image what most people now believe.   Somewhere up thread somebody mentioned Clara Bow - and the few people today who even know who she was believe the gangband story about her and the football team, and that she was a mess whose career was done in by a Brooklyn accent and a nefarious studio system.   None of the above is true (in fact, her voice was also fine, she made at least one talkie, and she walked away from a very large studio contract  because the microphones made her nervous and she wanted to quit show biz to  raise a family).    I find it a shame that there is so much false stuff written and then remembered about these famed people from the past.  And anybody can make up any crap that they want, publish a book, and before you know it, the lies wind up in Wikipedia as "fact" (case in point, a vile piece of "fan fiction" about Jeanette McDonald and Nelson Eddy, which is back in print after 20 years.  I'm not going to mention the title). 

That Bette Davis to Joan Crawford letter up thread was very obviously a fake (and I'd bet the rent was done after "Mommie Dearest" ) and yet I bet there were some people reading this forum who thought it was the real mccoy (insert smiley face here).  

Anyway, I think we need to take a lot of this stuff we read (and see on shows like this) with a large grain of salt and enjoy it as entertainment and not so much as fact.  And all that being said, I wish that a bunch of us could just meet for drinks and dish about these old films and their stars for hours.  Thanks so much everybody for the good read on this forum!  

Edited April 28, 2017 by 12catcrazy
typos

[Arynm]

On 4/27/2017 at 9:53 AM, NutMeg said:

I've only just discovered that there is a "Mysteries & Scandals" documentary series about Hollywood - has anyone seen it and is it good? It's rated 7.7 on IMDb, which is relatively high, so I'll probably give it a try when I'm out of other viewing material:)

I love that show! I watched it when it first came out and recently have been rewatching because of this show. Not all of the episodes are on there, especially some more obscure people, but they made a total of 152 episodes. I has a lot of great info. I wish I could find all of the episodes.

I think there are a few stories that they should have made like Thomas Ince and Olive Thomas or even Bob Crane.

Edited April 28, 2017 by Arynm

[ennui]

2 hours ago, 12catcrazy said:

It's great to see that there are other people who still love (and watch)  old movies and also love to discuss both the movies and the actors who were in them.

On this website, there is a forum for TCM -- >Off-Topic > Movies > TCM: The Greatest Movie Channel

They discuss the films and their stars there. 

[Mindthinkr]

I understand that the next season will be Charles and Diana. 

Down the road let's get edgy. How about something about Rock Hudson? His relationship with Doris Day (on film) and his hidden gay life. It wasn't necessarily a Feud but it was hidden Hollywood life and worth a good look. 

Scotty Bowers wrote a tell all (first hand knowledge) about running escorts for stars, their different propensities and he is still alive and can provide background information and details. 

[hippielamb]

On 4/28/2017 at 0:49 PM, Growsonwalls said:

Like Audrey Hepburn (whom I love) had a bunch of miscarriages but she also had a 3 pack a day cigarette habit and eating disorder. Amazed she actually brought two pregnancies to term. 

She also had suffered from malnutrition in her youth due to the war. 

[enoughcats]

On 4/27/2017 at 6:09 PM, dcubed said:

He probably had no appreciation for a woman that had sex willingly.

Announced today, a book of letters between Kirk Douglas and his 2nd wife of many decades. Mentions first marriage didn't last and that the second one had problems with his straying in the early years.    

[newyawk]

Yep. Kirk was not the only one that reported he had sex with Joan Crawford. There are a few books that report the same thing. He was one of a parade.

Anyway, I'm watching the Three Faces Of Eve, and I stopped it to look up whether Joanne Woodward did her own singing (she was probably dubbed, as was common then) and saw a tidbit that said Joanne's mother named her after Joan Crawford, only altering the name to a more Southern version.  Never knew that. And apparently Joan had Joanne's husband before Joanne did, according to Darwin Porter.  This is from a Daily Express article on a book about Paul Newman's life:

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

http://www.express.co.uk/entertainment/books/128086/Paul-Newman-The-Man-Behind-The-Baby-Blues-His-Secret-Life-Exposed

Once, when asked if he was ever tempted to be unfaithful, he famously replied: “Why go out for hamburger when you’ve got steak at home?”

Joan Crawford, who had slept with Newman on a couple of occasions during his first marriage, was dismissive of this remark. “What a clever thing to say but how true is it? First I think Woodward is hamburger, not steak. As for Paul, he dines out frequently and on the most succulent filet mignon, from what I hear.”

[newyawk]

On 4/28/2017 at 10:08 AM, dcubed said:

No one but Christopher has come out to support Christina's assertions that she was beaten that I'm aware of but I'm not a Joan historian. 

She did not slut shame Marilyn.  She said her dress was vulgar, which for the times, it was.  It was sewn on her and she couldn't sit or eat.  By today's standards, the dress was pretty tame. 

She hit on an adult Liz Taylor?  Everyone hit on an adult Liz Taylor.  I probably would have too.  I don't see any crime in that.  She was an adult and could say yes or no to Joan. 

I am not a big Joan fan.  I think Mildred Pierce is incredibly over-rated.  I think she was petty and controlling.  I think she was probably hostile toward toward other women who might usurp her position in Hollywood.  I just don't believe everything Christina wrote. 

As for her going after married men, yes I find that deplorable but no more so than the married men that broke their vows to sleep with her.  I don't subscribe to the "women are man-eaters and men can't help themselves" view of things.  

According to the book, Liz was still a teenager at the time.  Most adults would probably not go there. 

As far as a witness, Christopher would be the best one, being okld enough to remember, and hating  Joan for the rest of his life based on his own experiences with her. People outside the house knew he was being strapped to the bed until he was twelve and that he first tried to run away at 7.  That doesn't happen unless something is wrong in the home. It is not something every kid does at one time or another.

Joan's exact quote re: Marilyn: "  ‘Didn’t you think that dress Marilyn Monroe wore at the awards dinner was disgusting?It was like a burlesque show. Someone should make her see the light; she should be told that the public likes provocative feminine personalities; but it also likes to know that underneath it all the actresses are ladies. "    Ironic, given what was going on in Joan's own personal life.

So yes, she absolutely slut shamed her, and the public support went to Marilyn, not Joan.

Edited May 2, 2017 by newyawk

[enoughcats]

7 minutes ago, newyawk said:

the public support went to Marilyn, not Joan.

That might be argued.  I was alive then and in high school, and I remember the press coverage (and TV coverage) of Marilyn singing to the President when the President's wife wasn't even at his birthday party.  She avoided Democrat fund raisers and MM's name had been increasingly mentioned with the Kennedy brothers'. 
Not only were Marilyn's mannerisms and suggestive glances embarrassing, but the dress was not well received.  The whole world knew she was starkers underneath it and had to be sewed into it.

The world audience was neither naive, blind, nor oblivious.  Many were too well mannered to comment except to close friends. 
 

[newyawk]

The comment Joan made was at or after the 1953 Photoplay awards, not after the JFK birthday. MM was an up and comer then and was becoming extremely popular.  The dress she wore in 1953 was really not bad at all. At least in black and white. 

Here's an article that gives more details.  http://blog.everlasting-star.net/2014/03/movies/bob-thomas-1922-2014/

Edited May 2, 2017 by newyawk

[enoughcats]

18 hours ago, newyawk said:

Joan's exact quote re: Marilyn: "  ‘Didn’t you think that dress Marilyn Monroe wore at the awards dinner was disgusting?It was like a burlesque show. Someone should make her see the light; she should be told that the public likes provocative feminine personalities; but it also likes to know that underneath it all the actresses are ladies. "    Ironic, given what was going on in Joan's own personal life.

So yes, she absolutely slut shamed her, and the public support went to Marilyn, not Joan.

Thank you for adding the quote.  How many months of public support did Marilyn get before her December 53 Playboy cover and nudes appeared?

[JudyObscure]

On ‎5‎/‎1‎/‎2017 at 10:30 PM, enoughcats said:

That might be argued.  I was alive then and in high school, and I remember the press coverage (and TV coverage) of Marilyn singing to the President when the President's wife wasn't even at his birthday party.  

I'm glad I'm not the only person who remembers that Marilyn wasn't always the revered icon she became after her death.  My mother and her friends, all pretty women of the Deborah Kerr, Loretta Young styles thought she was embarrassing and sleazy.  I remember my mother saying how she disliked Marilyn's whispery baby voice and "messy hair." 

[TheBride]

I'm just watching this now. Honestly, the egocentric train-wrecks that Hollywood produced are unreal! To be complaining because you didn't gain three oscars, what small minds. That said, Hollywood did produce much better pictures in those days, clearly. These two wasted far far too much time lamenting what they did NOT have! Shame on them both.

[CherithCutestory]

On 4/28/2017 at 0:49 PM, Growsonwalls said:

From what I've read Hollywood women often got a lot of back-alley abortions which made childbirth and pregnancy difficult when they actually wanted a kid. Like Barbara Stanwyck had a back-alley abortion that made childbirth impossible. Also the constant smoking and drinking during pregnancy resulted in miscarriages. 

Like Audrey Hepburn (whom I love) had a bunch of miscarriages but she also had a 3 pack a day cigarette habit and eating disorder. Amazed she actually brought two pregnancies to term. 

Jane Russell also had a "botched" abortion leading to inability to have children later. She became avidly pro-life because of it. It's a common story of the age.

It may have been part of Marilyn Monroe's fertility problems too.

Quote

Ah, Bette...

I love this story because the author is so oblivious. Like he brought a gossip columnist he knew Bette despised to her daughter's wedding? Then left because she wanted to hold off on champagne for the toast. But then he thinks it's totally unreasonable that she never wanted to be his friend again. That's a totally normal reaction to someone bringing a gossip columnist and then ditching the event to your kid's wedding. Or his snide comments about how awful she looked on Oscar night (I don't think she looks that bad.)

Or how he casually puts out her husband beating the shit out of her as if it was an unprofessional act on her part. Like those bruises all over her face really put him out. Sorry, Bill.

Not that she doesn't come off bad in parts but typical stuff you'd expect from Bette Davis. And she comes off wonderfully in other spots (the two different instances where she strikes up immediate friendships with women he introduces her to.) But I don't think he realized what a d-bag he sounds like.

Quote

Am I the only one who thinks Bette Davis, in her prime, was far more beautiful than Joan Crawford in *her* prime?

I agree for my own personal tastes but for the 30s Joan Crawford was definitely far more the it type. Bette Davis would never have gotten a contract if she were genuinely unattractive but she was definitely not the ideal for the time. Which, worked for her benefit as she got so many roles that were of the past.

Quote

I don't think it did.  Joan was already past the "normal" working age for Hollywood at that time.  

But Joan Blondell (despite what the show suggests), Bette Davis, obviously Kate Hepburn, Barbara Stanwyck all got regular work in film or TV during this period. Olivia de Haviland basically worked when she felt like it through out the 70s. TV may have been a downgrade but it was certainly better than Trog and even Hepburn did television. And of course Stanwyck got one of her most well known roles outside of film noir on TV. There is no reason Joan Crawford couldn't have been in that category and she clearly wanted to work given the crap she accepted. 

I don't think it's true that she aged out. As much as the show makes it seem like the worst of times I'd argue it was actually a better time for aging actresses than the 80s, 90s or most of the 2000s would be (changing a bit now.)

People stopped wanting to work with her. I don't think the Oscar bit helped much. But the nail in the coffin was probably her stunt on Charlotte. This was after her antics on films like Johnny Guitar. It wasn't an anomaly.

Quote

To be complaining because you didn't gain three oscars, what small minds.

It wasn't about small minds. Of course, Bette did want it for validation, as is made clear. But as is also made clear winning an Oscar adds years to your career shelf life. One Oscar worthy role leads to more. And having three would have given her a career boost when she most needed it.

It was also her life's work. She was genuinely dedicated to her craft in a way that wouldn't actually become common until later in Hollywood (although always on the stage.) So, yeah, she wanted that recognition that her life's work meant more than some guest spots on Perry Mason.

Edited May 9, 2017 by CherithCutestory

[sugarbaker design]

On 5/9/2017 at 0:24 AM, CherithCutestory said:

Jane Russell also had a "botched" abortion leading to inability to have children later. She became avidly pro-life because of it. It's a common story of the age.

It was also mentioned in the movie Philomena (with Judi Dench) that Russell adopted from an Irish magdalene laundry.

[Mindthinkr]

On 5/12/2017 at 10:24 AM, sugarbaker design said:

It was also mentioned in the movie Philomena (with Judi Dench) that Russell adopted from an Irish magdalene laundry.

  Saw Philomena but forgot if I heard that. I'll have to go back and rewatch. Thank you for the post.  

 After reading everyones posts about the abortions and complications (being barren afterwards) it gives me pause to think about some that were mentioned (like MM) only because it makes sense. Interesting. 

[sugarbaker design]

Philomena and her writer friend wondered why there was a picture of Jane Russell in the orphanage/former magdalene laundry.  A local bartender told them JR acquired a baby from the orphanage and also set up other adoptions for rich Hollywood friends.

[psychoticstate]

On 4/27/2017 at 8:35 PM, newyawk said:

And one that handed it out all over town, to boot! Anyway, he saw the strapped beds. He wasn't the only person who did and mentioned them.

A good read is The Fixers: Eddie Mannix, Howard Strickling and the MGM Publicity Machine . If you are at all interested in what really happened behind the scenes in Old Hollywood, and what got covered up, facts, not unsubstantiated blind item rumors, this is a good one.

Joan certainly wasn't the only Hollywood celeb "to hand it out all over town."   Plenty of male and female stars had their share of affairs and relationships.  Why should only Joan be smeared?  

I haven't read "The Fixers" but unless the author was there and with people who will back it up, there's no way to say for certain what happened, unless it's well documented.  Plenty of things can be said now because nearly all these people are gone and cannot speak for themselves. 

As far as the strapped beds go, Joan was not the first to use them nor probably the last.  They seem horrible today but back in the 1940s, they were probably considered acceptable.

On 4/28/2017 at 6:09 AM, newyawk said:

Christina's story was substantiated By Christopher, who grew up in the house with her.  There are other witnesses who have come out to support Christina's side. Who witnessed Joan's abuse? Is that substantiated by anyone other than Joan? She probably was, but come on..you're going to assume it was true about one but not the other?  Joan's substantial promiscuity might not have been as jawdropping if she didn't have a pattern of aggressively going after married men as part of it. Interestingly, Elizabeth Taylor said that when she was making he transition from child star to grown up roles, she was invited to met Joan under the pretext of Joan teaching her how to do makeup. Aside from the technique, which Liz decided she would rather do without, Joan also made sexual overtures to her.   It's also said that Joan's public slutshaming of Marilyn Monroe was the result of a one nighter between her and MM, which Marilyn afterward decided she wanted no more of,

I don't think Joan herself considered her situation abuse so who else would be speaking for her?   Anyone around at that time would be long gone now and very likely gone by the time Christina's book was published. 

Christina's story was also roundly dismissed by Cathy and Cynthia, who were also in the same house.  So who do you believe?  

It seems to me that far more people have discounted Christina's book than endorsed it.  There may be some truths in it but I don't believe 100% of it.  There are many problems with it, including that it's not likely that a 4 or 5 year old Christina would remember conversations the way she recounted them in the book.  Her timeline is also off.  

I have read about and studied Joan for many years.  I have never before heard that she hit on Elizabeth Taylor.  Marilyn, yes.  Elizabeth, no.  I do recall that Elizabeth planted herself on the set of "Torch Song" because she was married to Joan's costar at the time, Michael Wilding. 

FWIW, I think Joan simply went after men she was attracted to.  Period.   I think she got validation by their attention and attraction to her.  

On 4/28/2017 at 9:49 AM, Growsonwalls said:

From what I've read Hollywood women often got a lot of back-alley abortions which made childbirth and pregnancy difficult when they actually wanted a kid. Like Barbara Stanwyck had a back-alley abortion that made childbirth impossible. Also the constant smoking and drinking during pregnancy resulted in miscarriages. 

Like Audrey Hepburn (whom I love) had a bunch of miscarriages but she also had a 3 pack a day cigarette habit and eating disorder. Amazed she actually brought two pregnancies to term. 

Back alley abortions were part of the fabric back then, in those days before the pill and many more birth control options.  

I also think major stars were encouraged not to get pregnant.  Judy Garland had an abortion while she was married to  David Rose on her mother's insistence because a pregnancy would keep her off the screen for too long and possibly harm her career.  Movies weren't necessarily brought back to theaters then and there was no home entertainment system so a star was literally as good as their last film.  

On 5/1/2017 at 7:09 PM, newyawk said:

According to the book, Liz was still a teenager at the time.  Most adults would probably not go there. 

As far as a witness, Christopher would be the best one, being okld enough to remember, and hating  Joan for the rest of his life based on his own experiences with her. People outside the house knew he was being strapped to the bed until he was twelve and that he first tried to run away at 7.  That doesn't happen unless something is wrong in the home. It is not something every kid does at one time or another.

Joan's exact quote re: Marilyn: "  ‘Didn’t you think that dress Marilyn Monroe wore at the awards dinner was disgusting?It was like a burlesque show. Someone should make her see the light; she should be told that the public likes provocative feminine personalities; but it also likes to know that underneath it all the actresses are ladies. "    Ironic, given what was going on in Joan's own personal life.

So yes, she absolutely slut shamed her, and the public support went to Marilyn, not Joan.

Yes, something can be wrong in the home but it doesn't always mean it's the parent(s)' fault.  Some children lie just as some adults do.  Just because Christopher said it was so does not mean it was necessarily so.  Just as Christina may not be speaking the truth, or the entire truth, and the twins may not have spoken the entire truth.  

I have a friend who was a wonderful parent, along with her husband, to their kids.  One of them had nothing but problems and gave them fits and did some pretty bad things.  It didn't mean they were bad parents or bad people, just that they had a difficult or bad kid. 

Okay, maybe Joan's statement was ironic given what she herself may have been up to but those things were not reported in the press at the time.  I would think most of middle class America was shocked by Marilyn's behavior and her dress (or lack thereof.)  Could it still have been sour grapes over the one night stand on Joan's part?  Absolutely.  But she was dead on right about American attitudes at the time. 

[newyawk]

7 hours ago, psychoticstate said:

Joan certainly wasn't the only Hollywood celeb "to hand it out all over town."   Plenty of male and female stars had their share of affairs and relationships.  Why should only Joan be smeared?  

Because in this case the conversation happens to be about Joan and her habit of going after married men..repeatedly.  The threads here are not about Shirley Temple, Rita Hayworth or anyone else but Bette and Joan. 

 

7 hours ago, psychoticstate said:

I haven't read "The Fixers" but unless the author was there and with people who will back it up, there's no way to say for certain what happened, unless it's well documented.  Plenty of things can be said now because nearly all these people are gone and cannot speak for themselves. 

"The Fixers" is about two men who were Louis B Mayer's right hand guys when it came to covering the scandals and unsavory antics of his big stars.  They were right there in the thick of it and they would know. Go look at the synopsis on Amazon.

As far as the strapped beds go, Joan was not the first to use them nor probably the last.  They seem horrible today but back in the 1940s, they were probably considered acceptable.

Then why didn't she use them on Cindy and Cathy? This is one reason why they wouldn't corroborate the abuse..because it was not done to THEM.

 

7 hours ago, psychoticstate said:

I don't think Joan herself considered her situation abuse so who else would be speaking for her?   Anyone around at that time would be long gone now and very likely gone by the time Christina's book was published. 

Christina's story was also roundly dismissed by Cathy and Cynthia, who were also in the same house.  So who do you believe?  

I believe the two children that this happened to, and whom visitors to the house backed up. If you look it up, it is not at all unusual, and actually can be common, for some children to be treated much, much worse, to the point of abuse, than other children in the same house.  Especially when adopted children are involved.  Just look at the kids of Ray and Vanessa Jackson of NJ, for one extreme example.  http://nymag.com/nymetro/news/people/features/10425/

 

7 hours ago, psychoticstate said:

It seems to me that far more people have discounted Christina's book than endorsed it.  There may be some truths in it but I don't believe 100% of it.  There are many problems with it, including that it's not likely that a 4 or 5 year old Christina would remember conversations the way she recounted them in the book.  Her timeline is also off.  

You are certainly entitled to your opinion. I am sure that she did er-arrange some things for the purpose of flow to the book, it does not make them invalid or untrue . And re-enacting conversations for a memoir or biography is a very common literary device.  It is simply the author trying to communicate the gist of what was said, in an easier way than saying "then he said, then she said.  Of course they are not going to be verbatim. But the thrust of what was said is conveyed. 

 

7 hours ago, psychoticstate said:

I have read about and studied Joan for many years.  I have never before heard that she hit on Elizabeth Taylor.  Marilyn, yes.  Elizabeth, no.  I do recall that Elizabeth planted herself on the set of "Torch Song" because she was married to Joan's costar at the time, Michael Wilding. 

As have I. The story I saw was in a very recent book on Liz.  Liz told Rolling Stone: "They tried to get me to create a Joan Crawford mouth when I first began using lipstick at 15." Hence the story in Darwin Porter's book about Liz being sent to Joan's dressing room where Joan herself tried to teach her about makeup..her way, and then stripped naked and changed in front of her.

 

7 hours ago, psychoticstate said:

FWIW, I think Joan simply went after men she was attracted to.  Period.   I think she got validation by their attention and attraction to her.  

And proceeded to judge other women publicly for the same bad behavior Joan herself did..going after married men..repeatedly. So it is entirely fair to come down on Joan for it. It was a long, long pattern for her, she had no respect for other people's relationships but wanted to play Queen Joan in public like her behavior was chaste and classy. Nuh-uh, sister.

 

7 hours ago, psychoticstate said:

Yes, something can be wrong in the home but it doesn't always mean it's the parent(s)' fault.  Some children lie just as some adults do.  Just because Christopher said it was so does not mean it was necessarily so.  

Helen Hayes' son backed Christopher up on it.  Joan was a serious alcoholic. She was widely known to be a control freak.  That is a bad combination that makes it entirely believable that she was abusive. 

Just as Christina may not be speaking the truth, or the entire truth, and the twins may not have spoken the entire truth.  

The "twins" wouldn't have known. They really didn't grow up in the same household,  Christina said: "‘Cathy has been very vocal about her experience, and that’s her privilege, but there was eight years’ difference between us. She was two when I was sent to boarding school. She couldn’t have known anything about my or Chris’s experience - zip, nothing. She wasn’t there - she wasn’t even born when I was adopted."

I have a friend who was a wonderful parent, along with her husband, to their kids.  One of them had nothing but problems and gave them fits and did some pretty bad things.  It didn't mean they were bad parents or bad people, just that they had a difficult or bad kid. 

"Bad" kid? Really? With good, competent parenting, kids do not turn out "bad." There are *emotionally disturbed* kids who simply need the right help.  There are INTELLIGENT kids who stand up for themselves and refuse to be manipulated, who are probably going to piss off a control freak parent with no imagination as to handle a situation correctly. . And then there are docile, "yes Mommy, whatever you say Mommy" type kids, like Cathy and Cindy were reported to be, who of course were never going to set Joan off.  And plenty of parents have good kids but abuse them terribly, (see Jackson family of NJ.)

 

7 hours ago, psychoticstate said:

 

[mikewho]

Tell that to my sister. Her daughter was a nightmare to raise, even becoming violent at times.

My sister wasn't a 'bad parent' at all. Her daughter was diagnosed, twice, as having Borderline Personality Disorder along with sociopathic tendencies.

So 'good, competent' parenting doesn't really mean or guarantee anything at all.

My niece would fall into your category of 'emotionally disturbed'. But it is NOT as simple as getting the right help. My sister tried, many times. My niece rebelled at every turn.

[psychoticstate]

3 hours ago, mikewho said:

Tell that to my sister. Her daughter was a nightmare to raise, even becoming violent at times.

My sister wasn't a 'bad parent' at all. Her daughter was diagnosed, twice, as having Borderline Personality Disorder along with sociopathic tendencies.

So 'good, competent' parenting doesn't really mean or guarantee anything at all.

My niece would fall into your category of 'emotionally disturbed'. But it is NOT as simple as getting the right help. My sister tried, many times. My niece rebelled at every turn.

Thank you.  Children are not always a reflection of their parents or upbringing.  I'm sorry for the difficulties your sister endured.

@newyawk, okay, let's talk about Bette Davis then.  Joan wasn't the only one going after married men.  Bette did so as well.  And she cheated during at least one of her marriages.  Does that make her any less of a talented actress or Hollywood icon?  Absolutely not, no more than lessening Joan's career or talent based on what she did privately 

As far as "The Fixers" go, was that book written by the two men working with Mayer?  I don't think it was.  So again, we have one person's viewpoint, not the story from the actual people involved.  I'm not saying it's not true but it may not be gospel either.

Maybe Joan didn't use the bed straps on Cindy and Cathy because they didn't get up from the bed?  They didn't sleepwalk?  I honestly have no idea but I'm not going to demonize her because she used an apparatus that was being sold to others as well for the same purpose.

I am not familiar with the story on Elizabeth Taylor but is Joan stripping in front of her somehow equating to hitting on her?  Women change clothes in front of other women.  It doesn't mean you are hitting on anyone.  And while Joan was clearly bisexual, or at least had some same sex encounters, I don't see her going after a minor Elizabeth Taylor. Especially not when there were plenty of other consenting adults in Hollywood. 

[enoughcats]

We know nothing of Christopher.  Really. 

We know that Joan had a brother who was less than perfect and that she knew some kinds of abuse that were never defined.

Could Joan have thought she was protecting her daughter by controlling her son at night?