David Stenn Interviewed About Clara Bow
DEADBALL
the documentary being shown by TCM was interviewed by Salon Magazine's Michael
Sragow. I thought you all might enjoy reading it.
Scott Flatow
SRAGOW: Do you support the film's notion that she was the first sex symbol?
STENN: She overturned the whole manner of courtship in this country -- the
titles of her movies speak for themselves. "Get Your Man," "The Wild Party,"
"Rough House Rosie." And the plot was always the same. She would see a man, she
would go after him and she would get him. The idea that a woman could pursue a
man and not be a bad girl changed the way men perceived women and women
perceived themselves. I've always thought that the true decade of sexual
liberation for women -- the decade when the major changes took place in this
country -- was the '20s, not the '60s. Women had just received the vote, and
they were starting to open up to the stirrings they were feeling and also
reading about in F.Scott Fitzgerald or Gertrude Atherton.
Clara Bow wasn't only or exclusively about sex, but she enjoyed it, and she
wasn't ashamed of it. A coed in a movie like "The Plastic Age," a girl in
school who wanted to "go the limit," which was what they called it, with her
boyfriend? That was "flaming youth," that's what the '20s were about and that's
what freaked out the parents. Watching her, the flapper generation found a role
model. They felt, "She doesn't feel bad about it, why should I?"
SRAGOW: Weren't there sex stars before Bow, and erotic dramas by De Mille and
Von Stroheim?
STENN: Yes, but the sex was tawdry and depraved. What you had were "vamps" --
and Bow was not a vamp. Vamps were "foreign," which meant decadent. Theda Bara?
She was a nice Jewish girl from Cincinnati, but nobody knew that, and she
always played foreign women. Vamp comes from vampire -- Bara played women who
were sucking the blood from American men. Bow is the woman as sexual being;
there was an innocence to her that saved her from being immediately condemned.
She played American girls. She never appeared as an upper-class character, only
as manicurists and shop girls, and her own background mirrored her characters'.
So people felt they were seeing her, and to a real extent they were --
although, of course, to another extent they weren't.
It's almost impossible for us to conceive of a time when there wasn't a female
sexual icon in our popular culture. When Madonna hit, everyone said she was
doing Marilyn Monroe, and when Monroe hit, everyone said she was Harlow all
over again. But when Bow hit there was no precedent. It's almost impossible to
imagine what that must have been like. She wasn't able to do what Madonna and
Monroe and Harlow did, even when they were doing it on an unconscious level --
which was to look at a predecessor and say, this worked for her, this didn't
work for her.
As far as I am aware, according to everything I've read, Monroe chose not to
wear underwear because Jean Harlow didn't wear underwear. And with Madonna --
it almost doesn't bear discussion because it's so obvious what she did: the
postmodernity of her saying, "I'm going to show you how calculated my act is."
When she does the video for "Material Girl" and we all know it's "Diamonds Are
a Girl's Best Friend," it's not subtext, it's above-text -- she's saying, "I'm
Marilyn for you guys."
But Bow was so new. That was the cause of her impact, and also the cause of why
people turned against her. And the fact that she achieved so much is a
testament to her drive. People ask me what the most incredible part of her
story is, and the most incredible part is that she even had a career. There's
never been a less educated star or one who came from more dire Dickensian
poverty.
Think of the rest of the female stars in silent movies -- they all had a
mother. I mean, Mary Pickford's mother was such a good negotiator Adolph Zukor
was afraid of her. Clara Bow had nobody. She had a father who took her money
and went off to the whorehouse, that's all she had. She didn't have an agent,
she didn't have a manager. She didn't have anyone guiding her professionally or
personally. When you think of her mother hovering over her sleeping body with a
knife, or her father raping her, it's amazing she lived. Marilyn Monroe was
like Laura Ingalls Wilder by comparison.
And I think the whole Bow personality is intensely lovable -- you root for her,
you really care for her, because she is kind and decent. Despite what other
people did to her she never retaliated. The documentary says she was naive, and
that's one way of looking at it. But that naiveté came out of her generosity of
spirit. I mean, Marilyn Monroe keeping Clark Gable waiting on the hot Nevada
desert for six hours on "The Misfits" -- Bow didn't speak that language. She
had a nervous breakdown because she was upset about holding up production.
Watching the documentary, I thought: Harlow died at 26, Monroe at 36, but Bow
lived till she was 60, stayed married and had two kids who still love her to
this day. She maintained her dignity, which is really incredible, and she kept
her money, which neither Monroe nor Harlow did.
SRAGOW: Bow was plagued by scandal. Yet celebrities were usually protected from
it, even in Monroe's day. How did stories get started like the absurd but
ubiquitous one about Bow "taking on" the whole USC Trojans football team?
STENN: I did find a newspaper report that the Trojans' coach had declared Clara
Bow's house off-limits. But what one was to extrapolate from that is a
different story. It was really Kenneth Anger in "Hollywood Babylon" [published
underground in 1959, above-ground in 1975] that first printed the story, and
that book is primarily fiction.
There was usually a difference between things that got printed and things that
got discussed. But her case was a huge exception, because there was a whole
series about her in a tabloid called the Coast Reporter that was unprecedented
and hasn't been matched since, and that led to an obscenity trial that preceded
the "Ulysses" trial by three years. This man accused her of bestiality and drug
addiction and incest and insanity and lesbianism and venereal disease. One of
the issues concluded by saying, "You know, Clara, you'd be better off killing
yourself." It never happened before, and it never happened since; the guy went
to federal prison for eight years, to do hard labor.
But the fact that he had printed that stuff showed how far her reputation had
gone. Here's how I interpret how it worked in those days. If it got out in the
community, it gave the local press -- and by extension the chains they were all
part of, like the Hearst papers -- permission to print things that otherwise
they never would have. Because they heard so many more outrageous things about
her, what they were printing was still worse than what they'd print about
anyone else.
Even the fan magazines -- they might have used schoolmarm language, but people
understood what they were saying. In the documentary you see one with Clara on
the cover and the headline, "Quit pickin' on me!" -- mocking her language as
well as showing that she's being harassed. And they tell you why she's being
harassed, but they don't tell you that any of the scandals are untrue, so in a
way they acknowledge them. They say, "It's because of her background, it's
because she's so young, it's because she's a motherless child, it's because she
didn't have any guidance."
She was crucified by the press, but also by her own public demeanor. She talked
about breaking her engagements, about trying to choose between Victor Fleming
and Gary Cooper and Gilbert Roland: "Well, Vick-ie mothered me, but Gary was a
big bashful boy." Everyone knew what a euphemism "engagement" was for her. When
I started the book I was skeptical about the coarseness of her reported
language. But when I interviewed the actresses she worked with and Tui Bow (her
stepmother and pal), they all said, "That's how she talked!" She'd compare
sizes of her lovers and that kind of stuff -- unheard of in those days,
especially in public. Esther Ralston said, "She used to come on the set and
love to shock me."
SRAGOW: After Mary Pickford and Lillian Gish -- who, as you write, played
Victorian heroines -- to project something that was groundbreaking and
individual, didn't a woman have to be sexually adventurous on-screen? What
other avenues of expression were open to her as an actress?
STENN: Without her looks what else would Clara have had to offer? That's why
Elaina Archer, one of the show's producers, picked that clip from "Dangerous
Curves" -- Clara's character looking in the mirror and saying, "You did it
yourself." Elaina thought it symbolized Clara's life and career. She was
totally self-made. She dubbed herself a working girl, and she was -- being a
star was her job. She called her fans her "wonderful fan friends"; they had
helped anoint her the It girl and she was going to do the best she could to
live up to that title. And by doing so she broke herself, or was broken.
Because in the history of this business there has never been anyone so
viciously persecuted.
Most people in Hollywood were burying their past; she was exhuming hers. They
were doing everything behind closed doors, and she was talking to the press.
Esther Ralston told me a story on herself that I thought revealed a lot about
Clara and Hollywood. She and Clara were shooting "Children of Divorce" and the
day they wrapped Esther was having a big party. Esther was very proper --
blond, petite, pretty -- and she lived in a big mansion. And everyone in
Hollywood was invited -- that is, all the right people. So Esther was getting
dressed in the dressing room and Clara walked by and lingered in the doorway
and said, "You're having a party, ain't cha, Esther?" And Esther said, as if it
had just hit her, "Oh Clara, would you like to come?" And Clara Bow stood in
the doorway and said, "Oh, no, I know you don't want to invite me." This is the
biggest star in Hollywood -- and she's a pariah to the point where no one even
pretended to accept her. And Esther liked her.
I mean, there are plenty of people around who don't like the big female stars
today, but they sure put on a great act.
salon.com | June 10, 1999
The Avocado Avenger
>David Stenn, author of "Clara Bow: Runnin' Wild," and a creative consultant on
>the documentary being shown by TCM was interviewed by Salon Magazine's Michael
>Sragow. I thought you all might enjoy reading it.
> She wasn't able to do what Madonna and
>Monroe and Harlow did, even when they were doing it on an unconscious level --
>which was to look at a predecessor and say, this worked for her, this didn't
>work for her.
>As far as I am aware, according to everything I've read, Monroe chose not to
>wear underwear because Jean Harlow didn't wear underwear. And with Madonna --
>it almost doesn't bear discussion because it's so obvious what she did: the
>postmodernity of her saying, "I'm going to show you how calculated my act is."
>When she does the video for "Material Girl" and we all know it's "Diamonds Are
>a Girl's Best Friend," it's not subtext, it's above-text -- she's saying, "I'm
>Marilyn for you guys."
This has nothing to do with Bow, but, when he says that Marilyn/Harlow/
Madonna do their act unconciously, why does he then go on to prove that
they consciously chose things to do to imitate and improve upon their
predecessors?
Also, when I first heard of the special, I thought it would have been
wonderful to get someone like Madonna, as opposed to Courtney Love, for
the narrator. They need someone who was "new", like Bow was, and while
Madonna certainly wasn't entirely original, she certainly fits the bill
more than Love. But. That's just me.
Stacia * The Avocado Avenger * Life is a tale told by an idiot;
http://www.io.com/~stacia/ * Full of sound and fury,
Remove the guacamole to reply! * Signifying nothing.
David P. Hayes
Runnin' Wild," and a creative consultant on the documentary being shown by
>>Monroe and Harlow did, even when they were doing it [imitating Bow]
>>on an unconscious level -- which was to look at a predecessor
>>and say, this worked for her, this didn't work for her.
>
>>As far as I am aware, according to everything I've read, Monroe chose not
to
>>wear underwear because Jean Harlow didn't wear underwear. And with
Madonna --
>>it almost doesn't bear discussion because it's so obvious what she did:
the
>>postmodernity of her saying, "I'm going to show you how calculated my act
is."
>>When she does the video for "Material Girl" and we all know it's "Diamonds
Are
>>a Girl's Best Friend," it's not subtext, it's above-text -- she's saying,
"I'm
>>Marilyn for you guys."
>
> This has nothing to do with Bow, but, when he says that Marilyn/Harlow/
>Madonna do their act unconciously, why does he then go on to prove that
>they consciously chose things to do to imitate and improve upon their
>predecessors?
Grammar point: Stenn says "even when," indicating that the rest of the
sentence refers to what Monroe/Harlow/Madonna would do SOME of the time, but
not ALL the time.
Consequently, references to "conscious" copying SUPPLEMENT the references to
"unconscious" imitating, rather than contradicting them. (The relevant
issue in logic is the difference between universals and particulars.)
--
David Hayes
To respond privately, excise the first underscore from address. (If your
news reader does not allow you to edit an email address within the send
fields, my address consists of "davidp" then an underscore ("_") then
surname "hayes", followed by: atsign earthlink dot net.)
Carole Bennett
> Also, when I first heard of the special, I thought it would have been
>wonderful to get someone like Madonna, as opposed to Courtney Love, for
>the narrator. They need someone who was "new", like Bow was, and while
>Madonna certainly wasn't entirely original, she certainly fits the bill
>more than Love. But. That's just me.
hmm.... I would agree, but I read an interview with Courtney Love on-line
about the Clara Bow documentary, and she says that she is "obsessed" with the
transition to sound and that type of thing. Now, I don't know how much of an
expert she is on the subject, but at least she has an interest in the era, and
maybe this experience of narrating was a good learning experience for her.
Carole
pre...@my-deja.com
Given that the special states that "overnight, Hollywood switched to
talkies" and implied that there was only a two-week break between WINGS
and THE WILD PARTY (conveniently omitting two years and seven features),
it's doubtful that she learned much.
Mike S.
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Share what you know. Learn what you don't.
The Avocado Avenger
> gypsy...@aol.com (Carole Bennett) wrote:
>>sta...@io.com (The Avocado Avenger) wrote:
>>
>> > Also, when I first heard of the special, I thought it would have been
>> >wonderful to get someone like Madonna, as opposed to Courtney Love, for
>> >the narrator. They need someone who was "new", like Bow was, and while
>> >Madonna certainly wasn't entirely original, she certainly fits the bill
>> >more than Love. But. That's just me.
>>hmm.... I would agree, but I read an interview with Courtney Love
>>on-line about the Clara Bow documentary, and she says that she is
>>"obsessed" with the transition to sound and that type of thing. Now, I
>>don't know how much of an expert she is on the subject, but at least she
>>has an interest in the era, and maybe this experience of narrating was a
>>good learning experience for her.
Many people have an interest in the era, and it doesn't make them
automatically chosen as narrators. Also, being a narrator for a
documentary shouldn't be a "learning experience" for someone. It's not
too much to ask that a professional do the narrating, is it?
They chose Love because she is Courtney Love. I can see where they
would want some sort of Hollywood wild girl to do the narration -- there's
always some sort of link between the narrator and the subject, especially
with these sorts of documentaries. But the link with the subject has to
be stronger than that.
For example, with the narration on the Thames Keaton, Lloyd, and Chaplin
series, they chose James Mason, who was involved in the process of saving
movies, and who had a very good speaking voice. He was also a "big name",
which they often need. In the "Looking for Lulu" special on Louise
Brooks, they used Shirley MacLaine, who knew Brooks and who also has a
good voice, and who also provided the "big name".
My problem with Love is that she does not have a good voice, nor is
particularly involved in the subject. She's simply the "big name;" her
image as a "wild girl" doesn't add a single thing to the documentary.
It's not that I disagree with you, it's that I disagree with the use of
Courtney Love as narrator.
>Given that the special states that "overnight, Hollywood switched to
>talkies" and implied that there was only a two-week break between WINGS
>and THE WILD PARTY (conveniently omitting two years and seven features),
>it's doubtful that she learned much.
Absolutely.
I'm really not looking forward to watching the special now that I know
they glossed over some important facts like this one.