#i love old movies from the 1930s through 1950s especially

[postwarlevi]

Hi hi hi! Just swooping in with some random questions to get to know you :P do you have any pets? If not, what’s your dream pet? What is your favorite aesthetic? Do you have a favorite hobby? And finally, what was your motivation to start this blog? Have a wonderful day, hope you’re doing well!

Hi anon! Hope your day is well :) Thank you so much for sending me some fun stuff!

I do have pets! 4 cats! They're all in this post. Jazz is my good boy, Jinx is my bad kitty, Sidney still acts like a kitten even though he's grown, Jackson dislikes me because be associates me with Jinx who is a brat LOL

So, IDK about dream pet, but one day when I have less cats, if I'm in a good place to provide the care, I would like to take on a CH cat. Cerebellar Hypoplasia is also known as wobbly cat syndrome (although other animals can get it too) and it affects the portion of their brain that gives them balance and motor skills. There's different severities of the condition but really these cats can live a long, happy life!

Alternatively I lost two cats to FeLV, leukemia, and if I'm cat-less would like to open my home to some positive FeLV cats since it can be spread by close contact and there's no way to completely prevent spreading it. So yeah, more cats :)

Favorite aesthetic? Hmm, I don't know if I have an answer since I feel like I don't know a lot of them, at all haha. But my first answer would be the well know cottagecore. Simple, country style, gardening, baking, loose fitting flowy dresses. It's safe to say that's my favorite.

I'm not very exciting with hobbies. I like reading, baking, and watching old movies! I'm terrible at multitasking so I can't do all the things in one day, so some days I bake all day, some times I'll watch 3 or 4 movies. If I'm in a mood, I stick with it, and the others suffer for a little while. Oops.

My motivation was really trying to find somewhere to connect with other Attack on Titan fans. I don't do much with any social media platform so this was a big jump but it looked like the right one. I looked around a lot before posting and started following people and posting on their stuff, then sharing, and eventually was encouraged to share my own writing, which I really wanted to do! Waaay back when I started writing fanfic and AOT got me back into it! I'm thankful for this site and the people I've connected with :)

[365days365movies]

Western August I: Stagecoach (1939) - Recap and Review

Let’s start at the beginning...almost,

The Western arguably was born with the 1903 film, The Great Train Robbery. This 12-minute short film is a classic, and one of the earliest achievements in film-making. It’s also, unsurprisingly, a Western, and based on an actual train robbery. At the time it was made, the Wild West had only really ended a few years prior, with its heyday being about 40 years past. Which, yeah, is CRAZY. People who remembered the Wild West lived into the 1950s and ‘60s. It seems like so long ago, and it was, but it was still relatively recent from a historical standpoint.

From then, the Western remained a staple of cinema, and would be so for over half a century. And then, enter John Ford. Born in 1894, the Irish American director began his career in 1914 as an assistant and handyman, often working with his older brother Francis. Eventually, John took his place as a director, starting with silent films, especially westerns. Starting with the very successful film The Iron Horse in 1924, he quickly rose to stardom. He transitioned from silent films to talkies pretty effortlessly, and continued his streak. All the while, he was also one of the first directors to have a roster of actors in his company. You know how Tim Burton always uses Johnny Depp and Helena Bonham Carter? Or how the Coen Brothers always use Frances McDormand and John Goodman? Or Wes Andersen with Bill Murray and Owen Wilson? Yeah, that started with John Ford and...ugh...

Before I start...fuck John Wayne.

Dude was a racist homophobic asshole, and absolutely a dick. Look it up, or don’t if you’d rather not have one of cinemas most iconic faces completely ruined for you. But OK, outside of that one time that he said that the Native Americans were “selfishly trying to keep the land for themselves”, or that he believed in white supremacy over uneducated blacks...yeah, he’s a DICK...

Marion Robert Morrison was born in Iowa in 1907, and began his film career after becoming injured while surfing without a surfboard and ending his football career. Yes, really. His football coach was a friend of a film director named John Ford, who hired Morrison as a favor to him. Said football coach was also friends with an actual remnant of the Old West: WYATT FUCKING EARP. YEAH.

For years, Morrison was a bit player until starring in the film The Big Trail in 1930, a Western directed by Raoul Walsh. And he wasn’t exactly famous after this, but it was with this film that he took up a screen name: John Wayne, after a Revolutionary War general, Anthony Wayne, and...well, the name John. Anthony sounded too Italian. Yes, really. After this movie, Wayne continued to star in more Westerns, and even became one of the first film cowboys to sing on camera. 

And then, 1939 came along, and John Ford came to him with a new film project. Being a classic Western, the film was about a group of settlers riding on a stagecoach together through the West. Strangers to each other, they find themselves attacked by a group of Native Americans belonging to the Apache tribes. This film, an adaptation of a 1939 short story, would come to be known as Stagecoach. And it would launch Ford, Wayne, and the Western genre into a Golden Age. So no more navel-gazing, let’s get started!

SPOILERS AHEAD!!!

Recap

I get reminded that I haven’t watched a Criterion Collection film in a while, and the film begins with a rousing Western theme, courtesy of...holy shit, this movie has SEVEN COMPOSERS? Well, OK, courtesy of somebody in that list of seven. From there, we cut to a camp somewhere in the Arizona Territory in 1880. Which, again, is only 60 years prior to this film’s release date. There, a group of men discuss the danger imposed on them by the Apache, stirred up by the legendary warrior Geronimo. 

And from there, we go to the town of Tonto, where stagecoach driver Buck (Andy Devine) lets a group of passengers out. One of these passengers is Lucy Mallory (Louise Platt), there to catch another shuttle to meet her husband in Dry Fork, New Mexico. However, the stagecoach gains an extra passenger in the form of the Marshal, Curley Wilcox (George Bancroft), who goes to find an outlaw also in Lordsburg.

The passenger list builds with the addition of Doc Boone (Thomas Mitchell) and Dallas (Claire Trevor), a drunk and a prostitute both driven out of town by the Law and Order League of Women, due to social stigma affecting them both. In a bar getting a farewell drink, Doc meets yet one more passenger, Samuel Peacock (Donald Meek), a whiskey salesman that Doc is glad to meet. Meanwhile, banker Henry Gatewood (Berton Churchill) also boards the vehicle, under mysterious circumstances.

Friends of Lucy are worried with her travelling a drunk and a prostitute (the ABSOLUTE SCANDAL), but she needs to visit her husband in Dry Fork. As she leaves, she meets eyes with the dangerous but enigmatic gambler Hatfield (John Carradine). And before they’re able to leave altogether, the carriage is stopped by the army, who warn them of the Apache and Geronimo. All of the passengers refuse to get off, and YET TWO MORE passengers board to protect the carriage: the Marshal and Hatfield. And finally, they’re off! But as they head out, they’re stopped when they encounter a recently escaped outlaw.

This is The Ringo Kid (John Wayne), who just got out of prison. The Marshal sees him, and takes him into custody on the way to Lordsburg, where they plan to drop him off into jail. And yes, he’s put on the fucking stagecoach. In total, we have Buck, the Marshal, Lucy, Hatfield, Doc, Peacock, Gatewood, and the Ringo Kid. Jesus, that’s a crowded-ass carriage, even if two of them are outside of it. Hell, Ringo’s sitting on the fuckin’ floor!

Anyway, the group interacts and introduces themselves. We learn that Doc once patched up Ringo’s brother, and was discharged from the Union Army for drunkenness. We learn that Hatfield is a true southern gentleman, and a veteran of the Confederate army (much to Doc’s ire), and that Ringo’s brother was murdered under mysterious circumstances.

The group gets to Dry Forks, currently under occupation by the army. Said army had accompanied them (outside of the carriage, thank God) to Dry Forks, and are staying there to guard against the Apache. Meanwhile, Lucy’s dismayed to find that her husband isn’t in fact there. This leads to the debate of whether or not the party should go back to Tonto, or head onwards to Lordsburg. Buck wants to go back to Tonto, as does Peacock, while literally everybody else wants to go to Lordsburg. And so, they continue onwards.

Before heading onwards, the group sits for dinner, during which Ringo is the only one to show any form of kindness to Dallas, as everybody else looks down on her for prostitution. Shit, man, they won’t even sit near her at the table. Jesus. Unfortunately, Dallas is used to this cruel treatment, and it allows her to bond with Ringo in her loneliness. Once again, character interactions reveal things about our cast. Lucy is feeling quite ill, and Hatfield reveals that he served under her father in the Confederate Army. 

And from there, the coach continues on through the desert. Buck and the Marshal argue about letting Ringo free, as he aims to continue his feud with the outlaw Luke Plummer and his brothers, despite the fact that he’ll likely be killed by them. It’s for this reason that the Marshal wants to keep Ringo in his custody, as he was good friends with his father and doesn’t want to see him killed by the dangerous Plummers, whom Buck thinks should be taken down regardless.

Inside the coach, the banker reveals that he’s literally a Republican from 2016 (he rants about small government, and claims that a businessman should be President, holy shit), while people keep treating Dallas like shit, except for Ringo. They go through a cold mountain pass, which isn’t great for Lucy for some reason. It’s actually quite rough on everyone. Except for Doc Boone, who keeps drinking Peacock’s whiskey samples, which is hilarious.

Finally, the group makes it to the next stop, Apache Wells. There, Lucy discovers that her husband has been severely wounded in a battle with the Apache, and she falls faint. Despite being absolutely SMASHED, Doc sobers up to help her, with the help of Ringo and the Marshal. Meanwhile, Dallas watches over her, despite the rancor that Lucy’s tossed at her this whole time.

The group stays the night, attended to by Chris (Chris Pin-Martin) a Mexican man who’s married to Yakima (Elvira Rios), an Apache woman who...is played by a Mexican singer. Huh. I mean...it’s still technically redface, unfortunately. But then again, the attitude towards Native American actors at this time was...oh boy. And the portrayal of the Mexicans in the camp aren’t exactly great, as a group of them steal the group’s spare horses, meaning that they only have one set of horses to use from here on out.

But amongst the unpleasant is a pleasant surprise, and the reveal of the cause for Lucy’s mysterious condition: she’s pregnant. Or rather, she was, as the baby’s just been delivered, and is being held by Dallas. As the group celebrates, Chris warns Ringo to stay away from Lordsburg, as the Plummers will kill him. But Ringo has something else on his mind.

See, on seeing Dallas with the baby, he finds himself quite in love with her. He finds her outside, and tells her that his father and brothers were killed by the Plummers. In turn, she reveals that her family was massacred on the real-life Superstition Mountain. Their conversation ends in Ringo proposing to Dallas, which she protests to because of her mysterious past.

The next morning, Yakima’s left with Chris’ horse and rifle, and the group worry that she’s gone to tell the Apache. After Gatewood panics about his mysterious valise being possibly stolen, the group packs up and readies themselves to go. But Lucy is, of course, still ill from literally giving birth hours ago. Things are still tense between Lucy and Dallas, despite Dallas taking care of her the entire fucking night. Jesus, lady, that high horse is looking uncomfortable, you should get off it.

Dallas has something else to worry about, as she’s thinking on Ringo’s proposal. She consults with the doctor, who reminds her of her mysterious and checkered past being revealed if she goes. But she doesn’t seem to care, and she decides to accept the proposal. As for the rest, Gatewood’s freakin’ the fuck out. Because of Lucy’s condition, the doctor requests that they don’t leave until a day later. And Gatewood doesn’t give a single shit, as the Apache are close enough. Still, the party decides to stay, at Hatfield’s added insistence.

Ringo and Dallas talk, with Dallas both warning him of the Plummers, and also accepting his proposal. The men are all still arguing about whether or not they should leave, and they note that the Apache are likely between them and their destination. Ringo then takes the opportunity to escape and ride to Lordsburg for revenge on the Plummers. But he stops when he sees smoke signals on the hill. The Apache are coming.

No more waiting, it’s time to GO. Taking the still recovering lady and her newborn child Coyote into the stagecoach, they take off into the desert. Gatewood continues to run his loudmouth, to the ire of Hatfield and Ringo. And Peacock, to my delight, shows some kindness and “Christian charity” to Dallas, as she holds Coyote during the ride. And after all, they’re almost at the ferry!

Ah, shit, the ferry! Looks like the ferry, and the entire town of Lee’s Ferry have been burned. And if they ford the river, all of their supplies could be flooded, or the oxen could drown! Or worse, dysentery could set in! That’s what The Oregon Trail taught me! And yet, despite this, that’s actually EXACTLY what they do! And unlike me literally every time I’ve every tried to cross a river without a ferry, they make it through fine! Realistic educational games my ASS!

But it’s not entirely safe, as the group are being watched by none other than the Apache, who make their way down to intercept the group. In the carriage, meanwhile, the group is thankful that they’ve made their way from danger, and even Gatewood relaxes a little. Doc Boone makes a toast, and everyone seems to be getting along for once.

OH FUCK, PEACOCK GOT HIT!

The girlfriend IMMEDIATELY SAYS, “Now he really is Drew Peacock.” I leave and get boba to soothe my injured spirit from that well-timed joke. And then, the movie continues, and the chase is on! The Apache chase the stagecoach through the desert, and the groups trade gunshots and arrows, with Ringo shooting from the back. Gatewood panics so hard that Doc Boone punches him and IMMEDIATELY knocks him out, as he attends to Peacock’s injuries.

But despite their best efforts, the Apache group catches up to them, although many of them are killed by Ringo, the Marshal, Doc, and Hatfield. In the process, Buck is also shot, and Ringo literally jumps ON THE FUCKING HORSES, and commands them from the front like a goddamn badass. Things begin to get worse, as everybody in the stagecoach runs out of ammo, at the worst possible time. Hatfield only has one bullet remaining, and he considers using it...to kill Lucy! Holy fuck!

And just as he’s about to fire IN HER FUCKING FACE, the sounds of horns ring out as the cavalry arrives. And Hatfield, dick that he is, is shot. I think he was trying to spare her the indignity of being captured by the Apache, but Jesus, man! He collapses, and reveals that his father is a judge in Virginia before he...either passes out or dies, I’m not sure. The group finally gets to Lordsburg, where it turns out that Lucy’s husband is gonna be OK, and wasn’t severely injured. She tanks Dallas for everything that she’s done, and promises to help her should she ever need assistance. Good, finally, the lady needs a goddamn break.

The stagecoach rides through the busy town, and the arrival of the Ringo Kid gets the attention of Luke Plummer (Tom Tyler), who fetches his brothers Hank (Vester Pegg) and Ike (Joe Rickson). Time to get ready for a showdown, it seems. Dallas seems to know this, and goes to Ringo after the living Peacock (yay!) and the not-so-living Hatfield (oof) are brought in for medical help.

Buck’s also OK, but Gatewood isn’t. See, that valise he was carrying was actually full of money, and he had embezzled it from his own bank. He had counted on telegraph lines being down, so that he could escape with his ill-gotten gains, but has no such luck, and is led away in handcuffs! HA!

Ringo, meanwhile, is set to kill Luke Plummer and his brothers. The Marshal lets him escape, and promises to get Dallas safely down to a little ranch he owns in the South. Dallas and Ringo walk off together, and Dallas tries to get him to leave and say goodbye before he goes to his death, and before he finds out about her past (presumably as a prostitute). 

See, they’re actually walking up to a brothel, where Dallas is going to stay and work. Because, yeah, she’s a prostitute. Sucks that she’s been so maligned, because prostitution fuckin’ BUILT the Old West! I guess it’s easier to see that with historical context. As Ringo finds out the truth about Dallas (which he might’ve known all along), he still insists upon marrying her...and upon killing the Plummers.

Doc, meanwhile, goes to the bar where the Plummers are waiting. He tells them that he’ll get them arrested, and Luke swears to come back for him after their business with Ringo is concluded. The brothers head outside, ready for the final showdown. It’s 3 on one, Plummers against Ringo. Ringo fires! A few more shots...then silence. And Dallas mourns.

Except that Ringo wins the fight, and goes back to her! A happy ending! I’m sure that’ll be pretty goddamn rare this month. The Marshal arrives to take Ringo away, and Ringo goes as promised. She asks to ride with him a bit, and the Marshal agrees. He and Doc watch them get on, then cause the horses of the carriage to stampede away, letting Ringo and Dallas escape into the desert, together. And that’s the end!

Y’know...I liked it! I really liked it! 

This movie is often referred to as the greatest Western of all time, and the reason that the Western survived into the next several decades. And honestly, I get it! It was nominated for 7 Academy Awards, and won for Best Supporting Actor (Thomas Mitchell, AKA Doc) and Best Original Score, both of which were quite deserved!

Review time!

Cast and Acting - 9/10: Sure, it’s a little hokey. But at the same time, it’s good classic Hollywood acting! Wayne, Trevor, Mitchell, Carradine, and Devine are standouts for me, all of which serving their roles well. Also, fun fact about Andy Devine: he’s the voice of Friar Tuck in Disney’s Robin Hood! KNEW I recognized that voice!

Plot and Writing - 10/10: Standard plot? Sure. Engaging as hell? Hell yeah! This is just a good story, plain and simple. No holes, no problems, no mistakes, and purely straightforward. Great writing by the original story author, Ernest Haycox, and great screenplay by Dudley Nichols!

Directing and Cinematography - 10/10: Great looking movie, too! All credit to John Ford, unsurprisingly. Cinematographer Bert Glennon also deserves credit for the beautiful landscape shots throughout. Gogeous film, even in black-and-white!

Production and Art Design - 8/10: This is pretty standard Western production design, so not a lot to write home about specifically. However, that doesn’t mean it’s bad. To the contrary, it’s quite good! Just does stand out to me quite as much as other movies. Might be a nitpick, but it’s still something against the film.

Music and Editing - 10/10: No complaints! Seven composers definitely make their presence known, and you can tell that this score heavily informed all Western scores after it. It’s iconic, and it’s perfect for the mood. As for the editing by Otho Lovering and Dorothy Spencer...it’s great! Perfect pacing, well-edited...no complaints whatsoever.

94%, and I had fun with this one!

I honestly did have quite a good time with this one. I can’t really call it a “fun” movie, but it definitely is a good one. Plus, it’s a John Ford/John Wayne film, which is basically a staple of the genre. So, what’s next?

Next: My Darling Clementine (1946), dir. John Ford

[trusting-in-his-love]

maple, harvest, jack-o-lantern, bonfire, and cinnamon.

@jwclapton Thanks for the asks, but ooooo, asking the hard questions here, I see....

Maple- is there a hobby / skill that you’ve always wanted to try but never did?

There are a couple. Horseback riding is one. However, my lower back gives me trouble on and off again, out of the blue always, and because of that, I don't think it would be very good for me to ride horses. Ice skating... again, this because I have really messed up my right ankle, and I'm nervous to give ice skating much of a shot. I tried it ONCE and loved it! I used to Rollerblade and roller skate when I was young, so I found that one time really easy. I only fell once, and funny story... I fell because there was another rink next door, and as I passed the swing doors to that rink, I caught a glimpse through the window of a hockey goalie... my head stayed stationary but my feet kept going... so I landed flat on my back. Yeah.... hockey players will distract me something terrible...

Harvest - what fictional character do you most identify with? Why?

I had to rack my brain on every book I've ever read (that I could think of!). Have I ever identified with any fictional character??? Ok, I guess it doesn't have to be from literature alone- … the character comes from a film series which was derived from a book series (which I've decided I'll never read). In The Thin Man films there are two main characters, and they're a married couple (my favourite cinematic couple!). I think I would have to say I more or less identify with Mrs. Charles. (Disclaimer: Only thing is I don't drink, and these two are always drinking in major excess- so ignore that part, ha!) I generally identify with Nora's overall attitude and behavioral tendencies. (There are probably a few other characters from older films I could choose from... this is off the cuff.)

jack-o-lantern - if you could look like any celebrity, who would you choose?

Ok, I'm gonna go on the premise that it's only for a day, or a week, not forever! Hmmmm... There are a lot of ones to choose from... Janet Leigh, Jennifer Jones, Olivia De Havilland (guess I should say Joan as well), Maureen O'Sullivan, Paulette Goddard, etc....... I think I'd go with Paulette- she had a fantastic smile! -And she was overall lovely looking.

Bonfire - describe your dream house.

Haha, this is difficult because I have soooo many different tastes!

But here's a style of house I can envision living in- (basic layout) A kitchen with a breakfast area, a separate dining room, living room separated from both the kitchen and dining room (not the biggest fan of open concept), half bathroom downstairs, all bedrooms upstairs, one bathroom or one and then a master bathroom as well, a finished third floor with two conjoined rooms so there could be something up there as well as storage space- front porch, back patio, and a sun room also in the back or on the side. A sizable yard... [EDIT: OH AND A STUDY/LIBRARY!!! Duuuuh....]

I've never lived in a big place, so this is extravagant sounding to me, but it's a 'dream' house. I'd be happy with anything I could call my own... and especially if it were a single home, not attached (been there, done that).

Cinnamon - if you had to live in a time period different than the present, which would you choose and where?

There's a lot to that Bible verse that says: “Do not say, “Why were the old days better than these? For it is not wise to ask such questions.” So I wouldn't really want to live in another time-- because they all had their troubles. BUT as the question goes... if I HAD to choose,... I would choose 1940s USA, and my preference would be to have been in my late teens/20s in 1940s. If that could be done, the 1920s would have to be when I was born... 1930s had the great depression... would have lived under FDR presidency, 1940s world war II... Not the happiest of times... so why choose it? Silliest of reasons I suppose, the aesthetic.... some commonplace practices of the time- more interaction with people, less with technology. More people believed that at least there is a God. Modernism wouldn't be so rampage in the majority of churches. People would want to marry and not just hook up, more respect- better chance of finding someone decent. Now, don't get me started on the clothes! Clothes were terrific in the 1930s and '40s,... (and in my 30s it would be the 1950s! I'd take that too! Even 1960s clothes would be nice in my 40s... )... and I'd probably be dead before that dreadful year of 2020 (and I don't refer to only the world wide bug). But man, my oh my... I'd have been subjected to nearly every kind of change..... from cars becoming not so commonplace for every household to a lot of households having 2+, 'operator, could you get me rosemarie 2929?' to cell phones, libraries to google, movie palaces to dvds, and records to mp3s, aeroplanes being relatively new- suddenly we're exploring outer space(!!!) ... a lot of changes, a lot of wars worldwide...

I'm such a mix of a realist and a dreamer, this is the only type of answer I can give. Ha! Terrible of me, I know! =P

Thanks again!

One question for you, why James Cagney?

[lilaccatholic]

Ugh, this article from Vanity Fair (copied below the cut for those of you who have run out of free articles for the month) about how many old Hollywood stars were forced into abortions to keep up their “images”—with some of them being absolutely destroyed by the procedure—is absolutely horrifying. How anyone can look at this and not see how these poor women were abused and manipulated is beyond me.

Abortions were our birth control,” an anonymous actress once said about the common procedure’s place in Hollywood from the 1920s through the 1950s. While patriarchal political powers connive to block women’s legal access to abortion in 21st century America, in Old Hollywood, abortions were far more standard and far more accessible than they often are today—more like aspirin, or appendectomies. How and why did a procedure that was taboo and illegal at the time become so ordinary—at least, among a certain set? 

Much like today, in Old Hollywood, the decisions being made about women’s bodies were made in the interests of men—the powerful heads of motion pictures studios MGM, Paramount Pictures, Warner Bros., and RKO. As Aubrey Malone writes in Hollywood's Second Sex: The Treatment of Women in the Film Industry, 1900-1999, “If you want to play in this business, you play like a man or you’re out. And if you happen to be a woman, better not mention it to anybody.”

From the very infancy of America’s film industry, abortions were necessary body maintenance for women in the spotlight. Birth control, including prophylactics, were about as new as “stars” themselves—movie performers who went overnight from being “Little Mary” or “The Vitagraph Girl” to “America’s Sweetheart” or “Sex Goddess.”

“These newly wealthy men and women didn’t know how to control their money, their bodies, or their lives, spending, cavorting, and reveling in excess,” writes Anne Helen Petersen in Scandals of Classic Hollywood. In the working environment of the Hollywood studio system, society’s 19th-century sexual segregation had fallen away. Women—flappers, It girls, sirens and seductresses—were spared their destiny in the kitchen, and for the first time, they earned large incomes they could spend on whatever and whomever they wished. Many believed the publicity they read about their own erotic powers, and they went toe-to-toe professionally with men. Sparks were bound to fly.

And so it became necessary for the studios to implement reformatory measures to prevent stars from destroying their value through scandal. In 1922, Will H. Hays Hays collaborated with studios to introduce mandatory “morality clauses” into stars’ contracts. Consequently an unintended pregnancy would not only bring shame to these top box-office earners—it would violate studio policy. “[I]t was a common assumption that glamorous stars would not be popular if they had children,” writes Cari Beauchamp in her book on powerful women in Old Hollywood, Without Lying Down.

These clauses may have extended to an actress’s right to marry. According to Petersen, rumor had it that “Blonde Bombshell” Jean Harlow couldn’t wed William Powell because “MGM had written a clause into her contract forbidding her to marry”—a wife couldn’t be a “bombshell,” after all. When Harlow became pregnant from the affair, she called MGM head of publicity Howard Strickling in a panic. Shortly thereafter, according to E.J. Fleming in The Fixers: Eddie Mannix, Howard Strickling and the MGM Publicity Machine, “Mrs. Jean Carpenter” entered Good Shepherd Hospital “to get some rest.” She was seen only by her private doctors and nurses in room 826, the same room she had occupied the year before for an “appendectomy.”

In the 1930s, vamp and man-eating thespian Tallulah Bankhead got “abortions like other women got permanent waves,” biographer Lee Israel quips in Miss Tallulah Bankhead. When virtuous singing sensation Jeanette McDonald found herself pregnant in 1935, MGM studio boss Louis B. Mayer told Strickling to “get rid of the problem.” McDonald soon checked into a hospital with an “ear infection,” according to Fleming’s The Fixers.

Many of these Silent Sex Goddesses either fell victim to their own hedonism, fell out of favor, or burned out, such as Theda Bara and Clara Bow. Others, like Joan Crawford, kept going. Kenneth Anger writes that Crawford was a “gutsy jazz baby” who marched through the “twin holocaust of the Talkies/Crash unscathed” to escape her dirt-poor origins. “Joan knew where she came from,” he continues, “and did not want to go back there.”

Get 1 year for $15.Join Now In 1931 Joan Crawford, estranged from her husband Douglas Fairbanks Jr., became pregnant with what she believed was Clark Gable’s child and Strickling arranged for an abortion. Rather than reveal the truth, Crawford told Fairbanks that during the filming of Rain on Catalina Island, she slipped on the deck of a ship and lost the baby.

Crawford’s rival Bette Davis also willingly chose to have abortions for the sake of her career. Davis was the breadwinner for her entire family—her mother and sister, and her husband, Harmon Nelson, whom she married in 1932. If she’d had a child in 1934, she told her biographer Charlotte Chandler in The Girl Who Walked Home Alone, she would’ve “missed the biggest role in her life thus far”—that of Mildred in Of Human Bondage, which earned Davis her first Oscar nomination. Other great parts—“Jezebel, Judith, Elizabeth, Charlotte, and Margo Channing”—may not have followed, either. “But I didn’t miss any of these roles, and I didn’t miss having a family,” she said. Later in life, Davis had three children.

Her first child, Barbara Davis Sherry—known as B.D.—was born when Davis was 39. As biographer Whitney Stine notes in I’d Love to Kiss You: Conversations with Bette Davis, “she was proud of the fact that, after her abortions, she could have a baby at last and a career, because her mother had always insisted that she couldn’t have both. She never tired of reminding [her mother] that she could be a mother and an actress.”

“A child could wait; her career could not.” That’s the reasoning Jean Harlow’s mother gave about her daughter’s own abortion at age 18. Ava Gardner, too, expressed a similar sentiment when discussing her abortion, which she had when married to Frank Sinatra—unbeknownst to him. “‘MGM had all sorts of penalty clauses about their stars having babies,’” Jane Ellen Wayne quotes Gardner saying in The Golden Girls of MGM. “‘If I had one, my salary would be cut off. So how could I make a living? Frank was broke and my future movies were going to take me all over the world. I couldn’t have a baby with that sort of thing going on. MGM made all the arrangements for me to fly to London. Someone from the studio was with me all the time. The abortion was hush hush . . . very discreet.’”

But things didn’t work out quite so well for Judy Garland. Famous primarily for playing Dorothy in The Wizard of Oz and struggling to maintain both her weight and her image as an ingenue, Garland was never free to make her own choices.

“Married or not, the MGM girls maintained their virginal image,” Wayne observes, and this was especially true of Garland. In 1941, at age 19, she married the bandleader David Rose without the approval of MGM, and within 24 hours was ordered back by to work. When she became pregnant by Rose, her mother, Ethel, in cahoots with the studio, arranged for Garland to have an abortion. Audiences loved her as a child—not as a mother. In 1943, Garland became pregnant from her affair with Tyrone Power, according to Petersen. Strickling arranged for her to have an abortion. Arguably, these incidents affected Garland psychologically; eventually she became the first public victim of stardom.

Tyrone Power also got Lana Turner pregnant. Again, Strickling arranged for an abortion. Power was one of a constellation of male stars—such as Errol Flynn, Clark Gable, and Charlie Chaplin—whose unbridled dalliances left women paying the price, according to The Fixers. (The phrase “In like Flynn” alludes to Errol’s ease at bedding women—and his good fortune at being acquitted of statutory rape of two teenage girls.)

Strickling, who was by now referred to as a “fixer,” had his hands full with Turner. The “Sweater Girl” allegedly found herself pregnant by bandleader Artie Shaw in 1941, and Strickling arranged an abortion during her publicity tour of Hawaii. The procedure took place without anesthesia, on her hotel bed. Turner’s mother covered her mouth with her hand to stifle her daughter’s cries. A studio doctor, paid $500 that was then deducted from Turner’s paycheck, performed the procedure. A week later, she was back on set filming Ziegfeld Girl, according to The Fixers.

Some actresses struggled with whether or not to keep their child. Mexican screen siren Lupe Velez committed suicide in 1944 because she was pregnant by her lover Harald Ramond, who wouldn’t marry her. A devout Catholic, she declined to call “Doctor Killkare” (“the joke name for Tinseltown’s leading abortionist,” according to Kenneth Anger in Hollywood Babylon), and downed 75 Seconal instead, according to Hollywood Babylon.

The decision was equally tragic for Dorothy Dandridge. Otto Preminger had directed her in Carmen Jones and made her a star. When she became pregnant by him in 1955, he refused to divorce his wife and marry her. Dandridge was forced to have an abortion; the studio demanded it, according to Scandals of Classic Hollywood, not only because a child would compromise her image as the sexy Carmen Jones, but also because Preminger was a white man. And, while miscegenation laws were repealed in California in 1948, nationwide they were still very much in place.

Ironically, the rebel of her day was Loretta Young—not because she had an abortion, but because she refused to have one. A devout Catholic, Young journeyed abroad in 1935 to recuperate from a ‘mystery illness,’ after she found herself with child by Clark Gable under shady circumstances—and avoided the press. She gave birth to her daughter at home in Los Angeles. Young initially gave the child up for adoption—and then, a few months later, officially adopted her, according to The Fixers.

In the heyday of the Hollywood studio system, women were at their most desirable and their most powerful—but it still didn’t afford them the right to choose when it came to governing their bodies. Hollywood’s production codes extended to women’s reproduction. In the hundred years or so that have passed since the birth of American cinema, everything has changed—though, then again, perhaps nothing has.

[dweemeister]

Movie Odyssey Retrospective

Cinderella (1950)

In the first few decades of Walt Disney Productions’ (now Walt Disney Animation Studios) existence, the studio veered perilously between periods of feast and famine. The success of Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs (1937), Dumbo (1941), and the modestly-budgeted films of the package era kept the studio afloat despite Walt Disney’s occasionally disastrous business instincts and rotten luck due to World War II cutting off European audiences. With WWII concluded, Disney’s propaganda commitments to the federal government and tightened budgets were no more. With the exception of the aftermath from the release of The Black Cauldron (1985), the studio’s survival has not been seriously endangered since. That is in large part because of the gamble that is Cinderella, directed by Clyde Geronimi, Hamilton Luske, and Wilfred Jackson.

Any rebirth for Disney animated features depended on Cinderella’s success. Not since Dumbo had so much been riding on one of the studio’s movies – especially now as Walt was dividing his attention between animation, live-action features, television, a preliminary plan to build a small play park, and collaborating with the FBI to root out suspected communists at his own studio. More later on Cinderella’s legacy (I think you, the reader, have an idea about what happened to the Disney studios after this), but the film was the fifth highest-grossing movie in North American theaters that year, ahead of Born Yesterday and behind Cheaper by the Dozen and Annie Get Your Gun. In various ways, Cinderella is among the most important movies in the Disney animated canon, even if it does little to nothing to elevate animation in cinema and contains issues that have metastasized in subsequent Disney animated features.

Decades before the Disney name became synonymous with fairy tales and princesses, the writing team assigned to Cinderella used Snow White as their template on this film. The opening minutes of Cinderella share much of Snow White’s alchemy: the opening of an ornate storybook, an orphaned young woman whose lot in life is to be a rag-wearing scullery maid, that same woman singing about dreams to an audience of animals that instinctively know of her kindness. What starts off too similarly like the second coming of Snow White then descends into an overstretched sequence of the animals’ tomfoolery (half the film is dedicated to the animals’ hijinks!).

Cinderella’s animals, unlike those in Snow White, are fully anthropomorphic – they wear clothes, converse with Cinderella in their high-pitched squeak-talking, tiptoe around the obviously villainous cat named Lucifer, and make fools of themselves to entertain the youngest set. In the opening minutes, Cinderella squanders its serviceable musical opening for vapid hilarity as it unlearns the lessons that began with Snow White and reached its apotheosis with Bambi (1942). In works where animals live alongside humans, animal side characters serving as comic relief are most effective and timeless when they behave like animals, not humans. Disney’s animated canon has been hampered by this development – one codified by Cinderella and, in its foulest iterations in recent decades (e.g. 2005′s Chicken Little), originates from commercial, not artistic, decision-making. The excessive screentime for the animals in the film’s opening third and especially the heavily gender-coded dialogue and behavior by the mice – “Leave the sewing to the women!” – is enough to eject Cinderella from the upper echelons of the Disney animated canon.

In my review to Snow White, I wrote that the writing of female characters in Disney’s animated canon films reflects the writers’ understanding of gendered roles in their respective times. Cinderella expressly looked to Snow White for inspiration after two decades where the Great Depression and World War II upended traditional gender norms. In the 1930s and ‘40s, thousands of American women found themselves in traditionally male occupations, altering – if only for a time – popular beliefs about what might be considered masculine or feminine behavior. Over in Burbank at the Disney studios, its departments were segregated by gender (its ink and paint department was solely staffed by women, and there were no significant clusters of women elsewhere in the studio) – insulating it from this phenomenon.

As if foreshadowing the gender-conforming atmosphere of the 1950s, it should not be a surprise that Cinderella cannot envision women beyond a vessel for marriage or a homemaker. With an eye towards a prince to sweep her away from her stepmother and stepsisters, an interesting protagonist Cinderella does not make. And with Cinderella not showcasing as much of her personality as Snow White did, she feels far more inert as a character than her predecessor. However, comparable to Snow White, Cinderella’s life has been one of deprivation and a lack of healthy human interaction – one without quarter, love from others. Knowing little else about life beyond her scullery duties, it is easy to see why she holds such retrograde beliefs for her own salvation.

Cinderella’s rough beginning is nevertheless the prelude to its visual wonderment. The visuals in animated feature films are the collaborative work of hundreds – credited or otherwise – of animators, background artists, character designers, painters, inbetweeners, cinematographers, and more. Sometimes, one particular artist wields an influence that extends across an entire feature. In the correct set of circumstances, they set an aesthetic that alters the artistic direction of animated films for an entire national film industry or a single studio. For Cinderella, its visual beauty is set by its backgrounds. Tyrus Wong’s background art defined Bambi a decade earlier; here, it is Mary Blair’s work that defines Cinderella.

Blair, a modernist whose style fit the films at United Productions of America (UPA; a breakaway studio which was founded by striking Disney animators) better than Disney, had been working at the studio since 1940. She worked through the package films era and on two live-action/animation hybrids in Song of the South (1946) and So Dear to My Heart (1948). But it is Cinderella where Blair’s style – flat, graphic, abstract – is the dominant force of the film. Blair’s buildings and their arches shoot upwards, supported by architecturally impossible reed-thin columns, making rooms cavernous and façades larger than life. The sprawl of these interiors suggests not only the fantastical atmosphere that this fairy tale inhabits, but the grandiosity of Cinderella’s story. The vertical frames of Blair’s buildings are elegant and abstract, never intimidating, as if hailing from a children’s storybook. With the exception of when Cinderella is dancing with (and fleeing) Prince Charming, blues, whites, and sometimes muted greens dominate the scenes of her regal desires – as if shimmering in moonlight.

In character design, three men – all part of the “Nine Old Men” fraternity – served as supervising animators for Cinderella. I find Cinderella’s character design plainly uninteresting, but it is how she moves that will leave awestruck this film’s most vocal detractors. Marc Davis (the three principal animated characters in Song of the South, Alice in 1951’s Alice in Wonderland); Eric Larson (Peter Pan in 1953’s Peter Pan, Mowgli and Bagheera in 1967’s The Jungle Book); and Les Clark (1928’s Steamboat Willie, 1961’s One Hundred and One Dalmatians) made heavy use of rotoscoping in their attempts to animate Cinderella. Rotoscoping, developed by Max Fleischer (and made exclusive to Fleischer Studios by patent from 1915-1934), involves an animator tracing the movements over projected live-action footage as opposed to animating something from scratch or some other form of reference. As an animator traces over the footage, they may add a personal flourish – a delay or embellishment of movement – in the process. For animating humans, adhering completely to human movement via Rotoscope results in footage that looks stilted, as if hailing from a different universe than one created for an animated film. For Davis, Larson, and Clark, there hardly is a scene where Cinderella is not benefitting from rotoscoping. The rotoscoped animation allows Cinderella to move more fluidly than any human character drawn by the Disney animators at this point in the studio’s history. Whether she is scrubbing the floors, waltzing with her animal friends or Prince Charming, or making herself scarce before the stroke of midnight, there is a majestic grace to her movement – and yes, that includes the moment where she loses her glass slipper.

The less cartoonish a character acts in Cinderella, the more they are rotoscoped. So alongside Cinderella, Prince Charming and especially stepmother Lady Tremaine – the latter’s supervising character animator was Frank Thomas (an animator for the Seven Dwarfs on Snow White, supervising animator for Tod and Copper on 1981’s The Fox and the Hound) – are the two other characters heavily rotoscoped in the film. Lady Tremaine’s imposing posture and manner of dress gifts her a wordless authority over everyone residing in the Tremaine château. In contrast to Cinderella’s stepsisters – characters who act and look in ways that one might expect in a bawdy animated short film – her stern demeanor, realistically angled long face, and deliberate movements effuse opportunism, menace, spite. Lady Tremaine’s appearance, in respect to how much it contributes to the film, is a pronounced upgrade from the Queen in Snow White. She relates a spectacular amount of characterization in just a glance, a scowl. Yet, Lady Tremaine’s darkly charismatic character design would only be the appetizer to even more iconic villainous designs to appear later that decade.

The incidental score by Oliver Wallace and Paul J. Smith is dominated by quotations from the songs, and is not nearly as independent from the soundtrack as previous Disney animated canon scores. For the first time in a Disney animated feature, the studio looked outside its Burbank campus for its songwriters. Looking towards Tin Pan Alley, Disney hired Mack David (the title songs to 1959’s The Hanging Tree, 1963’s It’s a Mad, Mad, Mad, Mad World); Al Hoffman (“Papa Loves Mambo”, “A Whale of a Tale” from 1954’s 20,000 Leagues Under the Sea); and Jerry Livingston (the title songs to The Hanging Tree, 1965’s Cat Ballou). Cinderella possesses a wonderful musical score, headlined by “A Dream is a Wish Your Heart Makes”, “Bibbidi-Bobbidi-Boo”, and “So This is Love” – ignoring “The Work Song” (squeak-sung by the mice in something that set a precedent for Alvin and the Chipmunks), of course.

One of these, obviously, is unlike the others. “Bibbidi-Bobbidi-Boo”, sung by the Fairy Godmother (voiced by Verna Felton, who voiced the Elephant Matriarch and Mrs. Jumbo in Dumbo and, over the 1950s, became a Disney voice cast regular), is an exuberant frolic, and easily one of the best songs with nonsense lyrics in film history. Nonsense and novelty songs in Hollywood typically wear out their welcome, running a minute or more longer than they should. Clocking in at roughly one minute, the Fairy Godmother performs her magic, and promptly whisks Cinderella away to Prince Charming’s ball by song – a musical exemplar in narrative brevity.

Thirteen years following Snow White, Cinderella benefits from advances in recording technology and a richer – if not necessarily fuller – orchestral sound. Ilene Woods was primarily a radio singer, and her voice’s timbre is suited to play Cinderella. “A Dream is a Wish Your Heart Makes” parallels Snow White’s “I’m Wishing” in its exceptionally early placement and nowadays-formulaic function. But it is a serviceable introduction to Cinderella as a character, even with no specific dream mentioned in the lyrics. Sung with Mike Douglas (as Prince Charming), “So This is Love” is a dreamy duet, a waltz that musically defies a typical waltz. Waltzes, in ¾ time, usually have a pulse that even those not versed in music can “feel”. That pulse is usually on the downbeat, the “1”. Yet “So This is Love” generally begins its phrases and pulses on the “and” of the second beat (as one would count a measure as: “1 and 2 and 3 and”). The song’s frequent use of slurred notes, even fermatas, gives it its romantic flow and dramatic ebbs. This is an unconventional waltz, one that resists categorization and a song that would have been quite difficult to compose – despite its outwards simplicity.

Walt Disney appreciated the financial cushion that Cinderella provided (funding for the project met fierce resistance from his brother and the company’s CEO, Roy), and never truly worried about funding issues after the film’s release. The funds from Cinderella were injected across the company: for feature animation, live-action narrative features, the True-Life Adventures nature documentary series, Disney’s eventual television presence, and into purchasing a tract of orange groves in Anaheim. As for Cinderella itself, Walt could see the artistic shortcuts (rotoscoping included) in most every frame. It was no Snow White, he thought to himself. And though this 1950 adaptation was technologically superior in every way from the 1922 silent Laugh-O-Gram* short based on the same story, there seemed to be no artistic fulfillment for Walt in this Cinderella’s success.

Cinderella heralds the start of the Disney studios’ “Silver Age” – the second half of Walt Disney’s tenure as the creative ringleader at his namesake studio. Various film writers will provide conflicting definitions for these periods in Disney animation history. According to this blog, the Silver Age (1950-1967) is named as such due to the cessation of the package films and the return of more traditional animated features, Walt retreating from his once-omnipresent role in the artistic decision-making for those animated features, and the limited animation of the 1960s. However, the Silver Age is also the beginning of the studio consciously crafting large portions of these movies (if not the entire movie) explicitly for children. This is not to say films specifically for children are not worthwhile – Dumbo being a prime example. But to introduce characters, plot devices, and humor geared for children at the expense of the film’s storytelling or thematic resonance to viewers of all ages is the Disney studios at its most cynical and business-minded. These trends – that are not solely the fault of any single film – have persisted into modern animation, and are artistically incompatible with Disney’s Golden Age animated features. Those cynical trends are absent in the next Disney animated feature – an adaptation of a Lewis Carroll work that embraces a tsunami of colors and its own looniness.

To audiences in North America who had not seen a non-package animated feature in almost a decade and to war-weary audiences abroad reintroducing themselves to Disney films, Cinderella must have been an astonishing work after episodically-structured movies without a natural through line. In this Silver Age, Walt Disney and his animators would define the studio’s hallmarks – princesses, fairy tales, comic relief intended for children inserted for non-artistic reasons, and the distinctive visual style of artists like Mary Blair. Cinderella is the genesis for these developments. The Silver Age’s most innovative, accomplished work would still be several years away.

My rating: 7/10

^ Based on my personal imdb rating. Half-points are always rounded down. My interpretation of that ratings system can be found in the “Ratings system” page on my blog (as of July 1, 2020, tumblr is not permitting certain posts with links to appear on tag pages, so I cannot provide the URL).

* Founded in 1921 by Walt Disney, The Laugh-O-Gram studio was located in Kansas City, Missouri, and was the short-lived predecessor of the modern-day Walt Disney Animation Studios. Alongside future animation industry stalwarts Ub Iwerks, Hugh Harman, Rudolf Ising, and Friz Freleng, the Laugh-O-Gram studios made short animated silent films. Many of these films were based on fairy tales – including Cinderella (1922).

For more of my reviews tagged “My Movie Odyssey”, check out the tag of the same name on my blog.

This is the twentieth Movie Odyssey Retrospective. Movie Odyssey Retrospectives are reviews on films I had seen in their entirety before this blog’s creation or films I failed to give a full-length write-up to following the blog’s creation. Previous Retrospectives include 12 Angry Men (1957), Oliver! (1968), and Jingle All the Way (1996).

[simtrospective]

congratulations on your follower mile stone! I only recently started following your blog but I love that you share your thought process behind your sims and your posts. I really enjoy reading them! can I hear more about your inspiration to do a historical-vintage blog? what are your favorite time periods to recreate with the sims and why?

Thank you so much @wirefiish!

First, a little tangent: I started playing this series 20 years ago. There have been some gap years since then: my computer couldn’t handle TS3 when it came out so I only notched a few hours of total play time before sticking with TS2; I’d heard bad things about TS4 and myself wasn’t wowed by the base game so I put it aside for a long while. I’ve never had a simblr before this year (I started one in March, almost immediately deleted it, and then resurrected this account in May after someone on reddit asked me for a download + CC list of a sim I’d shared there; I needed somewhere to put all that info and so…). I never had any account for simming no matter which platform was popular: no Livejournal account, nor a Dreamwidth account, nor a GoS account, nor an MTS account, on and on and on. I only ever lurked the community though I felt like I knew everyone in it! But this year, I wanted to keep track of other simmers on tumblr who I liked, and I needed a quarantine distraction from work + panic, and so here I am. Operating this account has been an exercise, too, in managing myself and self-esteem: not letting myself fall into some of my kneejerk behaviors like trying to please others, apologizing (for nothing; for “me”), putting myself down, comparing myself to other people who I imagine are all perfect and talented and objectively better. My inclination, when I write wordy posts or give “too much information” about my sims is to delete and keep it simple, and that certainly gets me more notes, but… this is who I am. Not that it’s that deep! But it’s good to have perspective and behave accordingly: it’s just a blog with pictures of sims. It’s just a game. I felt like writing, it’s my little blog, who cares? I’m not doing it for notes or likes or whatever. What do I have to apologize for? What do I have to fix?

All this to say thank you that you are enjoying reading about my process. I enjoy writing about my process, whether mundane or not. I enjoy treating this blog like a blog when I feel called to do so.

Now, to your questions!

Can I hear more about your inspiration to do a historical-vintage blog? 

Sure! 

If you’d like to read more about my save and my plans for it, I have a link to that featured in my navigation menu. It is HERE for any and all who are interested and includes references and pictures I’m hoping to use as inspiration for world-building and character creation.

Basically, why I’m doing this is very simple: I like old stuff. I like vintage stuff. I like retro stuff. I love old photographs, old furniture, old music, old clothes, old movies. I love references and inspirations and art. I hate the internet. I hate my sims taking out their phones every two seconds and stuntin’ for the ‘gram and whatever else. I am forced to use too much internet and social media at work but in real life I have this blog and a neglected Pinterest account and a neglected reddit account and that is it and that has always been it, with the tumblr and reddit accounts only begun this calendar year. I’m not a luddite; I mindlessly scroll more than I should and I have favorite Vines (RIP) just like the other girls and how else can I stuff my game with CC if not over WiFi, but really, there’s so much of the *NOW* in TS4 that takes me out of and away from what I love about this series because it’s so invasive. This is where I could go on another tangent about how--through what EA, et al purports is endless gameplay possibilities--TS4 actually gives us less choice when it comes to overall gameplay but that is not the question I’m answering.

Beyond wanting to return my sims to a simpler time in terms of technology and their personal interactions, I’m totally doing it for the aesthetic. If I had my way, if I could choose the world’s aesthetic, the world’s advances in terms of, again, the technology in our pockets, it would span between 1920 and, like, 1995 and how exciting that I actually can build a little world that does just that. I can dress my little dolls exactly how I want and make some of them use the washboard! I can’t curate planet earth but I can make damn sure that all the teenage girls in Brindleton Bay wear circle skirts to the diner.

Also, related to doing whatever I want, I get to have the things I love, the world and gameplay I love but apply more progressive values to it. Yes, all the teenage girls in Brindleton Bay wear circle skirts to the diner but the teenage girl who prefers to wear a mechanic’s jumpsuit isn’t going to be looked at askance or be isolated or teased or made to conform or beat up or, best case scenario, need to shoulder the burden of trailblazer or need to shoulder the burden of being The Girl Who Wears A Mechanic’s Jumpsuit even if everyone thinks it’s cool, she’s just… herself. And yes, the world looks like 1955 but it isn’t 1955, or, it’s a parallel 1955. This girl wears a jumpsuit but her girlfriend wears a circle skirt and none of my sims bat an eye.

I also love, love, love looking at other simmers’ historical stories and gameplay. They’re consistently so clever with both CC and in-game content that it’s impossible not to be inspired, and that got my wheels turning.

And, lastly, I’m a CC addict. Limiting my aesthetic and applying rules to my save goes a long way to cull my collection and to keep me from going on a tear that might make my computer explode. It’s much easier for me to delete a bunch of dresses that aren’t appropriate for the parameters of my game than to delete a bunch of dresses because I “should,” because I have “too much stuff.”

What are your favorite time periods to recreate with the sims and why?

I’m partial to the 1950s because it is the easiest. It seems that so many creators make a lot of content that--even if it’s only described as “vintage”--is from the 50s. I mentioned circle skirts above. How many times have I done a broad search for vintage or retro and got circle skirts back? The 1950s isn’t my favorite time period, though; again, it’s just so easy to recreate. Lately I’ve enjoyed making a range of 70s sims and hope I can find a home for them all. I like, too, trying to fit content that I don’t usually use or which I think I don’t like into my version of a particular decade’s or era’s look because it often changes my opinion of the content (especially non-CC) so that I see it with new eyes/better appreciate it, and this practice helps me to hone my abilities and increase my comfort and familiarity with whatever time period I’m working with.

In real life, although I had a long art deco phase, my absolute favorite design aesthetic is mid-century modern. I’ve always loved it, and that love intensified and deepened a few years ago when I started writing my novel--not to sound like a jerk, but it’s true!--which is set in the mid-to-late 1960s. I started doing research and putting together inspiration boards which included, in part, house plans and interior design and for my tastes, I’m sorry, mcm just cannot be beat. I cannot get enough! TS4’s art style is so complementary to the mcm aesthetic that it’s impossible not to fall in love with how it looks in the game, whether it’s CC or not, so that’s my favorite in-game decorative period.

When it comes to clothing and fashion, I have a little bit that I like from every era, really, but if we’re speaking generally and I’m being forced to choose, I (think I) like best male/masculine looks and styling from the 1950s to about… 1963? 1965?, although I prefer a slimmer cut to the suits and pants; and feminine/female looks and styling from the 1930s and 1970s. I perceive a similar combined sensuality, ease, and sportiness in the 30s and 70s silhouettes as well as the prevailing attitudes and approach to fashion that speaks to me. I just love it--but I need more of it for my sims, so I can’t say it’s necessarily my favorite to try and recreate. Yet, anyway.

Thank you again for this question and thank you to all who read this entire answer!

[hellzyeahthewebwieldingavenger]

Why (most of) the 2010s Marvel legacy characters didn’t work

For Marvel characters I think it comes off as profoundly undermining when they get legacies, at least in the specific way Marvel attempted this throughout the 2010s.

To explain this we need to actually first look at DC’s characters in order to compare and contrast why legacies for them tend to work out better than they do for Marvel.

Simply put back in the 1930s-1950s (if not even later) DC’s characters were almost always created as powers first, people second. Wish fulfilment fantasy figures over flawed mere mortals.

Consequently you could legacy Green Lantern and the Flash in the 1950s and then do so again in the 1980s-1990s because so so long as you had a guy with a ring and another guy with super speed you were retaining the essence of both characters, the fundamental point and appeal of them.

But the Marvel characters were the other way around and practically deliberately designed to be so. 

Thor was the story of the life and times of Thor Odinson. Spider-Man was the story of the life and times of Peter Parker. The Fantastic Four was never the story about a brainiac who stretched, a girl who could go invisible, a kid who could burst into flame and a guy who looked like a rock monster. 

It was about a stern scientist obsessed with his work. A nurturing young woman who loved him but was frustrated by his tendency to get lost in his work. Her younger brother interested in sports cars, girls, excitement and other typically hot headed teenage endeavours. And an average Joe who was tortured and depressed that he was no longer human. 

Ben Grimm could’ve looked like any kind of monster and the central point of his character would have been retained. The F4′s specific powers, complemented their personalities, but they were not the driving point unto themselves. 

In contrast let us consider Captain America, probably the Marvel character who’s done the ‘replacement legacy hero’ storyline the most (at least within 616 canon). How comes he  lends himself so much better to this type of story than the other Marvel characters? 

Simple, because unlike most of the big name Marvel characters you know of, he wasn’t created in the 1960s or beyond. Cap was the product of the 1940s and was a peer to those same early days super heroes from the Golden Age, including the original Green Lantern and Flash. Like them he began fundamentally more as a symbol and powerset than a person. 

But now flashing forward to the 21st century many (most in my view) Flash fans were upset (and continue to be so) Wally West’s ascension to the Flash mantle was undermined and ultimately undone for the sake of restoring Barry Allan to the spotlight. The reason for this upset when Wally himself had replaced Barry? Wally had proven himself a far more flawed, nuanced and complex character than Barry had ever been. 

He demonstrated a degree of characterisation in the Flash role that Barry never had. It wasn’t even that he simply had more of this than Barry, but that Barry, just like Jay Garrick preceding him, had little to speak of in the first place. Thus the contrast between Jay and Barry was mostly superficial but the contrast between Barry and Wally was as stark as comparing Spider-Man to 1950s Superman.*

But Wally West, and the entire DC Universe from Post-Crisis onwards in fact, were in that mould precisely because they were trying to be more like Marvel comics has been since the 1960s onwards. 

DC in effect began prioritising the people beneath the costumes over the powers.** But Marvel starting in the 1960s had pretty much always been like that with their heroes.

Consequently when legacies popped up and those new characters were pushed as being just as good, just as worthy, or (in some cases) lowkey pushed as being better  than their predecessors it naturally rubbed those fans with decades of emotional investment the wrong way. OBVIOUSLY  a woman or a POC can be just as worthy and just as capable as a man or a white person as a superhero. But series to series, character to character, it was almost like Marvel was taking away your beloved pet.

Imagine for a moment you had a pet named Rex that you’d known and loved for years. 

Then Marvel insisted on taking Rex away from you when there was nothing wrong with him. In his place they give you another clearly different pet with Rex’s collar, who gets Rex’s bowl, Rex’s food, Rex’s toys, Rex’s bed and even Rex’s name and asks you to treat them not as just a new dog but straight up the new Rex.

Except he isn’t Rex. Rex is Rex. The ‘new Rex’ playing with Rex’s toys, doing the same tricks as him or having his collar doesn’t change that.*** 

Because Rex was more than a collar, his toys or his tricks. He was an individual that you’d known and loved. And even if you know Rex is going to come back ‘eventually’ having Rex taken away from you at all, having the new Rex supplant them (especially if old Rex was screwed over for the sake of new Rex’s arrival) and having so many people insist new Rex is just as great or more great than old Rex (to the point where many people loudly proclaim they don’t even want the old Rex back and the old Rex was kinda lame and boring) is going to create a massive dissonance. Maybe you would’ve been chill with the new Rex is he was just another additional pet called Rover or even like RexY who was similar yet different to Rex, but not actually promoted AS Rex or as his replacement. 

Maybe you would’ve been okay with the new Rex if the old one got too old, died naturally or accidentally. But you aren’t okay with it because there was nothing wrong with Rex, you LOVED Rex and Rex had been with you and been around generally forever. So the new Rex felt like he was undermining him, especially undermining Rex’s individuality. 

That’s how I think most Marvel fans felt about practically EVERY legacy situation that’s ever cropped up from the 1960s onwards, not even the ones just from the 2010s. I remember  the outrage when Bucky was announced as the new Cap. I know there were people salty about Eric Masterson as Thor and the Spider-Man Clone Saga speaks for itself.

Compounding the situation is that more than a few media outlets (despite imo not representing the feeling’s of the majority at all) promoted (and in some cases still promote) the new characters as not just better than they are (see the dozen or so lists talking about how great Riri allegedly was) but along with many fans tear down the older characters whilst doing so. 

See every article ever talking about why Peter Parker in the movies (and sometimes in the comics) NEEDS to die for the sake of Miles becoming the new Spider-Man in spite of their rationales rarely making sense from a creative/financial POV and utilizing misrepresentations of both characters to varying degrees. Even fans that appreciate the social/political relevancy of the new characters are going to naturally be upset in response to that and angrily voice opposition when the character they love gets dragged through the mud like that. And that then gets exacerbated when they are labelled as bigots for feeling upset by the changes or reacting against the character they love being dragged through the mud.**** 

Especially considering they would’ve reacted the same way regardless of who was the replacement hero.  Again, fans at first didn’t take kindly to John Walker or Bucky as the new Captain Americas so the idea that backlash against Sam Wilson was entirely or primarily racist was itself profoundly ignorant. Especially when you consider black reviewers such as those on the Hooded Utalitarian were calling it out as bad storytelling and bad representation for black people. SpaceTwinks went issue by issue through Spencer’s Sam Wilson run and called it out as racist, ignorant and naive. NONE of which is me saying that there isn’t more than a little bigotry going around detractors of these new characters nor that there aren’t obviously bad actors.

But those people did not and do not represent the majority and framing the situation as though they do is disingenuous and highly unethical. In conclusion, the backlash against the 2010s Marvel legacy characters was entirely natural, understandable and for the vast majority came from a place of love for the original characters not a bigoted hatred for the new characters skin colour or sex. 

It was a testament to Marvel’s, and the wider media, misunderstanding the psychology of most comic book fans. 

P.S. In regards to that, though it isn’t exactly talking about what I’ve spoken about I’d highly recommend checking out this video which touches upon the disenchantment Star Wars fans felt over the Sequel Trilogy, which itself could be viewed as doing the same thing Marvel did with it’s replacement legacy characters.

P.P.S. The reason I think the likes of Miles Morales or Kamala Khan succeeded where others failed is chiefly due to their rise to the role of legacy replacements stemmed from their predecessors not  being sidelined for their rise to the spotlight. Miles never ever replaced the 616 version of Peter Parker, widely considered by most fans and Marvel internally as the true and legitimate version of the character. Kamala Khan meanwhile picked up the Ms. Marvel only when Carol Danvers discarded it and became Captain Marvel. She was still in the spotlight in her own right, Kamala simply got her own spotlight using Carol’s obsolete name. Which isn’t all that dissimilar to fan favourite Cassandra Cain’s rise to the Batgirl mantle now I think about it.

P.P.P.S. A possible counter argument to all I’ve said is the success of the Superior Spider-Man/Otto Octavius. After all why was he embraced when Sam Wilson and Jane Foster wasn’t? Was a double standard rooted in bigotry at play?

No, but the answer isn’t neat and simple.

I think Ock as the new Spider-Man was more embraced partially because Ock had been around essentially as long as Spidey himself. But more poignantly  pre-Superior Spider-Man was so atrocious that a sizzling and sexy idea like Superior (which generated tons of cheap novelty) felt utterly refreshing, even to people who had actually LIKED pre-Superior Spidey under Slott. It’s like how people praised the early Big Time stories despite their problems because compared to BND they were genuinely better.

Plus Superior, for all it’s god forsaken writing, didn’t exist to clearly workshop potential movie ideas or chiefly in aid of a social/political cause. Someone can agree that there should be more black or female superheroes but disagree that the older characters should be sidelined in the attempt to achieve that.

Especially when there were better alternative options such as introducing those newer characters within and alongside the established hero’s narrative or simply introduce them independently as has happened recently with the likes of Lunar Snow.

*This is also why I suspect Superman, Batman and Wonder Woman survived from the Golden Age into the Silver Age. Because they were the DC characters who (more than any of the other ones) had actual personalities/substance to them. **Of course this didn’t begin wholesale with the post-Crisis era. But noticeably the characters who had worked with this new shift in priorities prior to Crisis on Infinite Earths stayed generally the same thereafter (E.g. the Titans, Batman) whilst characters who had largely vacillated or struggled (e.g. Superman and Wonder Woman) were given fresh starts which proved critically and financially successful.  

***Not even if he does everything just as well as Rex did or does some stuff differently that’s still good (although the overwhelming majority of the time new Rex is clearly not as good as the old Rex).

****I’ve seen people be called racist and misogynists for calling out Riri Williams honestly ridiculous degree of competency as a hero/tech genius in spite of her age. This is not an invalid criticism, yet disliking the character because of those reasons is grounds to be labelled as something ugly by another (imo minor yet also vocal) contingent of fandom. 

Hell I was called a Trump supporting Breitbart reading bigot for calling out Marvel as two-faced due to never putting a black writer in charge of Sam Wilson as Captain America or a woman in charge of Jane Foster as Thor. It isn’t exclusive to comics either as I and other people have been accused of racism/misogyny for disliking the Last Jedi in spite of that film to my eyes being itself racist and sexist anyway.

[cyrilarnold9874-blog]

Diet For Diabetes

Learn more about these brave as well as ultimate martial performer women starlets of perpetuity. Although certainly not as significant a success as the earlier movies in the franchise, Die Hard 4 is actually an excellent action flick that is usually load filled with weapons, blasts as well as airplane. Hold an old movie evening feature coming from the year that you were born or movies coming from the 1930s. Without a doubt, there are actually an amount of fantastic films presently offered for movie lovers to delight in viewing but 3D blu radiation motion pictures has come to be the in point and the current flick ridiculous to bring in target markets to movie theaters. The film organisation in fact observed a rise in admissions during the course of 2009 - the elevation of the monetary crisis - displaying resiliency during bad financial opportunities. The reason why it's a household course, investing per year in theater is actually a lot less than what you might invest in airlines or in hotels, as an example. If you don't recognize their labels, you will probably recognize their faces (specifically London's since his twin brother is actually additionally a star.) Once and for all, the motion pictures see Dracula come back to lifestyle as well as a Blade like Priest (Lee) seeking him to attempt to end the power of the OG vampire. In movie joined many movies directed by Winner Saville (Kim of India, 1950), John Huston (The Origins of Heaven, 1958), Vincente Minnelli (The 4 Horsemen of the Apocalypse, http://20dietandfit18.info/het-gebruik-van-de-hier-voorgestelde-supplementen-kiezenfit-nl-is-volledig-veilig-en-veroorzaakt-geen-bijwerkingen/ 1961), Henry Master (Tender Is the Evening, 1962), Nicholas Radiation (55 days in Beijing, 1 963) as well as Richard Brooks (God Jim, 1965), unquestionably several of the most essential signatures of American movie house. Andrew Sarris, owner of the auteur theory of movie researches, remarks in his The American Cinema (1968) anyone who loves the movie house has to be actually relocated by Child of Dr Jekyll," recommending to me that Sarris invested a great deal even more time at the art-house cherishing, as opposed to the grindhouse, delighting in. Similar to numerous of the flicks discussed over, the remake isn't a unpleasant part of cinema, yet it's nothing special, either. When there is no aspect in doing so (e.g. European motion pictures or Oriental terror switched right into Hollywood display), don't like remakes in basic and also especially.

Seemingly a murder secret embeded in 'Toon City', the emphasize of the film was actually the many appeals through legendary anime characters coming from the golden age of computer animation (featuring many of the birds on our checklist), playing themselves as residents of 'Toon Town', a general vicinity filled through Toons that behave in Hollywood comic strips. In 1946, she made the movie that folks still keep in mind today. Lee Yeon-hee's big break came in the form of the flick Millionaire's Puppy love where she participated in a leading man along with prominent actor Hyun Container. Hollingshead phoned his Drive-In Theater business "Park-In Theatres, Inc." as well as developed a big operation contacted the Auto Motion picture Theatre just over the Camden NJ area line (find chart listed below). I am actually specifically thrilled that our company've put VIP advantages right into show business, to ensure our A-list people and also our Debut List people are actually treated better than our frequent Stubs members and that our frequent Stubs members are handled far better than our non-Stubs members.

7. Maggie Cheung: Hong Kong starlet, Maggie Cheung is actually rather widely known for her prosperous work in flicks based on action category. When not watching motion pictures, the lightweight bean bags could be put back against the wall structure to allow day-to-day traffic and also ability to move.

[surveysonfleek]

462.

5000 Question Survey Pt. 20

1901. You're real life is an rpg and you have to choose your stats. Choose your race (you can't pick whatever race you are right now): mixed Choose your alignment: huh? 1902. Now, divide ten points between these stats for yourself: Strength: 3 Charm: 3 Luck: 2 Magic: 2 1903. Now pick 2 skills for yourself: (alchemy, animal taming, blacksmithy, carpentry, cartography, healing, lock picking, music, magic) healing and lock picking. 1904. Do you and your parents like any of the same bands/singers? yeah, probably. 1905. Do you know who lives three houses down from you? nope.

1906. What chore do you absolutely hate doing? sweeping and mopping. 1907. If you could choose anyone, who would you pick as your mentor? i haven’t found the right person yet. maybe at my next job. 1908. What would you name the autobiography of your life? undecided. 1909. What do you miss most about being a kid? not having to worry about real problems. 1910. Why is there an entry for the word 'dictionary' in a dictionary? because why not? it’d be stupid to skip it. 1911. How does glue not stick to the inside of the bottle? lack of oxygen in the bottle maybe. 1912. What do you plant to grow a seedless watermelon? a seed. 1913. If you dislike your family, are you obligated to spend time with them? Show up at family functions? Help them out in their time of need? Is a family even relevant anymore – especially when you have a close circle of friends? you’re definitely not obligated. i feel as though if they’d attend your events or help you out in a time of need, you’d owe it to them to do the same. if not, fuck it. 1914. How would you live your life if you had a week to live? How would you live your life if you had 5 years left to live? How would you live your life if you were going to live forever? one week: spend every day doing something on my bucket list. five years: make goals and plan out something special to do every month. forever: i’d study as much as i could about anything and everything. 1915. Is a day spent watching movies when you could’ve been working a day wasted or well spent? it depends if i had more important things to do. 1916. Can we ever be sure that our perception of things is right – without consulting other people? If we do consult others, how are we to know whether theirs is true or if we’re both deluded? we’ll never know... 1917. Would your life be better or worse if you knew the day, time, and place that you were going to die? worse. it’s all i’d think about. 1918. What is honor? Does honor matter anymore? sure it does. 1919. Are the stories we tell ourselves about our past true, or do we bend the truth so we can create our stories? If the latter is true, than what worth is there in the stories if they aren’t true? if you don’t intentionally bend the truth, it’s still your story, it’s just how you remembered it. 1920. What would happen if you never wasted another minute of your life? What would that look like? i’d never sleep. 1921. How much control do you really have over your life? full control. 1922. Does your happiness depend on where you live? For example, if you owned Santa Monica Real Estate, some of the most expensive in the world, would you truly be fulfilled? not at all. life would definitely be sweeter but it doesn’t define my happiness. 1923. How much does your happiness depend on your health? haha hardly. 1924. What is more difficult for you; looking into someone's eyes when you are telling someone how you feel, or looking into someone's eyes when they are telling you how they feel? maybe looking into someone’s eyes and telling them how i feel. 1925. What are 3 things that make you beautiful? mind, body, soul hahaha. jk. 1926. Have you ever sacrificed self respect for love? yeah. 1927. If you had to be stuck in a fairy tale, which one would you choose? cinderella. pretty good ending. 1928. What activities make you lose track of time? watching shows/movies and reading. 1929. Have you ever wondered why they leave blank pages at the back of the books? never wondered. 1930. If a habitual liar tells you that he is a habitual liar, will you believe him? i mean, you can’t lie 100% of the time. 1931. Would you ever be willing to move to a distant country knowing there would be little chance of seeing your current friends or family again except on trips? probably not. unless i could travel to see them very constantly. 1932. If you woke up tomorrow with no fear, what would you do first? apply for a million jobs. 1933. What was your biggest worry five years ago, do you still feel the same about it at this minute? nope. 1934. What promises have you never carried through for yourself? idk. 1935. When did you last do something for nothing in return? i forgot haha. 1936. What must you do daily to keep yourself ‘sane’ ? get enough sleep. 1937. When did you last judge someone who you didn’t know? tonight. 1938. How would you hate to be described? rude. 1939. Would you fall head over heels in love with you? haha no. 1940. What in your life exhilarates you? Do you do enough of it? traveling. and not lately. 1941. What makes you indispensable? idk. 1942. Do you follow at least 20 blogs in your field? no. 1943. When was the last time you said or wrote something someone disagreed with? i forgot.  1944. What do you bring to the world that is truly yours? my spirit. shit, idk. 1945. What one word do you want people to think when they think of you? memorable. 1946. What one image do you want people see when you cross their mind? happiness. 1947. What one feeling do you want people to feel when they think of you? happy. 1948. What one thought do you want in people’s minds about you? omg i don’t knowwww. 1949. Why are so many people depressed? idk. either mental health or they’re just not happy with their lives. 1950. When is war justifiable? hardly ever. it never turns out well, people will die. 1951. What does it mean to live in the present moment? make the most of things? 1952. What is the greatest quality humans possess? power of the mind. 1953, What is it that prevents people from living to their full potential? addictions. 1954. Are we all one? no. 1955. Are the senses meant to be starved and destroyed or given in to and relished? given in to and relished. 1956. What are some things that you wished people knew about you? nothing. 1957. What makes it so hard to break away from things or people that we care about dearly? not having them in your life. 1958. Which was an incident in your life that totally changed the way you think today? not sure. 1959. Why can only 2 people fall in love with each other, why can't 4, 5, 6 or 12 people fall in love with each other? Why just a couple and not a triple, quadruple or more? i mean, have you seen sister wives? polygamy is alive and real mate. 1960. What do you know that you really know? And how do you come to know that you know? ooookay... 1961. Why are pirates usually depicted wearing eye patches? idk.  1962. Is there someone you wish to teach a lesson, and still haven't? nope. 1963. Who do you sometimes compare yourself to? my friends. 1964. What can you do today that you were not capable of a year ago? drive to work on my own. 1965. What do we all have in common besides our genes that makes us human? our ability to think. 1966. What’s something you know you do differently than most people? the way i tie my laces. 1967. If you could instill one piece of advice in a newborn baby’s mind, what advice would you give? be kind to others. 1968. Can you describe your life in a six word sentence? no. 1969. What is your most beloved childhood memory? my birthdays. 1970. What is the difference between innocence and ignorance? there’s a purity in innocence whereas none in ignorance. 1971. Would you rather lose all of your old memories or never be able to make new ones? that’s tough... not sure. half and half. 1972. What’s the difference between settling for things and accepting the way things are? settling is not striving for anything more whereas accepting the way things are is more about accepting things you cannot change. 1973. When have you worked hard and loved every minute of it? uni i guess. 1974. What have you done in the last year that makes you proud? traveled. 1975. Why do we idolize sports players? a lot of them have inspiring stories. 1976. What do you do to deliberately impress others? nothing lol. 1977. What’s the best part of growing older? learning more about life and yourself. 1978. What’s the biggest lie you once believed was true? santa. 1979. What is the most spontaneous thing you’ve ever done? rocked up to a stadium during a stomry night and randomly bought ice hockey tickets. turned out to be the best seats in the house. 1980. Do you like the city or town you live in? Why or why not? it’s okay. it’s still quiet and fairly safe. 1981. What’s the best part of being you? idk. 1982. If you could have a gift certificate to have one service done for you every day for an entire year (getting your hair styled, getting a massage) what would you pick? massage for sure. 1983. Who is your mentor and what have you learned from them? no one. 1984. Would you rather your child be less attractive and extremely intelligent or extremely attractive and less intelligent? more intelligent.  1985. What is the biggest change you have made in your life in the last year? nothing as of yet. 1986. What is the biggest conscientious change you have made in your life ever? idk. 1987. When should you reveal a secret that you promised you wouldn’t reveal? if it’s a means of life or death. 1988. If you could live forever but you would be the only one, would you want to? Why? no way, how lonely. 1989. What are some recent compliments you’ve received? my makeup looks nice. 1990. What is the number one quality that makes someone a good leader? being relatable. 1991. What do you love to practice? nothing. 1992. What is something you have always wanted since you were a kid? a dog. and i got it. 1993. When in your life have you been a victim of stereotyping? all the freaking time. 1994. How important does a person have to be before they are considered assassinated instead of just murdered? household name status i guess. 1995. Why is it that doctors and lawyers call what they do 'practice' but other professions don't? How does your profession sound when referred to as a practice? idkkk. 1996. What are 5 topics you follow on twitter? i mostly follow my friends. 1997. If you had to get one sentence tattooed on your body, what would it be? none omg. 1998. At what point will you be good enough? When are you self-improved enough to accept yourself? if i reach all my goals. 1999. What are the three "nevers" of your life? never doing hard drugs (even though i have), never taking anyone i love for granted and i’m never going to settle. 2000. What is your first priority when you wake up? check the time.

[jana-hallford]

Baby Boomer Halloween Memories

"Hallowe'en" means “All Hallows Evening,” and refers to October 31st, the night before All Saints Day is observed. All Hallows Eve occurs at or near the time of older pagan celebrations that mark the end of the harvest season and the start of the “dark half” of the year. This is a “liminal” time, when the boundaries between the earthly realm and the supernatural are thinned. Elements of the old ways carried over into Christian customs. Lighting candles, praying for the dead, dressing up, and eating certain traditional foods became part of Hallowe’en for many.

Hallowe’en postcards from 1900 through the 1920s depicting children dressing up in masks and costumes and making or lighting Jack O’ Lanterns are common, but none show children trick-treating, because that custom did not emerge until well into the 1930s. (The classic 1944 film “Meet Me in St. Louis” depicts children out making mischief on Halloween in 1903, before the days of trick-or-treating.) Trick-or-treating was created to encourage children to accept “treats” instead of wreaking havoc on their communities.

By the time I was growing up, Hallowe’en had lost the apostrophe, trick-or-treating was well-established, and Halloween was very much a children's holiday. Dressing up in a costume to go get candy and other treats was a lot of fun. Here are some of my favorite Halloween memories.

Vintage black cat plastic blow mold Halloween treat bucket, circa 1950s - 1970s.

The Halloween Carnival

The Halloween Carnival at Monterey Heights Elementary school was a splendid evening event, with booths, games, food, and a darned good stage band providing music. There was enough going on to make many of us divide our time between trick-or-treating and attending the carnival. 

To this day I associate Halloween with that carnival, and the memory of walking around under the night sky in my costume, eating chili from a paper cup in the early autumn chill, and listening to the band. I loved the booth where we “fished” for prizes, using a stick with a string and a clothespin for a fishing pole, line, and hook. By the 4th grade I discovered the White Elephant booth, kindling my early interest in second hand and vintage items. 

An especially fond Halloween Carnival memory is the cake walk, held in one of the classrooms. When I was in the second or third grade, I won the cake walk, and happily chose a spice cake frosted with white buttercream icing and festooned with Autumn Mellowcreme decorations. I remember being quite charmed with the candy cats, pumpkins, sheafs of wheat, ears of corn, and other Halloween and harvest symbols. Being able to take that cake home to my family felt magical.

Autumn Mellowcreme candies. These ones are similar to the candy decorations on the cake I won as a child at the Halloween Carnival.

Vintage Halloween blow mold Jack O’ Lanterns.

Vintage plastic “popcorn” Halloween decoration. This type of decoration, made from bits of colored plastic fused together, is still sold.

Costumes

“What are you going to be for Halloween?” was a frequent and enjoyable conversation-starter among my classmates and I as the holiday neared. Choosing what you wanted to be was exciting.

Some of my Halloween costumes were made by my mother, and some were purchased. Halloween costumes sold in dime stores came in a box with a cellophane window, or on a hanger, and included a plastic mask and a simple rayon smock or jumpsuit with a design printed onto the fabric. 

You could also purchase a mask without a costume. (In the 1961 film “Breakfast at Tiffany’s,” the two main characters steal very typical Halloween masks from a dime store.) 

My earliest Halloween memory is of my father carrying me to homes of close neighbors so I could trick-or-treat. I wore pajamas with feet in them and a clown mask. A mask and “footy” pajamas were the standard ensemble for the preschool set.

When I was old enough to choose, I always wanted pretty costumes, often some variety of princess or fairy. (Purchased costumes like that rained glitter, which sales people referred to as “fairy dust.”)  An angel costume my mother had a local dressmaker sew for me for my kindergarten Christmas play was re-used as the basis for my 1st grade Halloween costume. I went as the Tooth Fairy, bedecked in pearls. (This worked fine for trick-or-treating, but not so well at a costume party, where other children chased me, demanding money.) In the second grade I had a homemade Mary Poppins costume, featuring a black straw hat an older Englishwoman helped my mother and I find at our church thrift store. (”It must have a brim!” she exclaimed, rushing to the back of the store to find exactly the right chapeau.) I won a prize for that costume at the church fair. 

In the fourth grade I used a fringed suede cloth vest and skirt with a yellow print top and a pair of moccasins I had for a Native American costume, then added a black wig and headband. (I am a card-carrying Kahnawake Mohawk, through my mother’s side of the family.)

My mother made a gypsy costume for my big sister at one point. It was a pretty skirt and fringed shawl, worn with a peasant blouse and a lot of costume jewelry. I wore it for Halloween when I was in the 6th grade. At age 11 I was already tall, looked older, and felt self-conscious about trick-or-treating for candy. I decided to go out one last time for a good cause, and collected donations for UNICEF instead. That was my final year of trick-or-treating.

Ever since then, I’ve enjoyed being the one to hand out Halloween candy. When I was 15, a date took me to see horror movies at the high school, and I felt I was really missing out on seeing the trick-or-treaters. As an adult, I’ve made an effort to have fun things to give out to the children who come to my door, even as the numbers have dwindled over the years.

Vintage clown costume. This one is from the 1970s, but I remember similar ones in the 1960s. The clown looks like Bozo, from the popular television show.

Vintage plastic Halloween masks. Masks like this could be bought separately or as part of a full costume.

Halloween costumes sold in dime stores were often packaged in boxes like this one, with a plastic mask and a rayon smock or jumpsuit printed with a simple design. This one is Wendy the Good Little Witch, the Harvey comic book character and friend of Casper the Friendly Ghost.

Vintage Yogi Bear costume, 1960s. Yogi Bear was one of my favorite cartoon characters.

When I was growing up, "dime stores," including Woolworth's, were the place to go for Halloween costumes, decorations, and candy. Such fun memories.

Treats, and Evolving Traditions

In an earlier post, I wrote about knowing which houses in the neighborhood had the best treats, and how I’ve tried as an adult to provide treats children will like and remember. (It was usually the older neighbors who gave the best stuff.)

Halloween felt very safe back then. I trick-or-treated in my neighborhood, where I knew people. (Some of my friends had much more ambitious Halloween routes.) My mother also always checked the treats we brought home. I was not allowed to eat anything I collected until then. I could not keep or eat unwrapped candy, which a few people still gave out back in the day. Anything that looked like it could possibly have been tampered with was also thrown in the trash. There were sometimes stories from other places of apples containing razorblades, but the only apples I brought home were from neighbors we knew, and they were always fine. I’m glad I grew up when I did, with crowds of children on the streets on Halloween night, that wonderful carnival, and no serious fears or worries. 

Once I was an adult, the world began to change this happy holiday. In September and October of 1982, just before Halloween, someone in Chicago laced bottles of Tylenol with cynanide, and seven adults died. Throughout the country parents were afraid the same thing might happen with Halloween candy. My parents and I gave out pencils and stickers instead that year. 

After that, Halloween was never quite the same. Decorations, adult costumes and parties became a bigger deal, but trick-or-treating as my generation knew it faded considerably. Shopping malls and churches started offering alternative celebrations, including “trunk-or-treat” in supervised parking lots. However, children still look forward to wearing costumes, and still seem to enjoy Halloween. And now, colorful Day of the Dead decorations and sugar skulls mingle with Halloween motifs. 

In Mexico, indigenous customs honoring the dead carried over into the observance of All Soul’s Day, the feast remembering all of the departed, on November 2nd. Held October 31st to November 2nd, Day of the Dead celebrations are a happy time of remembering and honoring family and friends no longer on this earth. People from Mexico brought this custom to the United States and beyond. 

Traditions evolve and change, as they have down the generations. With a little work, perhaps we can keep the best of the old as we embrace the new.

As a little postscript, and a nod to the old-fashioned Baby Boomer-era Halloween I remember, I’m including a recipe for popcorn balls my mother used. I’ll bet some of your remember this one!

Happy Halloween!

Vintage Halloween recipes. My mother used the one shown here for Popcorn Balls.

[gywair]

Hey! I got the honor of being on Historical Hotties. It’s a podcast about researching hot historical figures and ranking them. I was on the episode about crime fighters. Below are my notes and references about Mabel Walker Willebrandt.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mabel_Walker_Willebrandt

http://www.pbs.org/kenburns/prohibition/media_detail/2082505810-willebrandt/

https://themobmuseum.org/notable_names/mabel-willebrandt/

https://www.encyclopedia.com/women/encyclopedias-almanacs-transcripts-and-maps/willebrandt-mabel-walker-1889-1963

https://www.loc.gov/item/mm82059618/

https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-2000-jul-02-me-47028-story.html

http://www.anb.org/view/10.1093/anb/9780198606697.001.0001/anb-9780198606697-e-0600712

https://books.google.com/books?id=CfGHM9KU7aEC&pg=PA736&lpg=PA736&dq=dorothy+rae+willebrandt&source=bl&ots=Ot1Hr5r5jy&sig=ACfU3U1zTmlS6XVkw1QFXoWtYaMSk5dOWA&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwia_-fX5KLhAhUELa0KHdrfC3gQ6AEwDXoECAkQAQ#v=onepage&q=dorothy%20rae%20willebrandt&f=false

https://themobmuseum.org/blog/mabel-willebrandt-prolific-prosecutor-of-prohibition-laws/

http://articles.latimes.com/2000/jul/02/local/me-47028

https://sallyjling.org/2011/07/16/mabel-walker-willebrant-fascinating-women-of-prohibition/

https://www.britannica.com/biography/Mabel-Walker-Willebrandt

  https://books.google.com/books?id=55ctM_Uy6KgC&printsec=frontcover#v=onepage&q&f=false

    Mabel Walker Willebrandt

Born May 23rd, 1889

Died April 6th, 1963 at age 73

  She was born in Woodsdale, Kansas as Mabel Elizabeth Walker.

Her family were farmers

She spent her early years traveling between prairie towns from Oklahoma to Missouri

Her father David was a local newspaper editor

She used to help him set the type for print

She was expelled from Park College in Parksville (a Presbyterian college), Missouri for being outspoken

She questioned the validity of a “virgin birth”

Reportedly she won the debate

In 1906 she began teaching in Buckley, Michigan

During this time she

Was almost lost in a blizzard

Trapped by a forest fire

Was threatened by a student with a knife

In 1910 she married Arthur Willebrandt, the principal

Together they moved to Phoenix, Arizona while Arthur recovered from tuberculosis

Mabel graduated from Arizona State University in 1911

Around this time she became severely hearing impaired and wore a hearing aid in each ear

She supposedly fixed her hair to hide them.

In 1912, they moved to Los Angeles where Mabel taught school during the day and took law classes at night

In 1916, she graduated from the University of Southern California with a masters in law

While completing her degree, Mabel began pro bono work in local police courts for mostly prostitution cases

She argued 2,000 cases as the city’s first female public defender

Her efforts led to courts permitting testimony from both women and men in these cases

This meant the male clients had to appear in court (in front of the press) as well as the female defenders

She successfully campaigned for the enactment of a revised community property statue at the state level (which involves property rights in marriages)

She was instrumental in getting the police to stop nickelodeon owners from preying on young girls during the “Rosebud Baby Case”

Apparently, the men were taking advantage of young girls during the movies

After graduation, she opened her own practice in downtown Los Angeles with Fred Horowitz (he built the famous hotel Chateau Marmont)

During World War I, she served as head of the Legal Advisory Board for draft cases

John Shepherd, perhaps the only man she really loved, who was killed in World War I.

In 1920, she moved her folks out west to be closer to her

In 1921, at 32, she was recommended by Frank Doherty (her old law professor), Senator Hiram Johnson, and all the judges in Southern California for the position of Assistant Attorney General under President Harding

Making her the highest-ranking women in the US federal government at the time and the first woman to head the Tax Division.

However, part of the issue is that no one wanted the job

It had no political advantage

It was a position that had to enforce unpopular laws

Her duties included overseeing federal taxation, federal prisons, and matters relating to the Volstead Act (the Prohibition Act)

She established the first female federal prison, Alderson federal prison in West Virginia

At the time, female prisons were too full to hold all inmates

If there was not enough space they would be housed with male inmates or otherwise alternatively punished

Sexual exploitation of women in the prison system was very high at the time

The prison was modeled as a boarding school offering classes for work-oriented fields

It had no armed guards or fences

Weirdly, still segregated

Things weren’t all great, however

In her 1929 book, The Inside of Prohibition, she described her problems

The law was too weak to do the job

The man in charge was not up to the task

She was only given volunteers to help make arrests

Things were so bad, one of her early arrests was a group that actually fielded a baseball team called the BOOTLEGGERS

She helped convinced the state department to give her boats and crews to apprehend alcohol coming into the country by boat

Reportedly, she met with the Treasury’s Prohibition unit, the US Coast Guard, and the Customs Service once and weeks later Congress okayed $11 million dollars for speed boats and equipment

She might have been the only person working to enforce prohibition

She said, “At one time it was quite apparent that no real effort was being made to put an end to such open defiance of our laws. Liquor runners operated off Florida practically in the open, in broad daylight, with little or no interference. There for years the prosecuting office and the prohibition agents engaged equally in the game of evasion of responsibility.”

In 1923, she successfully brought down the ‘Big Four of Savannah’

Reportedly the largest bootlegging ring in the US

She brought in George Remus, nicknamed ‘King of the Bootleggers’ and supposedly the inspiration for Jay Gatsby

Mabel came under a lot of trouble at one point for arresting Helen Morgan, a popular singer who had been reportedly duped into running a speakeasy

She regularly made the society magazines as a bit of a villain

She also argued to reform prisons for young offenders

She is credited with starting the prison work programs for male prisons

She started the first record keeping system for federal inmate populations

In 1924, Mabel and her husband Arthur got divorced

They were separated in 1916

Her mother-in-law moved in with Mabel and Arthur but Mabel financially supported the whole family

Reportedly because after putting Arthur through law school, he was unwilling to pay his share of expenses

In 1925, she adopted a two-year-old daughter named Dorothy Rae

Whom she raised with her friends

Feminism, Sexuality, and Politics by Estella B. Freedman

The book mentions that this was a more common practice at the time for career women that wanted a family.

Her parents took over when she was in Washington

Back in Prohibition, however, Mabel prosecuted 48,734 cases between 1924 and 1925, of which resulted in 39,072 convictions

278 cases went to the Supreme Court

She argued 40 of those cases

In 1927, she devised the plan to catch gangsters with tax evasion and in 1931 successfully prosecuted Al Capone

She recommended J. Edgar Hoover to head the FBI

In 1928, she campaigned for Republican candidate Herbert Hoover

To do this, she would address Methodist ministers and slam Hoover’s Democrat opponent, Al Smith as a ‘wet’ candidate

She began timing speakeasy raids to coincide with the Democratic convention

She was recognized as a major force behind getting Hoover elected

She took political help anywhere she could get it including the Woman’s Christian Temperance Union and the Ku Klux Klan saying, “I have no objection to people dressing up in sheets if they enjoy that sort of thing.”

For her service, she expected to be appointed Attorney General but was snubbed

In 1928, she resigned her post and returned to private practice

Mabel’s first case outside of the government was for California Fruit Industries that made wine and went on to serve as a lobbyist for the industry

CFI’s first big product push with her was Vine-Glo

Which was a concentrate that if added to water and sugar and left alone for two months made wine at home

Her casework set the foundation for the basic interpretations of the 16th and 18th amendments

In 1930, Mabel successfully argued for Frederick Albert Cook’s release from prison

He had been falsely imprisoned when several of his business partners committed fraud

Because his lawyer, Joseph Weldon Bailey, had a personal problem with the judge, he lost the case

Mabel managed to get him off his 14-year sentence in 7

Cook claimed to be the first explorer to reach the North Pole

In 1950, she served as counsel to the Screen Directors Guild

She defended the studios during the “Red Scare” and Joe McCarthy

She represented Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer and Aviation Corp. of America

Her famous clients include

Louis B. Mayer

Jean Harlow

Clark Gable

Jeanette MacDonald

She also began defending bootleggers she had helped put away

She went on to pioneer the fields of aviation and radio law

She was the first woman to chair a committee for the American Bar Association for aeronautical law

She got her pilot’s license and promoted air travel with Amelia Earhart and Jacqueline Cochoran (created the Women’s Auxillary Army Corps and Women Airforce Service Pilot organizations and was the first woman to break the sound barrier)

She received an Honorary Doctorate from the Aeronautical Chamber of Commerce

Due to intense criticism of her role in Al Smith losing the presidency, as her rhetoric was seen as anti-Catholic, she converted to Catholicism

Later in life, she worked to destroy many of her personal records (especially from when she was Attorney General)

She, in fact, was overlooked by several early women’s history studies as she purposely erased many of her personal histories

Which is why much of what we know comes from her legal work

Mabel Walker Willebrandt died of lung cancer in Riverside, California

She was survived by her adopted daughter, Dorothy Rae (Van Dyke)

Her lifelong friend, Judge John J. Sirica, was quoted as saying, “If Mabel had worn trousers, she could have been president.”

Nicknames

“First Legal Lady of the Land”

“Prohibition Portia” (which is a joke from Julius Caesar–it’s Brutus’s wife)

“Deborah of the Drys”

“Mrs. Firebrand.”

Fun facts

She owned a farm in Gettysburg, Pennsylvania

Once advised a prostitute she worked for on “going straight”

Mabel looked over her books and said to keep working six more months

Then ended up footing the rest of the bill herself to get the woman and her sons into a nice home

Quotes

“Give me the authority and let me have my pick of 300 men and I’ll make this country as dry as it is humanly possible. There’s one way it can be done – get at the source of supply. I know them and I know how they could be cut off. I have no patience with this policy of going after the hip-pocket and speakeasy cases. That’s like trying to dry up the Atlantic Ocean with a blotter.”

In reference to herself “an instrument of God”

  Physical Hawtness: 2/5

Described as Comely

Sort of an Elisabeth Moss

More of the way she carries herself than her looks (substance over style)

Mental Hawtness: 5/5

She started school at age 13

was teaching at age 17

a principal at 22

Assistant Attorney General at 32

Social Impact: 3/5

For her time, she made a huge splash

Lots of firsts

Set a tone for the whole decade of the ‘20s

Je Ne Sais Quoi: 2/5

Problematic

Reformed?

Sounds too unbelievable for a movie

Historical Hotties – Mabel Walker Willebrandt Hey! I got the honor of being on Historical Hotties. It's a podcast about researching hot historical figures and ranking them.

[angryrdpanda]

The Tragic Mulatto Myth

Lydia Maria Child introduced the literary character that we call the tragic mulatto1 in two short stories: "The Quadroons" (1842) and "Slavery's Pleasant Homes" (1843). She portrayed this light skinned woman as the offspring of a white slaveholder and his black female slave. This mulatto's life was indeed tragic. She was ignorant of both her mother's race and her own. She believed herself to be white and free. Her heart was pure, her manners impeccable, her language polished, and her face beautiful. Her father died; her "negro blood" discovered, she was remanded to slavery, deserted by her white lover, and died a victim of slavery and white male violence. A similar portrayal of the near-white mulatto appeared in Clotel (1853), a novel written by black abolitionist William Wells Brown.

A century later literary and cinematic portrayals of the tragic mulatto emphasized her personal pathologies: self-hatred, depression, alcoholism, sexual perversion, and suicide attempts being the most common. If light enough to "pass" as white, she did, but passing led to deeper self-loathing. She pitied or despised blacks and the "blackness" in herself; she hated or feared whites yet desperately sought their approval. In a race-based society, the tragic mulatto found peace only in death. She evoked pity or scorn, not sympathy. Sterling Brown summarized the treatment of the tragic mulatto by white writers:

White writers insist upon the mulatto's unhappiness for other reasons. To them he is the anguished victim of divided inheritance. Mathematically they work it out that his intellectual strivings and self-control come from his white blood, and his emotional urgings, indolence and potential savagery come from his Negro blood. Their favorite character, the octoroon, wretched because of the "single drop of midnight in her veins," desires a white lover above all else, and must therefore go down to a tragic end.(Brown, 1969, p. 145)

Vara Caspary's novel The White Girl (1929) told the story of Solaria, a beautiful mulatto who passes for white. Her secret is revealed by the appearance of her brown-skinned brother. Depressed, and believing that her skin is becoming darker, Solaria drinks poison. A more realistic but equally depressing mulatto character is found in Geoffrey Barnes' novel Dark Lustre (1932). Alpine, the light-skinned "heroine," dies in childbirth, but her white baby lives to continue "a cycle of pain." Both Solaria and Alpine are repulsed by blacks, especially black suitors.

Most tragic mulattoes were women, although the self-loathing Sergeant Waters in A Soldier's Story (Jewison, 1984) clearly fits the tragic mulatto stereotype. The troubled mulatto is portrayed as a selfish woman who will give up all, including her black family, in order to live as a white person. These words are illustrative:

Don't come for me. If you see me in the street, don't speak to me. From this moment on I'm White. I am not colored. You have to give me up.

These words were spoken by Peola, a tortured, self-hating black girl in the movie Imitation of Life (Laemmle & Stahl, 1934). Peola, played adeptly by Fredi Washington, had skin that looked white. But she was not socially white. She was a mulatto. Peola was tired of being treated as a second-class citizen; tired, that is, of being treated like a 1930s black American. She passed for white and begged her mother to understand.

Imitation of Life, based on Fannie Hurst's best selling novel, traces the lives of two widows, one white and the employer, the other black and the servant. Each woman has one daughter. The white woman, Beatrice Pullman (played by Claudette Colbert), hires the black woman, Delilah, (played by Louise Beavers) as a live-in cook and housekeeper. It is the depression, and the two women and their daughters live in poverty -- even a financially struggling white woman can afford a mammy. Their economic salvation comes when Delilah shares a secret pancake recipe with her boss. Beatrice opens a restaurant, markets the recipe, and soon becomes wealthy. She offers Delilah, the restaurant's cook, a twenty percent share of the profits. Regarding the recipe, Delilah, a true cinematic mammy, delivers two of the most pathetic lines ever from a black character: "I gives it to you, honey. I makes you a present of it." While Delilah is keeping her mistress's family intact, her relationship with Peola, her daughter, disintegrates.

Peola is the antithesis of the mammy caricature. Delilah knows her place in the Jim Crow hierarchy: the bottom rung. Hers is an accommodating resignation, bordering on contentment. Peola hates her life, wants more, wants to live as a white person, to have the opportunities that whites enjoy. Delilah hopes that her daughter will accept her racial heritage. "He [God] made you black, honey. Don't be telling Him his business. Accept it, honey." Peola wants to be loved by a white man, to marry a white man. She is beautiful, sensual, a potential wife to any white man who does not know her secret. Peola wants to live without the stigma of being black -- and in the 1930s that stigma was real and measurable. Ultimately and inevitably, Peola rejects her mother, runs away, and passes for white. Delilah dies of a broken heart. A repentant and tearful Peola returns to her mother's funeral.

Audiences, black and white (and they were separate), hated what Peola did to her mother -- and they hated Peola. She is often portrayed as the epitome of selfishness. In many academic discussions about tragic mulattoes the name Peola is included. From the mid-1930s through the late 1970s, Peola was an epithet used by blacks against light-skinned black women who identified with mainstream white society. A Peola looked white and wanted to be white. During the Civil Rights Movement and the Black Power Movement, the name Peola was an insult comparable to Uncle Tom, albeit a light-skinned female version.

Fredi Washington, the black actress who played Peola, was light enough to pass for white. Rumor has it that in later movies makeup was used to "blacken" her skin so white audiences would know her race. She had sharply defined features; long, dark, and straight hair, and green eyes; this limited the roles she was offered. She could not play mammy roles, and though she looked white, no acknowledged black was allowed to play a white person from the 1930's through the 1950's.

Imitation of Life was remade in 1959 (Hunter & Sirk). The plot is essentially the same; however, Peola is called Sara Jane, and she is played by Susan Kohner, a white actress. Delilah is now Annie Johnson. The pancake storyline is gone. Instead, the white mistress is a struggling actress. The crux of the story remains the light-skinned girl's attempts to pass for white. She runs away and becomes a chorus girl in a sleazy nightclub. Her dark skinned mother (played by Juanita Moore) follows her. She begs her mother to leave her alone. Sara Jane does not want to marry a "colored chauffeur"; she wants a white boyfriend. She gets a white boyfriend, but, when he discovers her secret, he savagely beats her and leaves her in a gutter. As in the original, Sara Jane's mother dies from a broken heart, and the repentant child tearfully returns to the funeral.

Peola and Sara Jane were cinematic tragic mulattoes. They were big screen testaments to the commonly held belief that "mixed blood" brought sorrow. If only they did not have a "drop of Negro blood." Many audience members nodded agreement when Annie Johnson asked rhetorically, "How do you explain to your daughter that she was born to hurt?"

Were real mulattoes born to hurt? All racial minorities in the United States have been victimized by the dominant group, although the expressions of that oppression vary. Mulattoes were considered black; therefore, they were slaves along with their darker kinsmen. All slaves were "born to hurt," but some writers have argued that mulattoes were privileged, relative to dark-skinned blacks. E.B. Reuter (1919), a historian, wrote:

In slavery days, they were most frequently the trained servants and had the advantages of daily contact with cultured men and women. Many of them were free and so enjoyed whatever advantages went with that superior status. They were considered by the white people to be superior in intelligence to the black Negroes, and came to take great pride in the fact of their white blood....When possible, they formed a sort of mixed-blood caste and held themselves aloof from the black Negroes and the slaves of lower status. (p. 378)

Reuter's claim that mulattoes were held in higher regard and treated better than "pure blacks" must be examined closely. American slavery lasted for more than two centuries; therefore, it is difficult to generalize about the institution. The interactions between slaveholder and slaves varied across decades--and from plantation to plantation. Nevertheless, there are clues regarding the status of mulattoes. In a variety of public statements and laws, the offspring of white-black sexual relations were referred to as "mongrels" or "spurious" (Nash, 1974, p. 287). Also, these interracial children were always legally defined as pure blacks, which was different from how they were handled in other New World countries. A slaveholder claimed that there was "not an old plantation in which the grandchildren of the owner [therefore mulattos] are not whipped in the field by his overseer" (Furnas, 1956, p. 142). Further, it seems that mulatto women were sometimes targeted for sexual abuse.

According to the historian J. C. Furnas (1956), in some slave markets, mulattoes and quadroons brought higher prices, because of their use as sexual objects (p. 149). Some slavers found dark skin vulgar and repulsive. The mulatto approximated the white ideal of female attractiveness. All slave women (and men and children) were vulnerable to being raped, but the mulatto afforded the slave owner the opportunity to rape, with impunity, a woman who was physically white (or near-white) but legally black. A greater likelihood of being raped is certainly not an indication of favored status.

The mulatto woman was depicted as a seductress whose beauty drove white men to rape her. This is an obvious and flawed attempt to reconcile the prohibitions against miscegenation (interracial sexual relations) with the reality that whites routinely used blacks as sexual objects. One slaver noted, "There is not a likely looking girl in this State that is not the concubine of a White man..." (Furnas, 1956, p. 142). Every mulatto was proof that the color line had been crossed. In this regard, mulattoes were symbols of rape and concubinage. Gary B. Nash (1974) summarized the slavery-era relationship between the rape of black women, the handling of mulattoes, and white dominance:

Though skin color came to assume importance through generations of association with slavery, white colonists developed few qualms about intimate contact with black women. But raising the social status of those who labored at the bottom of society and who were defined as abysmally inferior was a matter of serious concern. It was resolved by insuring that the mulatto would not occupy a position midway between white and black. Any black blood classified a person as black; and to be black was to be a slave.... By prohibiting racial intermarriage, winking at interracial sex, and defining all mixed offspring as black, white society found the ideal answer to its labor needs, its extracurricular and inadmissible sexual desires, its compulsion to maintain its culture purebred, and the problem of maintaining, at least in theory, absolute social control. (pp. 289-290)

George M. Fredrickson (1971), author of The Black Image in the White Mind, claimed that many white Americans believed that mulattoes were a degenerate race because they had "White blood" which made them ambitious and power hungry combined with "Black blood" which made them animalistic and savage. The attributing of personality and morality traits to "blood" seems foolish today, but it was taken seriously in the past. Charles Carroll, author of The Negro a Beast (1900), described blacks as apelike. Regarding mulattoes, the offspring of "unnatural relationships," they did not have "the right to live," because, Carroll said, they were the majority of rapists and killers (Fredrickson, 1971, p. 277). His claim was untrue but widely believed. In 1899 a southern white woman, L. H. Harris, wrote to the editor of the Independent that the "negro brute" who rapes white women was "nearly always a mulatto," with "enough white blood in him to replace native humility and cowardice with Caucasian audacity" (Fredrickson, 1971, p. 277). Mulatto women were depicted as emotionally troubled seducers and mulatto men as power hungry criminals. Nowhere are these depictions more evident than in D. W. Griffith's film The Birth of a Nation (1915).

The Birth of a Nation is arguably the most racist mainstream movie produced in the United States. This melodrama of the Civil War and Reconstruction justified and glorified the Ku Klux Klan. Indeed, the Klan of the 1920s owes its existence to William Joseph Simmons, an itinerant Methodist preacher who watched the film a dozen times, then felt divinely inspired to resurrect the Klan which had been dormant since 1871. D. W. Griffith based the film on Thomas Dixon's anti-black novel The Clansman (1905) (also the original title of the movie). Griffith, following Dixon's lead, depicted his black characters as either "loyal darkies" or brutes and beasts lusting for power and, worse yet, lusting for white women.

The Birth of a Nation tells the story of two families, the Stonemans of Pennsylvania, and the Camerons of South Carolina. The Stonemans, headed by politician Austin Stoneman, and the Camerons, headed by slaveholder "Little Colonel" Ben Cameron, have their longtime friendship divided by the Civil War. The Civil War exacts a terrible toll on both families: both have sons die in the war. The Camerons, like many slaveholders, suffer "ruin, devastation, rapine, and pillage." The Birth of a Nation depicts Radical Reconstruction as a time when blacks dominate and oppress whites. The film shows blacks pushing whites off sidewalks, snatching the possessions of whites, attempting to rape a white teenager, and killing blacks who are loyal to whites (Leab, 1976, p. 28). Stoneman, a carpetbagger, moves his family to the South. He falls under the influence of Lydia, his mulatto housekeeper and mistress.

Austin Stoneman is portrayed as a naive politician who betrays his people: whites. Lydia, his lover, is described in a subtitle as the "weakness that is to blight a nation." Stoneman sends another mulatto, Silas Lynch, to "aid the carpetbaggers in organizing and wielding the power of the vote." Lynch, owing to his "white blood," becomes ambitious. He and his agents rile the local blacks. They attack whites and pillage. Lynch becomes lieutenant governor, and his black co-conspirators are voted into statewide political offices. The Birth of a Nation shows black legislators debating a bill to legalize interracial marriage -- their legs propped on tables, eating chicken, and drinking whiskey.

Silas Lynch proposes marriage to Stoneman's daughter, Elsie. He says, "I will build a black empire and you as my queen shall rule by my side." When she refuses, he binds her and decides on a "forced marriage." Lynch informs Stoneman that he wants to marry a white woman. Stoneman approves until he discovers that the white woman is his daughter. While this drama unfolds, blacks attack whites. It looks hopeless until the newly formed Ku Klux Klan arrives to reestablish white rule.

The Birth of a Nation set the standard for cinematic technical innovation -- the imaginative use of cross-cutting, lighting, editing, and close-ups. It also set the standard for cinematic anti-black images. All of the major black caricatures are in the movie, including, mammies, sambos, toms, picaninnies, coons, beasts, and tragic mulattoes. The depictions of Lydia -- a cold-hearted, hateful seductress -- and Silas Lynch -- a power hungry, sex-obsessed criminal -- were early examples of the pathologies supposedly inherent in the tragic mulatto stereotype.

Mulattoes did not fare better in other books and movies, especially those who passed for white. In Nella Larsen's novel Passing (1929), Clare, a mulatto passing for white, frequently is drawn to blacks in Harlem. Her bigoted white husband finds her there. Her problems are solved when she falls to her death from a sixth story window. In the movie Show Boat(Laemmle & Whale, 1936), a beautiful young entertainer, Julie, discovers that she has "Negro blood." Existing laws held that "one drop of Negro blood makes you a Negro." Her husband (and the movie's writers and producer) take this "one drop rule" literally. The husband cuts her hand with a knife and sucks her blood. This supposedly makes him a Negro. Afterward Julie and her newly-mulattoed husband walk hand-in-hand. Nevertheless, she is a screen mulatto, so the movie ends with this one-time cheerful "white" woman, now a Negro alcoholic.

Lost Boundaries is a book by William L. White (1948), made into a movie in 1949 (de Rochemont & Werker). It tells the story of a troubled mulatto couple, the Johnsons. The husband is a physician, but he cannot get a job in a southern black hospital because he "looks white," and no southern white hospital will hire him. The Johnsons move to New England and pass for white. They become pillars of their local community -- all the while terrified of being discredited. Years later, when their secret is discovered, the townspeople turn against them. The town's white minister delivers a sermon on racial tolerance which leads the locals, shamefaced and guilt-ridden, to befriend again the mulatto couple. Lost Boundaries, despite the white minister's sermon, blames the mulatto couple, not a racist culture, for the discrimination and personal conflicts faced by the Johnsons.

In 1958 Natalie Wood starred in Kings Go Forth (Ross & Daves), the story of a young French mulatto who passes for white. She becomes involved with two American soldiers on leave from World War II. They are both infatuated with her until they discover that her father is black. Both men desert her. She attempts suicide unsuccessfully. Given another chance to live, she turns her family's large home into a hostel for war orphans, "those just as deprived of love as herself" (Bogle, 1994, p. 192). At the movie's end, one of the soldiers is dead; the other, missing an arm, returns to the mulatto woman. They are comparable, both damaged, and it is implied that they will marry.

The mulatto women portrayed in Show Boat, Lost Boundaries, and Kings Go Forthwere portrayed by white actresses. It was a common practice. Producers felt that white audiences would feel sympathy for a tortured white woman, even if she was portraying a mulatto character. The audience knew she was really white. In Pinky(Zanuck & Kazan, 1949), Jeanne Crain, a well-known actress, played the role of the troubled mulatto. Her dark-skinned grandmother was played by Ethel Waters. When audiences saw Ethel Waters doing menial labor, it was consistent with their understanding of a mammy's life, but when Jeanne Crain was shown washing other people's clothes audiences cried.

Even black filmmakers like Oscar Micheaux made movies with tragic mulattoes. Within Our Gates (Micheaux, 1920) tells the story of a mulatto woman who is hit by a car, menaced by a con man, nearly raped by a white man, and witnesses the lynching of her entire family. God's Step Children (Micheaux, 1938) tells the story of Naomi, a mulatto who leaves her black husband and child and passes for white. Later, consumed by guilt, she commits suicide. Mulatto actresses played these roles.

Fredi Washington, the star of Imitation of Life, was one of the first cinematic tragic mulattoes. She was followed by women like Dorothy Dandridge and Nina Mae McKinney. Dandridge deserves special attention because she not only portrayed doomed, unfulfilled women, but she was the embodiment of the tragic mulatto in real life. Her role as the lead character in Carmen Jones (Preminger, 1954) helped make her a star. She was the first black featured on the cover of Life magazine. In Island in the Sun (Zanuck & Rossen, 1957) she was the first black woman to be held -- lovingly -- in the arms of a white man in an American movie. She was a beautiful and talented actress, but Hollywood was not ready for a black leading lady; the only roles offered to her were variants of the tragic mulatto theme. Her personal life was filled with failed relationships. Disillusioned by roles that limited her to exotic, self-destructive mulatto types, she went to Europe, where she fared worse. She died in 1965, at the age of forty-two, from an overdose of anti-depressants.

Today's successful mulatto actresses -- for example, Halle Berry, Lisa Bonet and Jasmine Guy -- owe a debt to the pioneering efforts of Dandridge. These women have great wealth and fame. They are bi-racial, but their statuses and circumstances are not tragic. They are not marginalized; they are mainstream celebrities. Dark-skinned actress -- Whoopi Goldberg, Angela Bassett, Alfre Woodard, and Joie Lee -- have enjoyed comparable success. They, too, benefit from Dandridge's path clearing.

The tragic mulatto was more myth than reality; Dandridge was an exception. The mulatto was made tragic in the minds of whites who reasoned that the greatest tragedy was to be near-white: so close, yet a racial gulf away. The near-white was to be pitied -- and shunned. There were undoubtedly light skinned blacks, male and female, who felt marginalized in this race conscious culture. This was true for many people of color, including dark skinned blacks. Self-hatred and intraracial hatred are not limited to light skinned blacks. There is evidence that all racial minorities in the United States have battled feelings of inferiority and in-group animosity; those are, unfortunately, the costs of being a minority.

The tragic mulatto stereotype claims that mulattoes occupy the margins of two worlds, fitting into neither, accepted by neither. This is not true of real life mulattoes. Historically, mulattoes were not only accepted into the black community, but were often its leaders and spokespersons, both nationally and at neighborhood levels. Frederick Douglass, W.E.B. DuBois, Booker T. Washington, Elizabeth Ross Haynes,2 Mary Church Terrell,3 Thurgood Marshall, Malcolm X, and Louis Farrakhan were all mulattoes. Walter White, the former head of the NAACP, and Adam Clayton Powell, an outspoken Congressman, were both light enough to pass for white. Other notable mulattoes include Langston Hughes, Billie Holiday, and Jean Toomer, author of Cane (1923), and the grandson of mulatto Reconstruction politician P.B.S. Pinchback.

There was tragedy in the lives of light skinned black women -- there was also tragedy in the lives of most dark skinned black women -- and men and children. The tragedy was not that they were black, or had a drop of "Negro blood," although whites saw that as a tragedy. Rather, the real tragedy was the way race was used to limit the chances of people of color. The 21st century finds an America increasingly more tolerant of interracial unions and the resulting offspring.

© Dr. David Pilgrim, Professor of Sociology Ferris State University Nov., 2000 Edited 2012

1 A mulatto is defined as: the first general offspring of a black and white parent; or, an individual with both white and black ancestors. Generally, mulattoes are light-skinned, though dark enough to be excluded from the white race.

2 Elizabeth Ross Haynes was a social worker, sociologist, and a pioneer in the YWCA movement.

3 Mary Church Terrell was a feminist, civil rights activist, and the first president of the National Association of Colored Women.

Also See: Tragic Mulatto Stereotype Image Gallery

[stephspencer10]

Famous ‘n’ Infamous Relatives

“We all come from the past, and children ought to know what it was that went into their making.” Russell Baker

  The following book by Diana Spencer’s brother, Charles Spencer, the ninth Earl of England, chronicles the story of his Royal family. It may be of interest to Spencer families and anyone related to the Spencers.

I had been told by my mother and my sister Mary Spencer that this book showed how we were related to this royal line. Recently I have done some fact-checking, and found the fact is, if we are related, it’s so far back as to be debatable.

    The Spencer Family Hardcover – November 4, 1999

by Charles Spencer (Author)

An insider’s history of the Spencer family, this book tells the family’s story from the sheep farmers of the 16th century through the Civil War and then the relationship with the Marlboroughs, on through the 19th century when the third Earl was one of the architects of the 1832 Reform Bill, to recent years and the death of Princess Diana. In the last chapter, Charles Spencer writes about his own views of the family’s history and what hopes he has for the future.</div> <em></em>

A famous sports figure, Eddie LeBaron, I’m proud to say, is part of my extended family. You can find him by using your search engine, Wikipedia, etc. He was a war hero, and also a Star in the NFL at 5-foot- seven! 

Years ago, in the public library, I found and enjoyed reading a well-written, interesting biography about him — though I’m not even a sports fan. I came away feeling so very proud of my cousin, Eddie LeBaron! He is a success story — a true hero who overcame many difficulties to become the sports star he had dreamed of being — and much more!

Eddie LeBaron

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    Eddie LeBaron

1953 Bowman football card

No. 14 Position: Quarterback Personal information Date of birth: January 7, 1930 Place of birth: San Rafael, California Date of death: April 1, 2015 (aged 85) Place of death: Stockton, California Height: 5 ft 7 in (1.70 m) Weight: 168 lb (76 kg) Career information High school: Oakdale (CA) College: Pacific NFL Draft: 1950 / Round: 10 / Pick: 123 Career history

Washington Redskins (1952–1953)

Calgary Stampeders (1954)

Washington Redskins (1955–1959)

Dallas Cowboys (1960–1963)

Career highlights and awards

4× Pro Bowl (1955, 1957, 1958, 1962)

NFL Rookie of the Year (1952)

80 Greatest Redskins

Washington Redskins Ring of Fame

All-American (1949)

Career NFL statistics

Pass attempts: 1,796 Pass completions: 898 Percentage: 50.0 TD–INT: 104–141 Passing Yards: 13,399 Passer rating: 61.4 Player stats at NFL.com

  Player stats at PFR

College Football Hall of Fame

Edward Wayne LeBaron, Jr. (January 7, 1930 – April 1, 2015) was an American football quarterback in the 1950s and early 1960s in the National Football League for the Washington Redskins and the Dallas Cowboys. He played college football for the College of the Pacific. He also was an executive vice president of the NFL’s Atlanta Falcons.

Contents

 [hide] 

1Early years

2College career

3Military service

4Professional career

4.1Washington Redskins (first stint)

4.2Calgary Stampeders (WIFU)

4.3Washington Redskins (second stint)

4.4Dallas Cowboys

5Personal life

6See also

7References

8Further reading

9External links

Early years[edit]

Born in San Rafael, California,[1] LeBaron graduated from Oakdale High School in Oakdale, northeast of Modesto.

College career[edit]

LeBaron enrolled at the College of the Pacific (now the University of the Pacific) in Stockton as a 16-year-old.[2] He played college football for the Tigers under Amos Alonzo Stagg and Larry Siemering from 1946 to 1949, lettering all four years and achieving All-American honors as a senior. The Tigers registered an undefeated season (11–0) in 1949, led the nation in total offense (502.9 yards a game), and set an NCAA single-season record of 575 points. LeBaron was a two-way, 60-minute player, as a quarterback on offense, safety on defense, and punter on special teams. He also played one year of baseball for the Tigers as a catcher.

He left the school after re-writing many of the football records: career touchdowns (59), touchdowns in a season (23), longest punt (74 yards), most yardage off interception returns in a game (119), most times leading the team in total offense (3).

He was inducted into the College Football Hall of Fame in 1980,[3] into the Bay Area Sports Hall of Fame in 2004[4] and was a charter inductee into the Sac-Joaquin Section Hall of Fame in October 2010.[5]

Military service[edit]

LeBaron was commissioned in the U.S. Marine Corps reserves while in college and served as a lieutenant in the Korean War after graduation. He was wounded twice and was decorated with the Purple Heart. For his heroic actions on the front lines, he was awarded the Bronze Star. Due to his diminutive size, 5 feet, 7 inches, and leadership skills from his military service, he was sometimes known as the “Littlest General”.[6]

In 2008, he was inducted into the U.S. Marine Corps Sports Hall of Fame.

Professional career[edit]

Washington Redskins (first stint)[edit]

LeBaron was selected in the tenth round (123rd overall) of the 1950 NFL draft by the Washington Redskins, but had to leave training camp to perform military service during the Korean War. At 5 ft 7 in (1.70 m), he was one of the shortest quarterbacks in the history of the NFL.

He returned to the NFL in 1952 after a two-year commitment to the United States Marine Corpsas a lieutenant, when he was discharged after being wounded in combat. He replaced future hall of famer Sammy Baugh in the starting lineup after the fourth game and received All-Rookie honors at the end of the season.[7] The next year he was limited with a knee injury and also shared the starting position with Jack Scarbath.

Calgary Stampeders (WIFU)[edit]

In 1954, the Western Interprovincial Football Union (a predecessor of the Canadian Football League) raided the NFL talent to improve its level of play. LeBaron signed with the Calgary Stampeders along with his Redskins teammate Gene Brito, because his college coach Larry Siemering was named the team’s head coach.[8] He registered 1,815 passing yards, 8 touchdowns and 24 interceptions during the season. He also played defensive back and punter. He decided to return to the NFL at the end of the year, after the team fired Siemering.

Washington Redskins (second stint)[edit]

On December 9, 1954, he re-signed with the Washington Redskins.[9] In his seven seasons with the Redskins he started 55 of a possible 72 games at quarterback (he played in 70 of those 72 games).[10] He was also the primary punter for his first three seasons with Washington (punting 171 times for a total of 6,995 yards in five seasons).[10] He was the league’s top-rated quarterback in 1958. He announced his retirement to focus on his law practice at the end of the 1959 season.[11]

Dallas Cowboys[edit]

After not being able to participate in the 1960 NFL draft during their inaugural year of existence, the Dallas Cowboys traded their first round (#2-Norm Snead) and sixth round (#72-Joe Krakoski) draft choices in the 1961 NFL Draft to the Washington Redskins in exchange for LeBaron,[12] convincing him to come out of retirement to become the franchise’s first starting quarterback. He started 10 of 12 games in 1960, with rookie Don Meredith and Don Heinrichstarting the other two.[13] He also scored the Cowboys’ first-ever touchdown in their first exhibition game against the San Francisco 49ers, on August 6 in Seattle. He set a record for the shortest touchdown pass in league history, with his throw to receiver Dick Bielski from the 2-inch line against the Redskins on October 9, 1960.[14]

LeBaron started 10 of 14 games in 1961, with Meredith starting the other four.[15] He only started five games in 1962, splitting time with Meredith.[16] He started the first game of the 1963 season, but was replaced permanently by Meredith for the rest of the season.[17]

He retired at the end of 1963, after playing 12 seasons, throwing for 13,399 yards and 104 touchdowns and being selected for the Pro Bowl four times in 1955, 1957, 1958, and 1962.[10]He is the shortest quarterback to ever be selected to the Pro Bowl.[18] He was also known as an elusive scrambler and great ball-handler.

Personal life[edit]

LeBaron became a football announcer for CBS Sports after his NFL career, and worked as an announcer from 1966 to 1971.[19] He had obtained a law degree during his off-seasons from football, and practiced law after his football career. He was also the general manager of the Atlanta Falcons from 1977 to 1982 and executive vice president from 1983 through 1985.[20]LeBaron was an avid golfer and continued to play golf in his retirement. He died of natural causes on April 1, 2015.[21]

                                                         Documentary about Ervil LeBaron and his cult

(*Some books about Uncle Ervil LeBaron — in public libraries and bookstores)

https://thetrueprophetfilm.com/proposed-cast/

Proposed cast

THE TRUE PROPHET is an independent film written and directed by Scott Hillier and executive produced by…

THETRUEPROPHETFILM.COM

  NOTE: This movie was planning on its release in 2014. It was never released due to lack of funding. But there is some information here that may very well be of interest to you. For example, on this Website there are some of Ervil’s writings and more. Must see.

A number of books have been published and more than one movie has been done on Mother’s brother, my infamous Uncle Ervil LeBaron. He is now known as “Evil Ervil,” and “The Mormon Manson.” I knew, respected, and loved him till I came to realize, many years later, what a manipulator he was — and before he went off the deep end with his sociopathy and psychosis. 

The “Prophet of Evil” is an especially well-done film produced years ago. It portrays a poignant part of this serial killer’s life. I love how brilliantly Brian Dennehy played the part of my Uncle Ervil.

But no film can possibly portray the depth of suffering, damage, and lunacy this personality-disordered megalomaniac caused in the lives of all he touched — especially his family and his brainwashed, true-believing followers, not to mention his around sixty children. 

You may get the film from wherever you get movies and see the portrayal for yourself. I, myself, will be telling my experiences with my Uncle Ervil down the line in my memoir blogs. You may also read books written about him.

See “Media” and also “Media on Extended Family, Friends and Fundamentalist Cults” in my Menu bar for other books, Book Reviews, and films I may not have listed in this blog. Wikipedia and other Who’s Who sites relate a short history of him also — as well as a short history of many of my other infamous, as well as famous LeBaron and other extended family members and relatives.

For example, you can find in Wikipedia a short biography of my great-great Uncle, Joel Johnson (brother of my great-great grandfather Benjamin F. Johnson) who helped found some of Utah’s first Townsites. And wrote 800 hymns for the Mormon hymnal, during the time of Joseph Smith. Two of these hymns are still in the modern Mormon hymnals. The beautiful “High on the Mountain Top” is one of them — and to this day is still one of mine and Mormonism’s favorite hymns.

Another outstanding relative is my a-number-of-places-removed-maternal great-grandfather, Dr. Francis LeBaron. He was the first of the LeBarons in the United States — brought to America around 1668 by his nurse to save his life, it is said, “because he was part of the French royalty,” or/and his parents were members of the Huguenots — so went into hiding and may eventually have been killed.

~PLEASE NOTE: I took the following material off the Internet. It needs editing. I edited a part of this bio. Do not have time to polish it:

 ~ NOTE: This portrait is of Dr. Francis LeBaron Apothecary General (1781-1829). He is the namesake and great-grandson of Dr. Francis LeBaron born 1668: 

This Dr. Francis LeBaron served in the service of the United States as: Surgeon’s Mate (Navy), Jan. 31, 1800 to Mar. 1, 1802 Garrison Surgeon’s Mate (Army), 1802 to 1808 Garrison Surgeon 1808 to1813 Apothecary General. 1813 to 1821. Check out the following link: http://www.anamelessnobleman.com/HTMLs/ApthcryGnrl.html

Memorial

Photos

Flowers

Edit

Share

Learn about upgrading this memorial…

Birth: Aug. 9, 1668 Bordeaux, France Death: Aug. 8, 1704 Plymouth Plymouth County Massachusetts, USA Francis LeBaron was a doctor from France. There are unconfirmed family stories that he was son of the persecuted Huguenots. One Story has him being handed over to a childless doctor, Louis Pecton of Bordeaux, and being instructed that if his father did not return in one year he was to raise the child as his own and teach him the family trade, for his mother had been killed and his father’s life was in danger. He was just an infant.This would explain how he became a doctor. Louis Pecton raised him and on his death bed in 1693 he told Francis of his true identity. It is said that he also gave him a golden cross that was his mother’s. And it is said that he adored it and never took it off but wore it concealed under his clothing and was buried with it. As far as is known, Francis never revealed his true identity to anyone.

Another story goes that after Louis’s death, Francis became involved with a French privateer. And it is known that he left France aboard a privateer ship.

The ship ran aground in Buzzards Bay in the fall of 1694. This was during the later stages of King William’s war with Louis XIV of France. The French crew was captured by the colonists. Francis became separated from his shipmates.

Some stories have him being hidden by his future wife Mary Wilder, while others have him being left behind because he was sick — or both.

At this time Plymouth had no surgeon and Francis, being a surgeon, performed a successful operation. Since he was willing to settle in Plymouth, the settlers petitioned the govenor to keep him. And it was done.

There is a book written by Mrs. Jane Goodwin Austin whose great-grandfather Nathaniel Goodwin married Lazarus’ widow Lydia. The book is called “The Nameless Nobleman.” It is fictional but is said to be the story of Dr. Francis LeBaron (dated 1876).

LOUIS PECTON had been a surgeon in the French armies. As popular prejudice would not allow of dissections in civil life, and as Harvey’s discoveries were written in English, few French practitioners then knew as much of their profession as did the old women who acted as nurses, or the barbers who monopolized the use of the lancet. In his army practice, young Pecton had abundant opportunity for dissections and for making the acquaintance of English surgeons.

When, therefore, he went to take possession of his patrimony in a suburb of Bordeaux, he was a surgeon of far greater skill and knowledge than was common in that day. He had married some years before. The parents of the parties had arranged the match, the bride and bridegroom knowing or caring little about each other, as was customary.

On settling down at Bordeaux, it was with a sort of agreeable surprise that the young couple found themselves exceedingly well mated, and proceeded to fall in love with each other.

Pecton practiced medicine, mainly from a sense of duty. His property was enough to support him, so that the fees, which he rigidly exacted from the rich, were systematically distributed among the poor.

One dark night, in 1668, the worthy doctor’s surgery was visited by a stranger of commanding appearance, but in humble apparel. In reply to the puzzled look of the former, the stranger pushed aside his hair, pointed to a little star-shaped scar above is temple, and said:

“Yes, my dear Pecton, your unspoken guess is right. But keep your seat. If you want to show me respect, do it by serving me. My life is sought, and so is that of my infant son. You know by whom! Mine he will yet have, but you must save that of my now motherless boy. He will reach your house to-night with his wet-nurse.

“Let him pass as your son till he grows up, Then tell him what you think will be for his good. Educate him well and see that he is trained to martial exercises. Then teach him your own noble calling. Two hundred Louis-d’ors will come with him to meet the expenses. He has been baptized as “Francis.” Honor him by giving him your own honest surname. And if he never knows any other, he will be far happier than if he bore his father’s historic title.

“Finally, rear him as a good Catholic. And teach him to wear this cross constantly, and to have it buried with him. It may lead, in happier times, to his identification.”

So saying, he handed the doctor a small but richly chased gold cross attached to an embroidered ribbon. A long, whispered consultation followed. The result was that the doctor, after conferring with his wife, accepted the trust imposed, but declared that the little stranger should take the place of his own deceased darling. And should be made his heir, unless reclaimed by his father.

The stranger sadly replied: “No! My double benefactor, that will never be. If I am alive, you shall hear from me in just one year. If you do not, you may know that I no longer live.”

The stranger departed. The doctor never heard of him again. The child arrived mysteriously and the family adapted itself to its new circumstances without attracting outside attention. Soon after, they moved to the opposite side of the city, among strangers, who neither knew nor cared whether little Francis Pecton was the son of his nominal parents or not.

At twenty-one, Francis had a fine education as the times went, and his training had been such as his father had requested. He was the embodiment of health and good spirits, the only grief of his life having been the recent death of his supposed mother. His guardian had given him rare instruction in surgery, and had abandoned his medical practice to him, which the young man was following up with enthusiasm.

In 1693, when Francis was twenty-five years old, Dr. Pecton lay on his death-bed. In a long, last interview he revealed to his ward such portion of his history as he knew. Soon after, he departed, leaving Francis heir to his little estate. The latter, now doubly an orphan, never recovered his former light-heartedness — largely because of something he had learned from the doctor which cast a shadow over his spirit for life. His hereditary cross seemed now doubly precious to him, and was seldom long out of his hand.

At length, his old home becoming insupportable, he invested a part of his funds in the city. A part he distributed among the poor of his neighborhood. With the rest, he bought a share in the privateer L’Aigle. Then, assuming the name of LeBaron, as surgeon of his ship, he started out to fight the battles of Louis XIV against William and Mary.

Like most privateers, L’Aigle won many ignoble victories and made some very gallant failures. At length, in 1696, while running along the New England coast, she took a look into Buzzard’s Bay, and being caught there by a south-west wind, she never looked further.

To bear up was impossible and to bear away was destruction. She came to anchor but soon the storm tore her loose and drove her upon the west coast of Falmouth. Her crew all landed safely, but the inhabitants gathered about them with extremely hostile indications. They had mistaken L’Aigle for a pirate, and were disposed to exterminate her crew at once.

After some hours of threatening, Major Bourne, a magistrate, arrived and took command. By his order, the Frenchmen were received as prisoners of war and were finally started on the route for Boston. When they came to march, it was found that the surgeon of the ship was not among the prisoners. He had landed with the crew, and had evidently escaped inland. Some of the people, first agreeing that the fugitive must be a spy, and therefore not entitled to quarter, started in pursuit.

A few miles northward stood a large, rambling house, in which Edward and Elizabeth Wilder had lived and died, and where their children now lived. The morning after the shipwreck, Mary Wilder was at home alone. Her brother and his wife were away for the day, and she was spinning flax and singing psalm tunes in the big, old kitchen. Suddenly a ragged, drabbled, excited young man rushed into the house and in broken language asked her to protect him. Her good sense and her woman’s heart roused her to efficient action. She took the fugitive to the garret and, taking up the loose boards of the floor, exposed a deep space, bounded by the stout wooden ceiling of the room below.

A few mats and sacks were thrown in, some food was provided, and Mary went to watch for the searchers. At length they appeared, examining every bush and hiding-place, far and near. Mary sent her captive into his place of refuge, and then, replacing the floor, she spread some bedding over the spot and lay down. Soon the hunters arrived and examined the house. In the garret they found Mary tucked up on the floor, with her head bound in a towel, and a bowl of sassafras tea by her side. They tried to explain their errand, but she was “so sick” she would not listen. Ransacking the rest of the premises, they went on their way. That night Mary won her sister-in-law over to her side and they two soon coaxed young Edward Wilder to help protect the fugitive.

In the course of two weeks, the latter was well nigh forgotten by the outside world. Major Bourne, who had been consulted by the Wilder’s, volunteered to go with LeBaron to Boston, and ask that he might live in Falmouth, on parole, until exchanged. Early one morning Major Bourne, with Wilder and LeBaron, crossed on horseback to Scusset Harbor, in Sandwich, where a boat at once started for Plymouth. At the latter place the prisoner was turned over to the selectmen who at once put him in care of Major Bourne until a convenient craft should be sailing to Boston.

There was then no surgeon in Plymouth, and there was a very serious case of disease requiring treatment. LeBaron volunteered to perform the operation. His knowledge and skill so impressed the people that the selectmen procured his discharge as a prisoner from Lieut.-Gov. Stoughton, and persuaded him to settle in Plymouth.

Dr. LeBaron’s first use of his freedom was to revisit Falmouth, and bring back Mary Wilder as his wife. How much of his history he told his wife was never revealed by her, beyond what is here recorded. To other people he said nothing. It was only known that he considered himself the victim of an official conspiracy, defrauding him hopelessly of his hereditary rights.

But while this feeling made him ready to abjure his native land and all connected with it, he held steadfastly to his religion, wearing his golden cross night and day, and providing that it should not be removed at his death. Many of his new neighbors were greatly troubled that their should be a devote’ of Rome and this fact much injured his influence.

Indeed, he was often charged with a lack of cordiality and sociability. But the poor found him a true follower of the noble-hearted Pecton. For them, his gentlest manners and most earnest efforts were ready. The remnants of his French property were reclaimed and formed into his private charity fund. When his survivors opened his will, they found that he had bequeathed the town of Plymouth ninety acres of land for the same purpose.

The prosperous complained of his brusqueness, but the weak and friendless blessed the sound of his approaching footsteps. With them, he was never impatient or indifferent, though they were sometimes ungrateful to him. With the aged, he was tender, as they reminded him of his adopted father and mother.

Especially was he affected when, in 1699, he soothed the last moments of Mary Allerton Cushman, who as a girl of ten years had landed from the Mayflower, and now at the age of 90 was the sole survivor of that immortal company. That the orphan of Bordeaux should have been, by such mysterious ways, brought to perform this duty, filled LeBaron’s soul with awe. Eight years of this new life passed quietly away. Then, at the early age of 36, the exile made his last journey. The visitor to Burial Hill in Plymouth may still see the gravestone which Mary Wilder had to import from England. On it he may read: HERE LYES Ye BODY OF Mr FRANCIS LEBARRAN, PHYTICIAN WHO DEPARTED THIS LIFE AUGUST Ye 8, 1704, IN Ye 36 YEAR OF HIS AGE.

A third of a century afterward, loving hands laid Mary Wilder by the side of her long-lost husband. Her son had then, for many years, been his father’s successor as “the beloved physician” of Plymouth. Her grandson was fitting himself for the same high position when his turn should come.

All in this country who bear the name “LeBaron” are of this stock. So are many more, who, through intermarriages with the descendants of Bradford, Standish, Alden, Howland, and Southworth, bear widely different names.

Few of them know of the romance which surrounds their French ancestor. None of them can unravel its mysteries. One of the number has herein told all that he can learn of the matter and it amounts to little more concerning its hero than this family link: Spouse: Mary Wilder Waite (1668 – 1737)Children: James LeBaron (1696 – 1744) Lazarus LeBaron (1698 – 1773)* Francis LeBaron (1701 – 1731)<span class=”fakeLink” title=”header=[  Reverse Relationships:] body=[This relationship was not directly added to this memorial. Rather, it is calculated based on information added to the related person’s memorial. For example: if Joe Public is linked to Jane Public as a spouse, a reciprocal link will automatically be added to Jane Public’s memorial. ] fade=[on] fadespeed=[.09]”>Calculated Relationship Inscription: HERE LYES Ye BODYOF Mr FRANCIS LEBARRAN PHYTICIAN WHO DEPARTED THIS LIFE AUGUST Ye 8. 1704. IN Ye 36 YEAR OF HIS AGE My flesh shall slumber in the ground.

His a-number-of-places-removed-granddaughter, Author Jane Goodwin Austin, wrote a history about him, “The Nameless Nobleman.” I bought the book on Amazon.com a few years ago, as well as other books written by her.

Another book I found years ago in the Public Library was written, I believe, by my Uncle Ben LeBaron’s son, George LeBaron — if I remember his name, and other facts correctly. (If you’re reading this and I am wrong in my data, would you please advise me in my “Comments” section?) 

He told of his experiences earning his Physician’s license and Medical degree at the prestigious Harvard Med School, no less. I say “no less” because if you knew what he grew up under, your sentiments would be the same! He had to be strong and brilliant to do this!

One of Uncle Ervil’s amazing daughters, Author-Speaker-Blogger-and Life Coach, Anna LeBaron, has also written a book. It is about her life growing up in her father’s dangerous and crazy cult — which she ran away from when she was 13! Her memoir, “The Polygamist’s Daughter,” was released March 21, 2017. It’s in the public library, in audiobook, eBook, and print versions. You can order it, now, on Amazon.com and other sites. Check out her Website at AnnaLeBaron.com.

These two above photos are of my cousin Anna LeBaron.

By Stephany Spencer: My Book Review of my cousin Anna LeBaron’s Memoir: “The Polygamist’s Daughter”

Thanks to Tyndale House Publishers, Inc., I was honored with a complimentary ARC (Advance Reader Copy) of cousin Anna LeBaron’s bravely written book, “The Polygamist’s Daughter,” published March 21, 2017.

Regarding Anna’s Memoir, I was disappointed she didn’t tell us more about her miscreant father, “Evil Ervil,” (the murderous “Mormon Manson”). Also wish she had gone more into the details of her “running away from home.” (I would not have cared if the book were longer!)

As it was, her book said very little about her colorful father. And her “running away” was simply to call her married sister to take her in — a sister within walking distance, no less. Still, I have to give her credit for having had the sense and courage to run away at the tender age of thirteen, no less! For having run away, she might even very well have been killed by the cult she is fled!

Even so, in essence, her book was milquetoast for me, in comparison to what was really going on in her family and father’s violent cult that drove her to flee the abusive and corrupt lifestyle. However, I realize she was between a rock and a hard spot when it came to relating this treacherous past.

I, an old veteran of much of that history, also realize that if she were totally up front, it would possibly compromise her present and future — and her amazing success in surviving her malevolent past.

Her father is my mother’s brother. And was my husband’s buddy for ten years — so  I knew him well … as well as you could know a devious man like my Uncle Ervil LeBaron for whom I had felt love and respect, till he went off the deep end in his psychopathy.

Now I feel mostly pity and shame for my insane, sociopathic, revengeful, zealot uncle who, nonetheless, had a lot of people convinced he was a prophet.

To better understand that whole scenario, read “Cult Insanity” by Irene Spencer;” “Prophet of Blood,” by Ben Bradlee, Jr. and Dale Van Atta.  And “The 4 O’clock Murders,”  by Scott Anderson.

To further understand this whole bizarre crime family scene, also check Wikipedia and other online Info about Ervil LeBaron, including my Website Menu bar under “Media About my Family, Friends, and Mormon Fundamentalist Cults.” And “Famous ‘n’ Infamous Relatives of Mine.” You could, as well, watch the excellent film, “Prophet of Evil,” starring Brian Dennehy.

Getting back to Anna LeBaron’s Memoir, “The Polygamist’s Daughter,” everyone in the LeBaron Colony in the 1960’s saw how Uncle Ervil went about preaching and “doing missionary work, ” indifferent toward his nine neglected children he bore by his first wife, bipolar Aunt Delfina.

These indigent kids were left to roam the streets, starving, and unkempt —  not to mention his fifty or more other deprived and abandoned children he bore by his thirteen other wives!

So it hurt to the quick to hear, firsthand, in Anna’s Memoir how it felt for her to be so badly neglected and used by her non-empathetic, uncaring, sense-of-entitlement, narcissistic father!

But when I then read how his unloved and abused daughter Lillian died, I grieved for days. She was one of Aunt Delfina’s children whom I had helped look out for while I lived near them in the LeBaron Colony in Mexico before I escaped the cult in 1967 at age twenty-one.

Lillian was only around five or so, then. And I don’t believe Anna had been born yet. But I had lived across the street from her jolly mother with the beautiful singing voice, Aunt Anna Mae. And had taught her older siblings in my Colonia LeBaron preschool I started in my home at age fifteen.

Therefore, though I wish Anna had gone more into depth, I’m proud of her efforts and the work she put into writing and publishing what she did of her Life Story. I’m sure her tragic memories were anything but easy to put into print.

For me, her story really picked up in the latter part where she began to shoot from the hip. I especially found it enlightening and helpful when she went into detail about how she overcame a bout of deep depression.

I benefited, also, when she told of her epiphany that gave her a new lease on life — a greater purpose for living. She is presently a Life Coach. And works to help improve the world — just the opposite of what her father did!

Though her father preached that he was “Here to set the house of God in order, to prepare it for the second coming of Christ,” in reality, he did just the opposite of everything he preached and claimed!!

Like her father, she is bright, a writer, and a leader. Unlike her father, she exhibits integrity, sanity, empathy, and a loving, giving spirit. So my hat goes off to Anna! She has come a long way, made a lot of good choices, and overcome a lot. I look forward to her next book — when she feels safe to actually “tell all.”

My Uncle Joel LeBaron’s daughter, Ruth Wariner, wrote a bestselling Memoir, “The Sound of Gravel,” published February 2016. It’s available on Amazon.com or wherever you get books. It’s also in audiobook and print in public libraries.

The following essay is my Book Review of “The Sound of Gravel,” a Memoir by Ruth Wariner, a first cousin of mine. (“Wariner” is Ruth’s mother’s maiden name. My mother’s brother, my Uncle Joel LeBaron, was Ruth’s father.)

By Stephany Spencer: In the past year, I’ve read once and listened three times to my cousin Ruth Wariner’s best-selling book/audiobook, “The Sound of Gravel.”  It has gotten higher ratings from me with each new read or listening to it. So I’ve found it pays to read or listen to a book more than once!

With my first read, I deemed the book “Not what I expected.” I grew up much the same way she had, so I had preconceived notions of what it was and should be about. It took listening to it a second time, as an audiobook, to be able to say:

“You go, cousin Ruth! It’s a well-written Memoir that should be read, as well as listened to, at least two times by everyone who thinks Mormon cults are “Just people exercising their freedom of religion.”

This well-scripted book gives you some idea of what “people just exercising their freedom of religion” do to the kids born into these Mormon fundamentalist cults! I should know: I grew up in and then escaped, 50 years ago, this same LeBaron cult Ruth grew up in!

People who grow up in abusive and traumatizing childhoods often split and revert into themselves when anything goes wrong in their life. I’ve learned from the late Dr. David Viscot that feeling sorry for one’s self is a form of splitting. Traumatized people do this so as to try to protect themselves, and to better handle a bad situation. However, it only leads to depression.

Thanks to Ruth’s Memoir, she’s taught me to replace bad situations with the song and mantra: “Count Your Blessings.” I grew up singing this song. But I didn’t realize, till I read Ruth’s book the third time, that this is what I needed to do, more than anything, to keep a good spirit with me and thus avoid depression, negativity — and splitting from myself by feeling sorry for myself in the face of bad situations (like aging, for example!) that I was experiencing or going through.

Now, whenever dark clouds threaten to rain on my sunshine, I quickly remember to say and sing “Count your blessings!” For there are no end of blessings that have been bestowed upon me in my life, despite all the bad things I’ve also survived.

I grew up singing this song, just as my cousin Ruth had. But I had not been taught the lesson Ruth’s mother, Kathy, taught her when she constantly and quickly always reminded her daughter Ruth to “count her blessings” — no matter how bad things were!!

At first, this seemed like a silly thing to consistently say, in the face of all the mire and dire adversity Ruth and her family constantly lived with. But now I realize Ruth’s mother, Kathy, had learned from her upbringing a good lesson that she then passed down to her own children:

Counting one’s blessings chases out negativity and depression, or feeling sorry for oneself. And supplants it with positivity, action, and being in control: the best prescriptions for surviving any bad situation.

 Thank you, Ruth, for passing this lesson on to me  — along with many other lessons you have taught through your outstanding memoir — your valuable gift to the world.

*I’ve posted below the words to this Thanksgiving song, in case you want to sing it too. (The music can be found online, by looking up the title of this song, if you don’t already know it).

Count Your Many Blessings

1-  When upon life’s billows you are tempest-tossed, When you are discouraged, thinking all is lost, Count your many blessings, name them one by one, And it will surprise you what the Lord has done.

Refrain: Count your blessings, name them one by one, Count your blessings, see what God has done! Count your blessings, name them one by one, *Count your many blessings, see what God has done. [*And it will surprise you what the Lord has done.]

 2-  Are you ever burdened with a load of care? Does the cross seem heavy you are called to bear? Count your many blessings, every doubt will fly, And you will keep singing as the days go by

3-  When you look at others with their lands and gold, Think that Christ has promised you His wealth untold; Count your many blessings money cannot buy Your reward in heaven, nor your home on high.

4-  So, amid the conflict whether great or small, Do not be discouraged, God is over all; Count your many blessings, angels will attend, Help and comfort give you to your journey’s end.

By Johnson Oatman, Jr., 1897

“Shattered Dreams” and “Cult Insanity” by Best-Selling Author  Irene Spencer/ AKA: Irene Kunz LeBaron, at IreneSpencerBooks.com.  Her books are also in audiobook form. (Irene is my Aunt, through marriage, as is Rebecca Kimbel, Irene’s half-sister.)

*Note: I took the photo featured on Irene’s book cover,”Cult Insanity. “Uncle Ervil LeBaron is holding my eight-year-old daughter, Asenath Marie Tucker, the little girl in the yellow dress. I took this photograph before I had any idea of the psychopathic, maniacal activities my mother’s brother Ervil was up to.)

“His Favorite Wife,”   by Susan Ray Schmidt/ AKA: Susan Ray LeBaron  (Another Aunt of mine, her Memoir reads like a novel. My family is mentioned in it.)

One of my favorite books on the subject of my relatives and my past is the following book, written by a very talented writer, Aunt Susan Ray Schmidt. (I took care of her for five days when she was around nine years old (long before she married my Uncle Verlan LeBaron, and thus became my aunt) while her parents were out of town, and we were still living in Colonia LeBaron, Chihuahua, Mexico).

Doris Hansen and Rebecca Kimbel also each interviewed Authors Irene LeBaron Spencer (See: IreneSpencerbooks.com)  and Susan Ray Schmidt (see her website). Both are my Aunts. 

Aunt Rebecca Kimbel and Doris Hanson also interviewed, on their TV and YouTube sites, other relatives and friends of mine from my days in the cult — people such as my cousin,  Carolyn Jessop,  a memoirist who wrote the bestselling, “Escape,” and other books.

Also, check out Aunt Rebecca Kimbel’s  excellent and adamant speech on YouTube’s TED-X Talks. (In around only 18 minutes, she did a genius presentation of the main issues concerning Mormon cults, including White slavery.

See the film: “The Childbride of Short Creek.” It was on YouTube, among other places, the last time I checked. (The writers of this film interviewed some of my sisters to gather Info for their Script.)

“Banking on Heaven“  is a Documentary my cousin Laurie Allen  (Mother’s brother, Uncle Wesley’s granddaughter) and her cohort Dot Reidelbach created. This documentary gives an outstanding overview of life as it used to exist for the Mormon fundamentalist female in Short Creek, Arizona; and Hilldale, Utah.

This DVD is available on Amazon.com @@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@

NOTE: My Spencer family line may or may not be related to England’s famous poet Edmund Spenser. The jury is still out on this.

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    Edmund Spenser Born 1552/1553 London, England Died 13 January 1599 (aged 46–47)[1] London, England Resting place Westminster Abbey Occupation Poet Language English Alma mater Pembroke College, Cambridge Period 1569–1599 Notable works The Faerie Queene

Signature

Edmund Spenser (/ˈspɛnsər/; 1552/1553 – 13 January 1599) was an English poet best known for The Faerie Queene, an epic poem and fantastical allegory celebrating the Tudor dynasty and Elizabeth I. He is recognized as one of the premier craftsmen of nascent Modern English verse, and is often considered one of the greatest poets in the English language. He was deeply affected by Irish faerie mythology, which he knew from his home at Kilcolman and possibly from his Irish wife Elizabeth Boyle. His genocidal tracts against Gaelic culture were war propaganda. His house (ruins remain) was burned to the ground during the war, causing him to flee Ireland.

  Edmund Spenser was born in East Smithfield, London, around the year 1552, though there is some ambiguity as to the exact date of his birth. As a young boy, he was educated in London at the Merchant Taylors’ School and matriculated as a sizar at Pembroke College, Cambridge.[2][3] While at Cambridge he became a friend of Gabriel Harvey and later consulted him, despite their differing views on poetry. In 1578, he became for a short time secretary to John Young, Bishop of Rochester.[4] In 1579, he published The Shepheardes Calender and around the same time married his first wife, Machabyas Childe.[5] They had two children, Sylvanus (d.1638) and Katherine.[6]

In July 1580, Spenser went to Ireland in service of the newly appointed Lord Deputy, Arthur Grey, 14th Baron Grey de Wilton. Spenser served under Lord Gray with Walter Raleigh at the Siege of Smerwick massacre.[7] When Lord Grey was recalled to England, Spenser stayed on in Ireland, having acquired other official posts and lands in the Munster Plantation. Raleigh acquired other nearby Munster estates confiscated in the Second Desmond Rebellion. Some time between 1587 and 1589, Spenser acquired his main estate at Kilcolman, near Doneraile in North Cork.[8] He later bought a second holding to the south, at Rennie, on a rock overlooking the river Blackwater in North Cork. Its ruins are still visible today. A short distance away grew a tree, locally known as “Spenser’s Oak” until it was destroyed in a lightning strike in the 1960s. Local legend has it that he penned some of The Faerie Queene under this tree.[9]

In 1590, Spenser brought out the first three books of his most famous work, The Faerie Queene, having travelled to London to publish and promote the work, with the likely assistance of Raleigh. He was successful enough to obtain a life pension of £50 a year from the Queen. He probably hoped to secure a place at court through his poetry, but his next significant publication boldly antagonised the queen’s principal secretary, Lord Burghley (William Cecil), through its inclusion of the satirical Mother Hubberd’s Tale.[10] He returned to Ireland.

By 1594, Spenser’s first wife had died, and in that year he married Elizabeth Boyle, to whom he addressed the sonnet sequence Amoretti. The marriage itself was celebrated in Epithalamion.[11] They had a son named Peregrine.[6]

In 1596, Spenser wrote a prose pamphlet titled A View of the Present State of Ireland. This piece, in the form of a dialogue, circulated in manuscript, remaining unpublished until the mid-seventeenth century. It is probable that it was kept out of print during the author’s lifetime because of its inflammatory content. The pamphlet argued that Ireland would never be totally “pacified” by the English until its indigenous language and customs had been destroyed, if necessary by violence.[12]

In 1598, during the Nine Years War, Spenser was driven from his home by the native Irish forces of Aodh Ó Néill. His castle at Kilcolman was burned, and Ben Jonson, who may have had private information, asserted that one of his infant children died in the blaze.[13]

  Title page, Fowre Hymnes, by Edmund Spenser, published by William Ponsonby, London, 1596

In the year after being driven from his home, 1599, Spenser travelled to London, where he died at the age of forty-six – “for want of bread”, according to Ben Jonson – one of Jonson’s more doubtful statements, since Spenser had a payment to him authorised by the government and was due his pension.[14] His coffin was carried to his grave in Poets’ Corner in Westminster Abbey by other poets, who threw many pens and pieces of poetry into his grave with many tears. His second wife survived him and remarried twice. His sister Sarah, who had accompanied him to Ireland, married into the Travers family, and her descendants were prominent landowners in Cork for centuries.

The Spenserian stanza and sonnet[edit]

Spenser used a distinctive verse form, called the Spenserian stanza, in several works, including The Faerie Queene. The stanza’s main meter is iambic pentameter with a final line in iambic hexameter (having six feet or stresses, known as an Alexandrine), and the rhyme scheme is ababbcbcc. He also used his own rhyme scheme for the sonnet. In a Spenserian sonnet, the last line of every quatrain is linked with the first line of the next one, yielding the rhyme scheme ababbcbccdcdee.

   Joel Johnson, My Great-Great-Uncle

Joel Johnson is my great-great-uncle, brother of my great-great-grandfather Benjamin F Johnson.

My Uncle Joel LeBaron is my mother’s brother and my Great–great Uncle Joel Johnson’s namesake. I was amazed to see how much Uncle Joel LeBaron looks like his Great Uncle Joel Johnson – especially in the cheeks, nose, mouth, and jaw! (He resembles his namesake more than any of my  mother’s other six brothers!)

Great-great uncle Joel Johnson is, among other things, famous for such well-known and beloved Mormon hymns as “High on the Mountaintop.” It  can still be found in modern Mormon hymn books. And is still one of my favorite hymns.

Great-great Uncle Joel Johnson wrote around 800 hymns for the Mormon church. He also helped found some of Utah’s Townsites.

The following I borrowed from Wikipedia for your convenience. But there is also more on him and his history that you can find if you do various online searches:

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia 

“High on the Mountain Top” Hymn

The text writer of the Latter Day Saint hymn

Written 1853 Text by Joel H. Johnson Meter 6 6 6 6 8 8 Melody “Deseret” by Ebenezer Beesley Composed 1854

“High on the Mountain Top” is an 1850s hymn written by Latter Day Saint hymn writers Joel H. Johnson and Ebenezer Beesley.[1]Originally named “Deseret”, it is hymn number 5 in the current LDS Church hymnal.

The lyrics to the hymn were written by Johnson in 1853, five years after Brigham Youngpreached on Ensign Peak as the Mormon pioneers first arrived in the Salt Lake Valley.[2]Even though Johnson’s journal contains more than 700 hymns, “High on the Mountain Top” is his most notable contribution to LDS music.[3]

In 1854, Beesley composed music to accompany Johnson’s poem. The Mormon Tabernacle Choir adopted Beesley’s rendition and it has since become one of the choir’s standard numbers.

The hymn has five verses and centers on the theme that God has restored the gospel to the earth.

  BELOW: Andre The Giant and Chief Jay Strongbow take on Don Leon Jonathan and Otto Von Heller from Madison Square Garden-1973.All rights owned by WWE entertainment.YOUTUBE.COM

“The Mormon Giant” Don Leon Jonathan was the grandson of my grandfather Alma Dayer LeBaron’s brother Leo LeBaron

The Mormon Giant * By Kris Wray While Dayer LeBaron [Sr]’s eldest son Ben may have been able to do 100 push-ups in a traffic jam to demonstrate he was mighty and strong, and bellow out roars that would leave people’s ears ringing as evidence he was the Lion of Judah, ol’ Ben had serious competition from another, little known member of the LeBaron family. Dayer’s younger brother Leo had a daughter named Leona, Ben’s cousin. Leona LeBaron Heaton gave birth to a son in 1931, in Hurricane, Utah, and named him Don. Don’s father, Jonathan, who had dabbled in professional wrestling [the male version of soap operas type], was once described as the “hymn-singing, psalm-shouting Brother Jonathan, who tossed opponents from pillar to post while in the midst of a Bible quotation”. Don–at 6 ft. 6 in. and 300ish pounds–followed in his footsteps. Raised Mormon, Don entered the ring in 1949 as Don Leo Jonathan, “The Mormon Giant”, and didn’t quit wrestling until 1980. In 1972, the same year Ervil had his brother Joel killed, Don the Mormon Giant defeated André the Giant with his trademark finisher, “The birthright brain buster”. Okay, that part’s not true. Don did win, but it was because André the Giant was disqualified [several rematches followed]. What is true is that years before Jake “The Snake” Roberts gained fame by bringing his pet boa into the ring in the 80s and 90s, The Mormon Giant often entered his matches with a seven-foot, defanged rattlesnake named “Cold Chills” draped over his shoulders. Gentiles who witnessed Don handle his serpent surely must have known that by such a sign following him, he was a true believer [Mark 16:17-18]. Big Don, also nicknamed The Lumberjack, won over 40 championships during his career, and was inducted into the Professional Wrestling Hall of Fame in 2006. Don died October 13, 2018. One can only imagine the face-offs that must have occurred when The Mormon Giant and LeBaron boys crossed paths.

* Don Leo Jonathan – Wikipediaen.wikipedia.org › wiki › Don_Leo_Jonathan The Mormon Giant Sonny Jonathan. Billed height, 6 ft 6 in (198 cm). Billed weight , 285–340 lb (129–154 kg). Billed from, Salt Lake City, Utah. Trained by, Brother Jonathan. Debut, 1949. Retired, 1980. Don Heaton (April 29, 1931 – October 13, 2018), also known as Don Leo Jonathan, was an …Billed weight‎: ‎285–340 lb (129–154 kg)Died‎: ‎October 13, 2018 (aged 87); ‎Langley, Bri…Debut‎: ‎1949Born‎: ‎April 29, 1931; ‎Hurricane, Utah‎, U.S‎Professional wrestling … · ‎Personal life · ‎Championships and …

Famous ‘n’ Infamous Relatives Famous 'n' InfamousRelatives "We all come from the past,and children ought to know what it was…

[dweemeister]

The Little Colonel (1935)

Whenever I watch older films with black actors in subservient roles, I have a habit of pausing the film, and scrolling through their filmography. For the African-American actors and actresses that worked at Hollywood’s major studios before the emergence of Sidney Poitier, Harry Belafonte, and Dorothy Dandridge in the 1950s, they toiled in stereotypical roles that read repetitively – servant, maid, busboy, slave, villager, savage, African chief. Like many black moviegoers in the early twentieth century, I am glad these mostly-unknown actors found work, but am sick to see the buffoonish, stereotype-adhering characters they play on screen (this raises questions about whether no representation or bad representation is better, but that is for another day).

Bill “Bojangles” Robinson was the highest-paid black entertainer of the 1930s: a masterful tap dancer (tap dancing is an innovation from the minstrel show, where Robinson’s career began) idolized by Fred Astaire, the Nicholas Brothers, and Gene Kelly. His birthday, May 25, is National Tap Dance Day. Robinson’s vaudeville and Broadway career had long made him a national celebrity, and Hollywood studios looked to procure his services for bit and supporting roles. While in Hollywood, he quickly learned that he could not escape the restrictions Hollywood executives had set for non-white actors – casting directors, whether by a lack of imagination or naked racism or somewhere in between, could not envision black actors beyond certain roles.

Another American cultural fixture in the 1930s was an adorable, curly-haired girl named Shirley Temple. Months before its merger with Twentieth Century Pictures, Fox Film Corporation cast Robinson in a Shirley Temple picture, The Little Colonel. Shirley Temple movies often relegated A-list actors to supporting roles – disgruntling those actors to some extent, but mollifying their frustration with the dependable profits made at the box office. Seen today, The Little Colonel is problematic in its depiction of race relations and portrayal of its black characters. And yet, it is also groundbreaking. The film features the first interracial dance couple in American film history, and spawned a close intergenerational friendship between Temple and Robinson that lasted until the latter’s death.

It is the early 1870s in Kentucky, and life has changed little since the American Civil War ended. White landowners retain their plantations and black subordinates. Those subordinates are no longer slaves, but racially-coded relations remain. Though Kentucky remained in the Union, there are numerous veterans and supporters of the defeated Confederacy within its borders, including Colonel Lloyd (Lionel Barrymore). The colonel has learned that his daughter, Elizabeth Lloyd (Evelyn Venable), has married a Yankee, Jack Sherman (John Lodge). Furious, the Colonel disowns Elizabeth – forcing her and Jack, an American soldier, to accept a posting in the West. There, they raise a girl, Lloyd Sherman (Temple), before moving back to Kentucky six years later. Before leaving the fort with her parents, Lloyd, the outfit’s darling, is made an honorary colonel of the United States Army. Elizabeth, Jack, little Lloyd, and housekeeper Becky “Mom Beck” Porter (Hattie McDaniel) settle in a household near Colonel Lloyd’s plantation without his knowledge. Colonel Lloyd eventually learns that the happy-go-lucky rapscallion bothering him and his head servant Walker (Robinson) is his granddaughter, and continues to exile Elizabeth and Jack from his life.

The Little Colonel, shown in black-and-white, ends with a brief two-strip Technicolor scene (Walt Disney’s monopoly on three-strip Technicolor would end later that year) – a “pink party” that marked the only time Shirley Temple wore makeup in a Fox film.

Adapted from Annie Fellows Johnston’s novel of the same name by screenwriter William M. Conselman (several Shirley Temple films, including 1934’s Bright Eyes and 1936’s Stowaway) and journeyman director David Butler (another Shirley Temple regular, 1942’s Road to Morocco), The Little Colonel sees Temple play a hallmark of her characters: a precocious troublemaker whose very charm melts hearts and inspires others to do what is just, despite their personal prejudices and historical biases. Only if the real world could be like that, audiences must have thought – packing movie theaters to see escapist fare like this, to forget momentarily the Great Depression. Like any Shirley Temple picture, the film is at its best when it concentrates on its young star. Most of the G-rated humor on display is gentle, ribbing others’ sense of self-importance and their absurd, absolutist behavior (especially Barrymore’s Colonel Lloyd, who looks as if he is about to sell me fast food served in a red-and-white tub). Not even little Lloyd is spared:

LLOYD SHERMAN: Aren’t papas supposed to love their little girls? MOM BECK: Yes, honey, they should. LLOYD SHERMAN: It seems might funny to me. MOM BECK: It’s ‘cause all the Lloyds are stubborn. The old colonel is, your mama is, and you is. LLOYD SHERMAN: I’m not stubborn! Don’t you call me that! MOM BECK: Don’t you stomp your foot at me. That don’t change it, that just proves it!

Elsewhere, too much of The Little Colonel’s humor is premised in racial stereotyping. That Lloyd Sherman befriends two black children in May Lily (Avonne Jackson) and Henry Clay (Nyanza Potts) might be enough to spark outrage among millions of American moviegoers in the 1930s. As much as this decision should be commended, that commendation is tempered by their appearance – inspired by minstrel shows – and by the fact they are eating watermelon in several scenes. Barrymore’s Colonel Lloyd is not only a misanthrope, but a racist misanthrope. Where little Lloyd sees an old man who needs to be taken down many notches, few others who see this film would probably be as disarming towards him. Colonel Lloyd refers to May Lily and Henry Clay as “pickaninnies”, threatens physical punishment towards Walker and Mom Beck at the slightest mistake, and indulges in Lost Cause rhetoric that glorifies the Confederacy as righteous. He is the sort of person that many Americans on tumblr would rather not speak to over Thanksgiving dinner. For Mom Beck and Walker, the two black servants in this film are understandably undereducated. But though the film paints them as self-aware and quick-witted, it mocks their lack of education during a scene where their poor spelling and grammar is apparent.

The Little Colonel is less of a musical than other Shirley Temple films, but it is obviously not devoid of musical moments. Its one notable musical scene is without lyrics and is best known for its fancy footwork. The staircase dance between Bill Robinson and Shirley Temple is transcendent cinema. This sequence is set to an original rhyme before transitioning into “My Old Kentucky Home” (Robinson mimics a trumpet to provide the melody) and follows a late-night confrontation between little Lloyd and Colonel Lloyd. Lloyd Sherman, who has been sent away from home because her father must be quarantined due to illness, wants to see her parents – ironically, this is for the good of the film, as Lodge and Venable’s performances are indifferent. She has never been away from her parents this long, and finds herself unsettled by living with her cantankerous grandfather. But there is Bill Robinson, as Walker, to provide comfort and solace.

In this complicated, potentially dangerous dancing scene, they showcase their agility and technical ability together. Robinson was Temple’s sole tap dancing teacher; she was a quick study, soon learning how to feel the beat rather vocalize or visualize it. Without hyperbole, Robinson would later claim Temple to be one of the best dancing partners he ever had. Depression-era audiences of all races witnessed their mastery on-screen. The scene celebrates and implies that blacks and whites can address and overcome hardship together. Robinson holding Temple’s hand proved incendiary to many Southern theater owners, as many requested prints that edited out the hand-holding.

During the years after The Little Colonel’s release, Robinson – fifty years Temple’s senior – became her most frequent co-star and a dear friend (best described as a close uncle-niece relationship). Nevertheless, unlike his white co-stars, he could never embrace or kiss Temple on-screen. Robinson also stayed in and used different facilities – giving the young Shirley Temple an early, though, understanding of the racism blacks faced in America. She recalled how, on the set of The Little Colonel, Robinson was the only person in the cast or crew to treat her as an equal, never patronizing her. The two sent telegrams when apart, encouraging and motivating the other to do and be their best. This meeting of two cultural giants, their careers constrained in their respective ways, continues to provide the inspiration and joy that audiences in the Depression sorely needed – even if the films themselves reflect the most unsavory aspects of American attitudes towards race.

My rating: 7/10

^ Based on my personal imdb rating. Half-points are always rounded down. My interpretation of that ratings system can be found in the “Ratings system” page on my blog (as of July 1, 2020, tumblr is not permitting certain posts with links to appear on tag pages, so I cannot provide the URL).

For more of my reviews tagged “My Movie Odyssey”, check out the tag of the same name on my blog.

[silverscreenclassics2016]

by Paul Batters

Part Two continues with the wonderful, personal stories of how our featured writers came to discover and love classic film.

Maddy 

Blog: Maddy Loves Her Classic Films   Twitter: @TimeForAFilm

I grew up in the 1990’s and was brought up on the animated Disney films such as Bambi and The Hunchback Of Notre Dame. I was very into dance when I was little and my parents bought me the documentary That’s Dancing (1985). That introduced me to so many classic era actors and films. It especially got me interested in Fred and Ginger, The Nicholas Brothers, Gene Kelly and Eleanor Powell. I started to seek out many of their films as I grew up.

If I had to pick one film in particular that made me fall in love with this era of filmmaking, then it would have to be Top Hat. It was the first b&w film I saw and I loved everything about it – from the characters and the dancing, to the stunning sets and beautiful costumes. This girl was hooked! In my teens I discovered Alfred Hitchcock. His films made me a classic film fan for life. They were what first made me aware of the language of cinema and got me interested in how films were made. Rear Window was the first I saw and I remember eagerly returning to the Library every weekend to borrow more of his films.

Theresa Brown

Blog: CineMaven’s Essays From the Couch     Twitter: @CineMava

I would need to go into some type of hydro~therapy, deep dark hypnosis to pull the memory of what film led me into loving classic films; and also to get into my past life as Cleopatra. My parents told me I used to run into the living room and stand in front of the tv set during commercials. Commercials, for heaven’s sake!! Were they bite-sized movies for the tiny Baby Boomer I was? It’s hard for me to say just what film set me on this path of being a classic movie buff. My mom took us to practically ev’ry Disney movie back in the 1950’s. American TV of the 60’s and 70’s threw away a lot of “old movies” and I was up all hours of the night trying to get my fill. Maybe seeing these films was a way to connect to my father and aunt with movies they grew up seeing on the big screen. For my 16th birthday my father gave me my first movie book: on Bogart films. Cinemabilia was a NYC book store I got lost in for hours. Classic films are just in my DNA.

Aurora

Blog: Once Upon a Screen    Twitter: @CitizenScreen

I arrived in the United States from Cuba at the age of five and immediately fell in love with movies. We were given a secondhand television set where one day I happened upon Delmer Daves’ Dark Passage. The unique point of view sequence at the onset of the movie fascinated me even then. I longed to see the face that peered out at the dark, grim world. I have loved film noir ever since. The only other genre that competes is the musical; it is what truly made my imagination soar. I remember vividly seeing On the Town and marvelling at the notion that my father had brought me to a place where people danced on the street. We lived in a crowded New York City apartment. I remember too wishing that my family were just like the Smiths in Meet Me in St. Louis. Alas, there are too many of those moments to recount, too many ways the movies made me who I am. It is to those days, when I knew no one outside my family, when those characters were as real as any person I had ever met, that I owe my love of movies.

Robert Short – Writer

Having been a fan of classic films for over fifty years now, I find it difficult to ascribe any specific movie as the pivotal film that inspired my love of the golden era of filmdom.  During the 1960’s and 1970’s, the decades in which I chiefly grew up, the cinematic offerings from the 1930’s and 1940’s were the general fodder of movie viewing on television; I undoubtedly saw many from a very young age.  I can say with greater certainty that I had developed a conscious interest in “old movies”, a relative term, by the age of twelve or thirteen.  Perhaps the interest grew organically; perhaps it was a moment of epiphany.

Again, while I cannot pinpoint any definitive “watershed” title, there is possibly one film of note which served as a cornerstone in my movie-watching career.  “Juarez” marked my first “late show”, the late-night movies that I was finally permitted to watch after beginning high school in September 1969.  A typically lavish production from Warner Bros., and another quality contribution from 1939, the film was immensely entertaining, albeit often historically inaccurate.  Admittedly, the fact that “Juarez” was my introduction to the venerable institution of the late show, now gone by the wayside in the wake of our modern digital era, may seem very trivial and unimportant.  However, the late show itself was once the chief means to watch classic films; through it my access to many wonderful movies was greatly expanded.

Amanda Garrett

Blog: Old Hollywood Films  Twitter: @oldhollywood21

My lifelong love of affair with classic movies began when I stumbled across director John Ford’s Western Stagecoach (1939) on PBS when I was in grade school. It soon became my favourite movie mostly because I wanted to be BFFs with Doc Boone played by Thomas Mitchell (I didn’t understand that what I thought was very funny behaviour was caused by alcohol), and I secretly wanted to be Andy Devine mostly because I thought driving a stagecoach seemed like a cool job. I’ve watched Stagecoach dozens of times since then, and while I’ve given up my ambition of being a stagecoach driver, I still find the film a rewarding experience all these years later. There are several reasons for this including the masterful plot, which Ford unfolds with clockwork precision, and the roster of great character actors. Most of all, I return to Stagecoach because of Ford. The gruff director despised being called an artist or even worse an auteur, but the truth is he was both. Ford’s fluid camera work makes Stagecoach poetry in motion, and he would return to the theme of one man’s quest for justice throughout his career.

Name: Jay

Blog: Cinema Essentials   Twitter: @CineEssentials

Although I grew up watching classic films, most were colour films from the 1950s and 1960s. If there was one film that overcame my childhood resistance to black and white, then it was Green for Danger. It’s a brilliant comedy-thriller that plays with the conventions of the murder mystery genre.

Alastair Sim plays an eccentric detective sent to investigate a series of suspicious deaths at a hospital, where he finds a range of suspects. Sim is unquestionably the star of the show, but there are many good supporting performances, from Trevor Howard, Sally Gray, Leo Genn, Megs Jenkins and Rosamund John.

The film was made by Sidney Gilliat, who co-wrote The Lady Vanishes and its spiritual successor Night Train to Munich. That gives you an idea of the sort of humour and playful tone of the film, which are mixed with a bit of tension and an intriguing mystery.

I first saw Green for Danger when I was 7 or 8. I’ve seen it numerous times since, but I usually forget who the murderer is, because it’s the performances and characterisations that make it irresistible. And the film is so entertaining anyway, that it doesn’t really matter if you remember the solution or not.

Margot Shelby

Blog: Down These Mean Streets

It’s hard to say exactly when, how and why I became a classic film fan. Neither my parents nor my grandparents were interested so I discovered them myself. I was probably around five and I assume some classic film came on TV and I was hooked. I loved history (still do) and somehow old movies were like a history lesson, a window into another world. Something just clicked. I wish I could remember what the first movie was that really left an impression on me, but I really can’t.

I’m so jealous of the people who had friends and family who also like classic films.

Unfortunately I had nobody I could share my love of classic films with. My friends weren’t interested either, everybody was just shaking their heads about my obsession.

Well thankfully nowadays we have the internet and yes, there are other people like me out there. I’m not a freak! Good to know. 🙂

Carol

Blog: The Old Hollywood Garden

I created The Old Hollywood Garden because I wanted to express my love for the classics. I wanted to make people want to watch them, and I wanted to share my undying fascination with Hollywood’s Golden Age with the world.

I became a classic movie buff after viewing my very first classic movie which was Gilda (Charles Vidor, 1946). All the way back in 2007 when I was fifteen years old. I was flipping through the channels, and I stumbled upon it on an retrospective type of channel which shows old films and TV shows. Its black and white cinematography caught my attention straight-away and I put the remote down and watched it. I had no doubt in my mind this would be the start of something great for me and I couldn’t wait for it. I was barely half way through it and I already knew that I wanted to consume as many of these wonderful movies as possible. I was mesmerized by Rita Hayworth – who isn’t? – and I loved the love-hate relationship between Gilda and Johnny (Glenn Ford). It was hot. It was exciting. It was a masterclass in screen chemistry. Years later, I still think it’s the sexiest movie ever made.

I was drawn in by them mostly, but right from the start, I thought Gilda was so fascinating. Johnny’s voice-over narration in the beginning (‘To me, a dollar was a dollar in any language…’) was everything I’d imagined these things to be. Great lines, no non-sense attitude; straight-up cool. The plot was interesting enough – small-time gambler Johnny is hired by Ballin Mundson (George Macready) to work in his casino, not knowing Ballin’s wife is his ex-lover Gilda – and the performances were fantastic. Especially Rita Hayworth’s. Her most iconic role was also her greatest. A flawed character, multi-layered and yet mysterious. Confident and yet vulnerable. A sort of anti-heroine that no doubt paved the way for many female characters that followed it. It is still one of my favourite performances of all time and the reason I couldn’t take my eyes off Gilda the first time I saw it. A ‘femme fatale’, I later read. I was transfixed by this. Film noir was intriguing.

Years later, of course, I realised that Gilda isn’t quite a film noir (noir melodrama?) and Gilda isn’t really a femme fatale. Not in the traditional sense anyway. Looking back, Gilda was ahead of her time, in many ways. But back then, I just knew that this was endlessly fascinating. I had to watch more of these. So many more. I had to watch more stuff with Rita Hayworth in it. And Glenn Ford. I had to watch all of these films noirs. And the screwballs and the Pre-Codes. And the musicals! I had to watch all the Golden Age of Hollywood had to offer. Needless to say, I’ve been doing just that for twelve years and it has been absolutely blissful.

Editorial use only. No book cover usage. Mandatory Credit: Photo by Columbia/Kobal/Shutterstock (5886203bk) Rita Hayworth Gilda – 1946 Director: Charles Vidor Columbia Lobby Card/Poster

It’s been an absolute honour to share the memories and feelings that classic film fans have about the films that matter to them and the experience of discovering classic film. The beauty is that those feelings do not go away but grow and flourish, as the journey continues and as we all discover and re-discover the films we have come to love. But it is also a wonderful thing to connect with classic film fans from around the world and share those experiences.

It has been an honour to share these contributions and my personal thanks to all who have contributed.

The Films That Brought Us To Love Classic Film – Part Two by Paul Batters Part Two continues with the wonderful, personal stories of how our featured writers came to discover and love classic film.

[samuelfields]

Watch TV Online For Free: The Complete Guide

I initially “cut the cord” to save myself money.

At the time, it did save me a lot. I traded in a $70/month cable subscription for a $10 Netflix subscription.

Then all the other streaming services came out. HBO Now, Prime, Hulu, Disney+, Showtime, and all the rest. When I add them all up, I get right back to $70/month.

Are there options to watch TV for free and still save money?

You do have options to watch TV for free. We looked into it and put together a complete guide on how to do it.

The True Cost of Watching TV Online

Watching TV online through a pay streaming service subscription is a popular choice for people after they cut the cord.

Streaming services deliver what’s almost an à la carte way of watching television. You can select a service that has the channels you want, eliminating channels you never watch (and their costs).

However, there are some significant expenses with streaming services. They’re not quite as costly as cable or satellite TV, but they’re closer than the marketers want you to believe.

Internet service: When you stream, you will need to pay a monthly charge for a high speed Internet connection. (Perhaps you already do this.) Depending on where you live and the speed you want, this can cost $40 to $100 per month. You’ll want a minimum speed of 5 Mbps for streaming HD quality video. And if you are streaming to more than one TV at a time, they each need 5 Mbps access. So for two simultaneous streams, your total Internet speed would need to be a minimum of 10 Mbps. For 4K quality video, you need a minimum of 25 Mbps. Higher Internet speeds cost more per month.

Streaming subscriptions: Streaming subscriptions vary in price. They can be as low as $5/month. For streaming services with popular cable channels that offer live programming like ESPN, Sling, Hulu Live, and AT&T TV Now, you’ll pay $25 to $100 per month.

Even if you only get two subscriptions, you’ll end up paying about $25/month plus your internet bill. On average, you’re looking at $100/month for a decent internet connection and two subscriptions. If you want 3-4 subscriptions, expect to pay $150/month all-in.

Is it Really Possible to Watch TV For Free?

For those who want to watch TV online for free, many options exist. Mind you, not all of them are legal, especially the peer-to-peer sites. If you watch copyrighted material illegally on a website, you could be subject to receiving a copyright infringement letter from your ISP.

Fortunately, multiple free TV options exist that are legal. Keep in mind that they don’t give you the same level of service of a pay TV subscription.

Here are some of the drawbacks of going with free online TV versus a pay TV subscription.

Commercials: Many free TV sites force you watch commercials, and you cannot skip them like you can with a DVR. At best, you can mute until it’s over.

Quality: Finding HD video quality on a free online TV streaming service is hit and miss. Finding 4K quality video is rare. And if your Internet signal is not consistent, you’ll have constant pauses and skips in your shows or a drop in video quality, which is frustrating. If you must have high quality video with your TV shows, free online TV may not be for you.

Newer shows: Free services don’t typically have the latest episodes of shows like you’ll find with pay streaming services and cable or satellite TV subscriptions.

Time spent searching: Finding a specific show can be a bit of a challenge with free TV online services. You may end up using several different services to find all of the shows you want.

Sports: Sports fans will not be happy with legal free online TV options. They have almost no live sports events.

Those who don’t mind putting in a bit of work to find the shows they want will be better candidates for free online TV. If you like your TV watching options well-structured and set up for ease of use, a cable or streaming subscription is worth the expense.

7 Options for Watching TV Online for Free

1. Borrow Someone Else’s Account

If you have a family member or friend who’s willing to let you have the account information for their Netflix, Hulu Live, or streaming service account, you can watch TV online for free. Most of these services allow two or three people to access the same account at one time.

2. Use a Free Streaming Service

Streaming services that are free for users typically are ad-supported, so you’ll have to watch quite a few commercials. These services are available through a smart TV app or a website. They don’t have very many newer shows, like paid streaming services do. But there are some shows on these services that you will not find elsewhere.

Crackle: The Crackle web site offers access to several dozen TV shows and hundreds of movies. You do have to create an account but it’s a free process. It has very popular older shows like The Facts of Life or Roseanne. It even has some original programming.

Internet Archive: With Internet Archive’s free TV section, you can choose to watch some old TV shows, along with classic commercials. There are replays of some live news shows for important events, such as 9/11. It definitely has things you won’t see anywhere else.

Pluto: Pluto TV is about the closest thing to live TV that you’ll find for free. It offers free on demand and live shows, and you’ll select them through a series of “networks” on Pluto’s channel guide. All you’ll be missing is the remote in your hand to scroll through channels.

Popcornflix: With Popcornflix, you can see quite a few 1990s children’s shows, which is fun for those seeking some nostalgia. It also has many different TV shows and movies across other genres, including some foreign films and documentaries.

Retrovision: If you really like old television shows and movies, Retrovision is made for you. You’ll find quite a few shows and movies from the 1930s, 1940s, and 1950s here, as well as a few newer ones.

Snagfilms: The site’s name may not be all that great, but Snagfilms gives you thousands of movies and older TV shows. Its claim to fame, though, is a large number of documentaries.

Tubi: Tubi offers mainly movies for free, along with some TV shows, in an ad-supported format. With a free account, you can create a list of your favorite shows and movies, or you can resume a movie you stopped watching earlier.

3. Visit a Network Website

The major broadcast networks (FOX, ABC, et cetera) and some cable networks allow you to stream the latest versions of current shows for a week or so after the show originally airs. You also will find episode recaps and special clips about the shows at the network web site.

You will have to watch commercials, but this is a great way to stay up to date on current shows, all for free.

4. Watch Digital Media Through Your Library

If you still have a library card, don’t throw it away. You may be able to use it with hoopla, which is a digital media service. Public libraries allow you to use hoopla to borrow digital media for a limited amount of time.

You can watch TV shows and movies online for free this way, all by checking them out using your local library card. Items like audiobooks are also available.

5. Sign Up for Free Trials

Most pay subscription streaming services give you a free trial period between 7 and 30 days where you can try the entire service for free. You may have to provide a credit card number to sign up for the free trial, and you have to remember to cancel the service before the trial expires or the service will charge your card.

You can only use this free trial trick once per email address. It is extra work, especially for short trials. But it is an option.

6. Check With Your Cellular Carrier

Sometimes, a cellular carrier will give its customers access to digital media, including some TV shows and movies. For example, Verizon is currently giving its customers free access to the Disney+ streaming service for up to a year.

7. Visit the Websites for Your Local Broadcasters

Your local broadcast channel websites won’t show movies and TV shows. However, you can access local news stories, weather broadcasts, and sports highlights through these websites. You also sometimes can stream the local newscast each night.

Budget TV Online – Cheap But Not Free

Say you don’t mind spending a little money for TV, as long as you receive a better quality than the free TV options. You have some choices here too.

On demand shows: Services like Netflix and Amazon Prime do not have popular cable channels like AMC or ESPN for live TV. However, they have thousands of on demand titles, as well as some original programming. They cost $8 to $15 per month.

Focused streaming services: Services like Disney+ and CBS All Access give you the ability to watch shows from a particular provider for a low price per month of around $5 to $12. Of course, these costs add up quickly if you have more than one service.

Over-the-air networks: You probably have several channels available to you through an over-the-air broadcast signal. These local networks broadcast major network programming, as well as local news programs. Purchase an easy-to-set-up HD antenna for $25 to $75, and you can pull in these signals for free, including some sports.

Digital rentals: Through services like VUDU the Google Play Store, you can rent movies and TV shows digitally for a reasonable price.

Cutting the Cord Successfully

When you want to watch TV online for free, you have quite a few options. Best of all, quite a few of them are legal.

You may need to be fairly creative to figure out just how to watch the shows you want. And you may need to use more than one free TV service. But when you remember you’re paying $0 for your TV bill, you won’t mind doing a little bit of extra work.

For those who truly love their TV and love saving money, watching TV online for free is tough to beat.

Watch TV Online For Free: The Complete Guide is a post from: I Will Teach You To Be Rich.

from Finance https://www.iwillteachyoutoberich.com/blog/watch-tv-online-free/ via http://www.rssmix.com/