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

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

Expand Messages
  • 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 1 of 29 , May 7, 2007
      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 2 of 29 , May 7, 2007
        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 3 of 29 , May 9, 2007
          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 4 of 29 , May 9, 2007
            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 5 of 29 , May 9, 2007
              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 6 of 29 , May 12, 2007
                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.