Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

RE: [The New Coven of Louise Brooks] Psychological Profile?

Expand Messages
  • Anita M
    IMO she was being socially responsible; particularly in respect to underage girls, who (judging from my own experience) are impressionable and most likely to
    Message 1 of 29 , May 7, 2007
    • 0 Attachment
      IMO she was being socially responsible; particularly in respect to underage
      girls, who (judging from my own experience) are impressionable and most
      likely to seek out those kinds of stories. At that point in my life, illegal
      drug use and being an underachiever was glorified. I knew people who bought
      into that and regretted it later. Instead of writing about her adventures
      and saying at the end “don’t do what I did,” (which seldom carries any
      weight if ever) she chose not to tell at all.



      Whether it mattered to her or not Brooksie knew that in her day “spilling
      the sexual beans” could ruin a career; today it enhances it. (If you ever
      have to stand in line in a grocery store, you know which celebrities are
      doing what because the tabloids are in plain sight whether you want to see
      them or not.)



      Anita M.



      _____

      From: thenewcovenoflouisebrooks@yahoogroups.com
      [mailto:thenewcovenoflouisebrooks@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Chuck Golden
      Sent: Monday, May 07, 2007 8:06 AM
      To: thenewcovenoflouisebrooks@yahoogroups.com
      Subject: Re: [The New Coven of Louise Brooks] Psychological Profile?



      Perri Lee,

      She said several times that one of the reasons she wouldn't publish her
      biography was that to do it properly would mean spilling all the sexual
      beans and that she had concerns about what this could potentially do to
      influence young girls. She admitted to her priest in the mid-50s that when
      she read about drinking she wanted a drink and when she read about sex she
      got excited. So she opted not to publish her memoirs out of concern for
      impressionable young women. On the one hand, she wouldn't renounce her
      lifestyle (standing toe-to-toe with her priest), on the other hand she was
      concerned about having young girls see her habits and lifestyle as desirable
      and exciting. Therein lies one of the many apparant contradictions of
      Louise Brooks. In fact, it's not so much a contradiction as a proof of her
      brutal, flint-like honesty. I am what I am, I don't plan on being anything
      but what I am, and you don't want to be what I am.

      I'm not sure what you mean about the "twisted religions beliefs of her
      region and her day". The only periods in her life where religion was
      mentioned was a very short period in her mid-teens when she attended a
      Protestant church (in Wichita and staying just long enough to evidently have
      a fling with an older man in the church before moving to Manhatten), and for
      ten years as a Catholic between 1954 and 1964 in New York. I certainly don't
      see either of them as being twisted in either location. Except for the
      Catholic period, I think Louise's attitude towards religion was ambivalence
      rather than antagonism. Interestingly, despite her declaring that she left
      the Church in 1964, when she died one of the few things of note in her
      little apartment was a crucifix at the end of her bed. I think she had a
      statue of the Virgin on her dresser as well. If she saw the religious
      beliefs of her day as twisted she never hinted at that opinion.

      Cheers!

      >
      > I have to add one more thing to all of this. I think she did not want to
      publish her own bio or let anyone else do it because of all the escapades
      she was involved in aka party girl. I think this was also mixed with the
      twisted religious beliefs of her region and her day. Perri Lee





      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • nutsaboutclara
      That s quite true, Olive. Brooksie always wanted to control the situation, so that she could be the center of attention. It was that way at home, when she
      Message 2 of 29 , May 7, 2007
      • 0 Attachment
        That's quite true, Olive. Brooksie always wanted to control the
        situation, so that she could be the center of attention. It was that
        way at home, when she and her mother bickered, and it continued well
        into adulthood. She was her own marching band, which turned a lot of
        people off, that's for sure.

        -Dario.


        --- In thenewcovenoflouisebrooks@yahoogroups.com, olive_e_thomas
        <no_reply@...> wrote:
        >
        > The way I look at it she was more concerned about the loss of
        > personal control. Like if Oprah had tried to put her book in her
        > book club Louise would likely refuse on the grounds any
        > success would "belong" to Oprah and not to her...
        >
      • nutsaboutclara
        She was a very willful person, Chuck; it was her way and nothing else. Clara Bow was like that to an extent, but she was outgoing and cheerful towards all
        Message 3 of 29 , May 7, 2007
        • 0 Attachment
          She was a very willful person, Chuck; it was her way and nothing
          else. Clara Bow was like that to an extent, but she was outgoing and
          cheerful towards all that met Clara. But Brooksie was moody,
          taciturn at times, and an intelectual snob, who thought that she was
          above everyone when it came film(film history, film making, actors &
          actresses, etc.), literature, politics, sex, male/female
          relationships, etc. And, very opinionated. But, I love her for it,
          because she would be who she was if she wasn't that in the first
          place. I marvel at her strong sense of independence. That made her
          stand out more than her contemporaries.

          -Dario.



          --- In thenewcovenoflouisebrooks@yahoogroups.com, "Chuck Golden"
          <bagnoli2@...> wrote:
          >
          > I think you've hit on one of THE major aspects of her personality.
          All
          > through the Paris bio, especially towards the end, it's evident
          that
          > she had to be in control - not so much in control of the people but
          in
          > control of the situation. Ken Tynan wrote the blockbuster
          piece "The
          > Girl in the Black Helmet" for the New Yorker which shot her back to
          the
          > top of the public consciousness. Not long afterwards, she got word
          > from him that he'd been out on the West Coast discussing (without
          her
          > knowing it) a bio-pic with a major Hollywood director. She went
          > ballistic, refused any thought of letting the film be done (despite
          the
          > increased fame and money), and cut Ken Tynan off forever. She
          > excoriated him for having the temerity of discussing a project that
          > involved her behind her back. The evident botton line is that she
          > wouldn't agree to putting herself and her story in a situation
          where
          > she couldn't be 100% in control of it.
          >
          > Now, as to why she was so much that way... any psycologists out
          there?
          > Certainly, she was her mother's daughter and the apple seldom falls
          far
          > from the tree. But she was far too complex for it to be something
          as
          > simple as that.
          >
          >
          > --- In thenewcovenoflouisebrooks@yahoogroups.com, olive_e_thomas
          > <no_reply@> wrote:
          > >
          > > The way I look at it she was more concerned about the loss of
          > > personal control. Like if Oprah had tried to put her book in her
          > > book club Louise would likely refuse on the grounds any
          > > success would "belong" to Oprah and not to her...
          > >
          >
        • olive_e_thomas
          I doubt that Louise had much concern for ruining the morals of children (she seemed more from the WC Fields school of child-care in that respect). My guess is
          Message 4 of 29 , May 7, 2007
          • 0 Attachment
            I doubt that Louise had much concern for ruining the morals of
            children (she seemed more from the WC Fields school of
            child-care in that respect). My guess is - assuming she really
            ever wrote a full memoir - she just didn't like the snot-nosed little
            brat she came off sounding like in print and opted for a more
            selective approach. Or the final result just looks like crap and it
            was easier to torch than try and rewrite...

            It could also be that she opted for little set pieces instead of one
            whole go so that she could improve her writing skills as she
            went.

            But "social responsibilty" and "Louise Brooks" are two sets of
            words that just don't seem to go together...

            --- In thenewcovenoflouisebrooks@yahoogroups.com, "Anita M"
            <Woodsy@...> wrote:
            >
            > IMO she was being socially responsible; particularly in respect
            to underage
            > girls, who (judging from my own experience) are
            impressionable and most
            > likely to seek out those kinds of stories. At that point in my life,
            illegal
            > drug use and being an underachiever was glorified. I knew
            people who bought
            > into that and regretted it later. Instead of writing about her
            adventures
            > and saying at the end "don't do what I did," (which seldom
            carries any
            > weight if ever) she chose not to tell at all.
            >
            >
            >
            > Whether it mattered to her or not Brooksie knew that in her day
            "spilling
            > the sexual beans" could ruin a career; today it enhances it. (If
            you ever
            > have to stand in line in a grocery store, you know which
            celebrities are
            > doing what because the tabloids are in plain sight whether you
            want to see
            > them or not.)
            >
            >
            >
            > Anita M.
            >
            >
            >
            > _____
            >
            > From: thenewcovenoflouisebrooks@yahoogroups.com
            > [mailto:thenewcovenoflouisebrooks@yahoogroups.com] On
            Behalf Of Chuck Golden
            > Sent: Monday, May 07, 2007 8:06 AM
            > To: thenewcovenoflouisebrooks@yahoogroups.com
            > Subject: Re: [The New Coven of Louise Brooks] Psychological
            Profile?
            >
            >
            >
            > Perri Lee,
            >
            > She said several times that one of the reasons she wouldn't
            publish her
            > biography was that to do it properly would mean spilling all the
            sexual
            > beans and that she had concerns about what this could
            potentially do to
            > influence young girls. She admitted to her priest in the mid-50s
            that when
            > she read about drinking she wanted a drink and when she
            read about sex she
            > got excited. So she opted not to publish her memoirs out of
            concern for
            > impressionable young women. On the one hand, she wouldn't
            renounce her
            > lifestyle (standing toe-to-toe with her priest), on the other hand
            she was
            > concerned about having young girls see her habits and
            lifestyle as desirable
            > and exciting. Therein lies one of the many apparant
            contradictions of
            > Louise Brooks. In fact, it's not so much a contradiction as a
            proof of her
            > brutal, flint-like honesty. I am what I am, I don't plan on being
            anything
            > but what I am, and you don't want to be what I am.
            >
            > I'm not sure what you mean about the "twisted religions beliefs
            of her
            > region and her day". The only periods in her life where religion
            was
            > mentioned was a very short period in her mid-teens when she
            attended a
            > Protestant church (in Wichita and staying just long enough to
            evidently have
            > a fling with an older man in the church before moving to
            Manhatten), and for
            > ten years as a Catholic between 1954 and 1964 in New York. I
            certainly don't
            > see either of them as being twisted in either location. Except
            for the
            > Catholic period, I think Louise's attitude towards religion was
            ambivalence
            > rather than antagonism. Interestingly, despite her declaring
            that she left
            > the Church in 1964, when she died one of the few things of
            note in her
            > little apartment was a crucifix at the end of her bed. I think she
            had a
            > statue of the Virgin on her dresser as well. If she saw the
            religious
            > beliefs of her day as twisted she never hinted at that opinion.
            >
            > Cheers!
            >
            > >
            > > I have to add one more thing to all of this. I think she did not
            want to
            > publish her own bio or let anyone else do it because of all the
            escapades
            > she was involved in aka party girl. I think this was also mixed
            with the
            > twisted religious beliefs of her region and her day. Perri Lee
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
            >
          • nutsaboutclara
            HEAR, HEAR!!! Discriminatory would probably be a better word for what Brooksie was all about, in respect to people, art, literature, etc. You hit the nail on
            Message 5 of 29 , May 9, 2007
            • 0 Attachment
              HEAR, HEAR!!! Discriminatory would probably be a better word for
              what Brooksie was all about, in respect to people, art, literature,
              etc. You hit the nail on the head perfectly, Olive. Kudos!

              -Dario.


              --- In thenewcovenoflouisebrooks@yahoogroups.com, olive_e_thomas
              <no_reply@...> wrote:
              >
              > I doubt that Louise had much concern for ruining the morals of
              > children (she seemed more from the WC Fields school of
              > child-care in that respect). My guess is - assuming she really
              > ever wrote a full memoir - she just didn't like the snot-nosed
              little
              > brat she came off sounding like in print and opted for a more
              > selective approach. Or the final result just looks like crap and
              it
              > was easier to torch than try and rewrite...
              >
              > It could also be that she opted for little set pieces instead of
              one
              > whole go so that she could improve her writing skills as she
              > went.
              >
              > But "social responsibilty" and "Louise Brooks" are two sets of
              > words that just don't seem to go together...
              >
              > --- In thenewcovenoflouisebrooks@yahoogroups.com, "Anita M"
              > <Woodsy@> wrote:
              > >
              > > IMO she was being socially responsible; particularly in respect
              > to underage
              > > girls, who (judging from my own experience) are
              > impressionable and most
              > > likely to seek out those kinds of stories. At that point in my
              life,
              > illegal
              > > drug use and being an underachiever was glorified. I knew
              > people who bought
              > > into that and regretted it later. Instead of writing about her
              > adventures
              > > and saying at the end "don't do what I did," (which seldom
              > carries any
              > > weight if ever) she chose not to tell at all.
              > >
              > >
              > >
              > > Whether it mattered to her or not Brooksie knew that in her day
              > "spilling
              > > the sexual beans" could ruin a career; today it enhances it. (If
              > you ever
              > > have to stand in line in a grocery store, you know which
              > celebrities are
              > > doing what because the tabloids are in plain sight whether you
              > want to see
              > > them or not.)
              > >
              > >
              > >
              > > Anita M.
              > >
              > >
              > >
              > > _____
              > >
              > > From: thenewcovenoflouisebrooks@yahoogroups.com
              > > [mailto:thenewcovenoflouisebrooks@yahoogroups.com] On
              > Behalf Of Chuck Golden
              > > Sent: Monday, May 07, 2007 8:06 AM
              > > To: thenewcovenoflouisebrooks@yahoogroups.com
              > > Subject: Re: [The New Coven of Louise Brooks] Psychological
              > Profile?
              > >
              > >
              > >
              > > Perri Lee,
              > >
              > > She said several times that one of the reasons she wouldn't
              > publish her
              > > biography was that to do it properly would mean spilling all the
              > sexual
              > > beans and that she had concerns about what this could
              > potentially do to
              > > influence young girls. She admitted to her priest in the mid-50s
              > that when
              > > she read about drinking she wanted a drink and when she
              > read about sex she
              > > got excited. So she opted not to publish her memoirs out of
              > concern for
              > > impressionable young women. On the one hand, she wouldn't
              > renounce her
              > > lifestyle (standing toe-to-toe with her priest), on the other
              hand
              > she was
              > > concerned about having young girls see her habits and
              > lifestyle as desirable
              > > and exciting. Therein lies one of the many apparant
              > contradictions of
              > > Louise Brooks. In fact, it's not so much a contradiction as a
              > proof of her
              > > brutal, flint-like honesty. I am what I am, I don't plan on
              being
              > anything
              > > but what I am, and you don't want to be what I am.
              > >
              > > I'm not sure what you mean about the "twisted religions beliefs
              > of her
              > > region and her day". The only periods in her life where religion
              > was
              > > mentioned was a very short period in her mid-teens when she
              > attended a
              > > Protestant church (in Wichita and staying just long enough to
              > evidently have
              > > a fling with an older man in the church before moving to
              > Manhatten), and for
              > > ten years as a Catholic between 1954 and 1964 in New York. I
              > certainly don't
              > > see either of them as being twisted in either location. Except
              > for the
              > > Catholic period, I think Louise's attitude towards religion was
              > ambivalence
              > > rather than antagonism. Interestingly, despite her declaring
              > that she left
              > > the Church in 1964, when she died one of the few things of
              > note in her
              > > little apartment was a crucifix at the end of her bed. I think
              she
              > had a
              > > statue of the Virgin on her dresser as well. If she saw the
              > religious
              > > beliefs of her day as twisted she never hinted at that opinion.
              > >
              > > Cheers!
              > >
              > > >
              > > > I have to add one more thing to all of this. I think she did
              not
              > want to
              > > publish her own bio or let anyone else do it because of all the
              > escapades
              > > she was involved in aka party girl. I think this was also mixed
              > with the
              > > twisted religious beliefs of her region and her day. Perri Lee
              > >
              > >
              > >
              > >
              > >
              > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
              > >
              >
            • Anita M.
              Now I m confused. Chuck said She said several times that one of the reasons she wouldn t publish her biography was that to do it properly would mean spilling
              Message 6 of 29 , May 9, 2007
              • 0 Attachment
                Now I'm confused.

                Chuck said "She said several times that one of the reasons she
                wouldn't publish her biography was that to do it properly would mean
                spilling all the sexual beans and that she had concerns about what
                this could potentially do to influence young girls. She admitted to
                her priest in the mid-50s that when she read about drinking she
                wanted a drink and when she read about sex she got excited. So she
                opted not to publish her memoirs out of concern for impressionable
                young women."

                But then, some people say one thing one day and the opposite another
                day - maybe a way to hold onto a little privacy.

                Anita M.


                --- In thenewcovenoflouisebrooks@yahoogroups.com, olive_e_thomas
                <no_reply@...> wrote:
                >
                > I doubt that Louise had much concern for ruining the morals of
                > children (she seemed more from the WC Fields school of
                > child-care in that respect). My guess is - assuming she really
                > ever wrote a full memoir - she just didn't like the snot-nosed
                little
                > brat she came off sounding like in print and opted for a more
                > selective approach. Or the final result just looks like crap and it
                > was easier to torch than try and rewrite...
                >
                > It could also be that she opted for little set pieces instead of
                one
                > whole go so that she could improve her writing skills as she
                > went.
                >
                > But "social responsibilty" and "Louise Brooks" are two sets of
                > words that just don't seem to go together...
                >
                > --- In thenewcovenoflouisebrooks@yahoogroups.com, "Anita M"
                > <Woodsy@> wrote:
                > >
                > > IMO she was being socially responsible; particularly in respect
                > to underage
                > > girls, who (judging from my own experience) are
                > impressionable and most
                > > likely to seek out those kinds of stories. At that point in my
                life,
                > illegal
                > > drug use and being an underachiever was glorified. I knew
                > people who bought
                > > into that and regretted it later. Instead of writing about her
                > adventures
                > > and saying at the end "don't do what I did," (which seldom
                > carries any
                > > weight if ever) she chose not to tell at all.
                > >
                > >
                > >
                > > Whether it mattered to her or not Brooksie knew that in her day
                > "spilling
                > > the sexual beans" could ruin a career; today it enhances it. (If
                > you ever
                > > have to stand in line in a grocery store, you know which
                > celebrities are
                > > doing what because the tabloids are in plain sight whether you
                > want to see
                > > them or not.)
                > >
                > >
                > >
                > > Anita M.
                > >
                > >
                > >
                > > _____
                > >
                > > From: thenewcovenoflouisebrooks@yahoogroups.com
                > > [mailto:thenewcovenoflouisebrooks@yahoogroups.com] On
                > Behalf Of Chuck Golden
                > > Sent: Monday, May 07, 2007 8:06 AM
                > > To: thenewcovenoflouisebrooks@yahoogroups.com
                > > Subject: Re: [The New Coven of Louise Brooks] Psychological
                > Profile?
                > >
                > >
                > >
                > > Perri Lee,
                > >
                > > She said several times that one of the reasons she wouldn't
                > publish her
                > > biography was that to do it properly would mean spilling all the
                > sexual
                > > beans and that she had concerns about what this could
                > potentially do to
                > > influence young girls. She admitted to her priest in the mid-50s
                > that when
                > > she read about drinking she wanted a drink and when she
                > read about sex she
                > > got excited. So she opted not to publish her memoirs out of
                > concern for
                > > impressionable young women. On the one hand, she wouldn't
                > renounce her
                > > lifestyle (standing toe-to-toe with her priest), on the other
                hand
                > she was
                > > concerned about having young girls see her habits and
                > lifestyle as desirable
                > > and exciting. Therein lies one of the many apparant
                > contradictions of
                > > Louise Brooks. In fact, it's not so much a contradiction as a
                > proof of her
                > > brutal, flint-like honesty. I am what I am, I don't plan on being
                > anything
                > > but what I am, and you don't want to be what I am.
                > >
                > > I'm not sure what you mean about the "twisted religions beliefs
                > of her
                > > region and her day". The only periods in her life where religion
                > was
                > > mentioned was a very short period in her mid-teens when she
                > attended a
                > > Protestant church (in Wichita and staying just long enough to
                > evidently have
                > > a fling with an older man in the church before moving to
                > Manhatten), and for
                > > ten years as a Catholic between 1954 and 1964 in New York. I
                > certainly don't
                > > see either of them as being twisted in either location. Except
                > for the
                > > Catholic period, I think Louise's attitude towards religion was
                > ambivalence
                > > rather than antagonism. Interestingly, despite her declaring
                > that she left
                > > the Church in 1964, when she died one of the few things of
                > note in her
                > > little apartment was a crucifix at the end of her bed. I think
                she
                > had a
                > > statue of the Virgin on her dresser as well. If she saw the
                > religious
                > > beliefs of her day as twisted she never hinted at that opinion.
                > >
                > > Cheers!
                > >
                > > >
                > > > I have to add one more thing to all of this. I think she did
                not
                > want to
                > > publish her own bio or let anyone else do it because of all the
                > escapades
                > > she was involved in aka party girl. I think this was also mixed
                > with the
                > > twisted religious beliefs of her region and her day. Perri Lee
                > >
                > >
                > >
                > >
                > >
                > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                > >
                >
              • olive_e_thomas
                Some clue as to her reasoning might be found in her comments after turning down Playboy magazine for a writing job all they want is (an article about) tits
                Message 7 of 29 , May 9, 2007
                • 0 Attachment
                  Some clue as to her reasoning might be found in her comments
                  after turning down Playboy magazine for a writing job "all they
                  want is (an article about) tits and free-fucking for men."

                  --- In thenewcovenoflouisebrooks@yahoogroups.com, "Anita M."
                  <Woodsy@...> wrote:
                  >
                  > Now I'm confused.
                  >
                  > Chuck said "She said several times that one of the reasons
                  she
                  > wouldn't publish her biography was that to do it properly would
                  mean
                  > spilling all the sexual beans and that she had concerns about
                  what
                  > this could potentially do to influence young girls. She admitted
                  to
                  > her priest in the mid-50s that when she read about drinking
                  she
                  > wanted a drink and when she read about sex she got excited.
                  So she
                  > opted not to publish her memoirs out of concern for
                  impressionable
                  > young women."
                  >
                  > But then, some people say one thing one day and the opposite
                  another
                  > day - maybe a way to hold onto a little privacy.
                  >
                  > Anita M.
                  >
                  >
                • nutsaboutclara
                  Brooksie was trying to protect herself from what others said about her. She never did trust people whom she met and later talked trash about her. Brooksie
                  Message 8 of 29 , May 12, 2007
                  • 0 Attachment
                    Brooksie was trying to protect herself from what others said about
                    her. She never did trust people whom she met and later talked trash
                    about her. Brooksie was one tough egg to crack, that's for sure.

                    -Dario.


                    --- In thenewcovenoflouisebrooks@yahoogroups.com, "Anita M."
                    <Woodsy@...> wrote:
                    >
                    > Now I'm confused.
                    >
                    > Chuck said "She said several times that one of the reasons she
                    > wouldn't publish her biography was that to do it properly would
                    mean
                    > spilling all the sexual beans and that she had concerns about what
                    > this could potentially do to influence young girls. She admitted
                    to
                    > her priest in the mid-50s that when she read about drinking she
                    > wanted a drink and when she read about sex she got excited. So she
                    > opted not to publish her memoirs out of concern for impressionable
                    > young women."
                    >
                    > But then, some people say one thing one day and the opposite
                    another
                    > day - maybe a way to hold onto a little privacy.
                    >
                    > Anita M.
                    >
                    >
                    > --- In thenewcovenoflouisebrooks@yahoogroups.com, olive_e_thomas
                    > <no_reply@> wrote:
                    > >
                    > > I doubt that Louise had much concern for ruining the morals of
                    > > children (she seemed more from the WC Fields school of
                    > > child-care in that respect). My guess is - assuming she really
                    > > ever wrote a full memoir - she just didn't like the snot-nosed
                    > little
                    > > brat she came off sounding like in print and opted for a more
                    > > selective approach. Or the final result just looks like crap and
                    it
                    > > was easier to torch than try and rewrite...
                    > >
                    > > It could also be that she opted for little set pieces instead of
                    > one
                    > > whole go so that she could improve her writing skills as she
                    > > went.
                    > >
                    > > But "social responsibilty" and "Louise Brooks" are two sets of
                    > > words that just don't seem to go together...
                    > >
                    > > --- In thenewcovenoflouisebrooks@yahoogroups.com, "Anita M"
                    > > <Woodsy@> wrote:
                    > > >
                    > > > IMO she was being socially responsible; particularly in
                    respect
                    > > to underage
                    > > > girls, who (judging from my own experience) are
                    > > impressionable and most
                    > > > likely to seek out those kinds of stories. At that point in my
                    > life,
                    > > illegal
                    > > > drug use and being an underachiever was glorified. I knew
                    > > people who bought
                    > > > into that and regretted it later. Instead of writing about her
                    > > adventures
                    > > > and saying at the end "don't do what I did," (which seldom
                    > > carries any
                    > > > weight if ever) she chose not to tell at all.
                    > > >
                    > > >
                    > > >
                    > > > Whether it mattered to her or not Brooksie knew that in her
                    day
                    > > "spilling
                    > > > the sexual beans" could ruin a career; today it enhances it.
                    (If
                    > > you ever
                    > > > have to stand in line in a grocery store, you know which
                    > > celebrities are
                    > > > doing what because the tabloids are in plain sight whether you
                    > > want to see
                    > > > them or not.)
                    > > >
                    > > >
                    > > >
                    > > > Anita M.
                    > > >
                    > > >
                    > > >
                    > > > _____
                    > > >
                    > > > From: thenewcovenoflouisebrooks@yahoogroups.com
                    > > > [mailto:thenewcovenoflouisebrooks@yahoogroups.com] On
                    > > Behalf Of Chuck Golden
                    > > > Sent: Monday, May 07, 2007 8:06 AM
                    > > > To: thenewcovenoflouisebrooks@yahoogroups.com
                    > > > Subject: Re: [The New Coven of Louise Brooks] Psychological
                    > > Profile?
                    > > >
                    > > >
                    > > >
                    > > > Perri Lee,
                    > > >
                    > > > She said several times that one of the reasons she wouldn't
                    > > publish her
                    > > > biography was that to do it properly would mean spilling all
                    the
                    > > sexual
                    > > > beans and that she had concerns about what this could
                    > > potentially do to
                    > > > influence young girls. She admitted to her priest in the mid-
                    50s
                    > > that when
                    > > > she read about drinking she wanted a drink and when she
                    > > read about sex she
                    > > > got excited. So she opted not to publish her memoirs out of
                    > > concern for
                    > > > impressionable young women. On the one hand, she wouldn't
                    > > renounce her
                    > > > lifestyle (standing toe-to-toe with her priest), on the other
                    > hand
                    > > she was
                    > > > concerned about having young girls see her habits and
                    > > lifestyle as desirable
                    > > > and exciting. Therein lies one of the many apparant
                    > > contradictions of
                    > > > Louise Brooks. In fact, it's not so much a contradiction as a
                    > > proof of her
                    > > > brutal, flint-like honesty. I am what I am, I don't plan on
                    being
                    > > anything
                    > > > but what I am, and you don't want to be what I am.
                    > > >
                    > > > I'm not sure what you mean about the "twisted religions
                    beliefs
                    > > of her
                    > > > region and her day". The only periods in her life where
                    religion
                    > > was
                    > > > mentioned was a very short period in her mid-teens when she
                    > > attended a
                    > > > Protestant church (in Wichita and staying just long enough to
                    > > evidently have
                    > > > a fling with an older man in the church before moving to
                    > > Manhatten), and for
                    > > > ten years as a Catholic between 1954 and 1964 in New York. I
                    > > certainly don't
                    > > > see either of them as being twisted in either location. Except
                    > > for the
                    > > > Catholic period, I think Louise's attitude towards religion
                    was
                    > > ambivalence
                    > > > rather than antagonism. Interestingly, despite her declaring
                    > > that she left
                    > > > the Church in 1964, when she died one of the few things of
                    > > note in her
                    > > > little apartment was a crucifix at the end of her bed. I think
                    > she
                    > > had a
                    > > > statue of the Virgin on her dresser as well. If she saw the
                    > > religious
                    > > > beliefs of her day as twisted she never hinted at that opinion.
                    > > >
                    > > > Cheers!
                    > > >
                    > > > >
                    > > > > I have to add one more thing to all of this. I think she did
                    > not
                    > > want to
                    > > > publish her own bio or let anyone else do it because of all
                    the
                    > > escapades
                    > > > she was involved in aka party girl. I think this was also
                    mixed
                    > > with the
                    > > > twisted religious beliefs of her region and her day. Perri Lee
                    > > >
                    > > >
                    > > >
                    > > >
                    > > >
                    > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                    > > >
                    > >
                    >
                  Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.