One of the Hollywood actresses that I profiled for my Sewing Circle article was a woman named Marguerite Clark. Her story involved so many unlikely coincidences that I decided a closer examination was required.
Marguerite Clark was second only to Mary Pickford in popularity during the silent film era. That level of fame only comes from being promoted by the studio and being cast in desirable roles. As we now know, Hollywood is comprised of descendants of European peerage, and they only promote and advance their own privileged and pampered prodigy. No hayseed from Ohio ever stumbled off a Greyhound bus and into stardom, but that’s what we are expected to believe happened in the case of Marguerite Clark. I don’t buy it. The fact that Clark’s entire family history is denied to us is a significant indicator that she was very well connected. Her NY Times obituary provides some confirmation in this regard since it lists a cousin named Hugh R. Wilson, former United States Ambassador to Germany.
Continue reading “A Crashing Success”
This article is just my opinion based on the lifestyles of the subjects profiled.
“Sewing Circle” is a phrase used to describe the underground, closeted lesbian and bisexual film actresses of Hollywood, particularly during Hollywood’s golden age from the 1910s to the 1950s. The actress Alla Nazimova (godmother of former first lady Nancy Reagan) was the one credited with coining the term. Many of the actresses that I will be profiling in this series were rumored or admitted lesbians. The remainder were childless and/or unmarried throughout their lives. Since women can have several reasons for not having children, this does not prove anything. You may decide for yourself. Keep in mind, though, that over the course of the 19th century, the average American woman gave birth to six children, not including children lost to miscarriages and stillbirths. And globally, up to 1965, the average woman had more than five children.
None of the birth control methods of the 19th century (aside from infanticide and abortion) were particularly effective, and none of them were new. Withdrawal by the male, douching and vaginal suppositories were around in ancient times and common in the 19th century. In 1838 condoms and diaphragms were produced with vulcanized rubber. It was second in popularity to withdrawal but was not advocated as birth control. Instead, it was to be used to prevent venereal disease. The most effective form of birth control was (and still is) abstaining from sexual intercourse (with men).
Continue reading “The Sewing Circle – (Part 1)”
This post is written to accomplish three objectives.
- I needed to satisfy myself that the actor known as “Eva Perón” was indeed one person, and not a composite. I went looking for twins and body doubles.
- I needed to understand who the second “mother” was in the Ciccone family photographs. It took a second set of eyes, those of Richard once more, to solve that mystery.
- I need to put this project to bed and get on with my life. Here’s hoping.
As to the use of names like “Eva Perón, “Silvio Ciccone,” “Madonna Fortin,” and of course, the singer known as “Madonna,” we have no idea who they are or what their real names are. I use those labels for convenience, nothing more. All the world’s a stage.
So off we go once more. You might be surprised, no, shocked, at Richard’s discovery. Continue reading “Eva Perón: Another shoe drops”
The above photo has been sitting here on my computer for maybe two years. It comes from the days when I was deceiving myself into thinking that twins were all about us. But it still bugs me. It is said to be Taylor Swift with her parents. The problem is that Swift looks like a mannequin. Below the fold is another photo of Swift.
Continue reading “About those photos …”
Below are photos of Paul McCartney (1959) who performed live with the Beatles in the 1960s, Mike McCartney (1957) who stepped in and out of “Paul’s” shoes, and eventually became the permanent Paul McCartney we know today.
I can easily tell them apart. Others, including facial recognition expert Joelle Steele, insist they are the same person. The reason, I suppose, is career-related. If she were to assert two Paul’s, she’d never be called upon to offer expert testimony again. I am not calling her a liar, but do know that evidence is often tainted by the need to make a living. But for most other people, recognition of two different people is hard because of the glassy-eyed manner in which they view the world, never really stopping to both think and examine evidence. It is what they are told it is. Continue reading “Eva Peron: The plot thickens”
Evita lived on in the material world
Back in the day, when Straight was still here, we bounced from one discovery to another. The zombie matter was of great interest. Rarely did a day go by that I did not get an email from him suggesting I look into this or that person. The man has great instincts. He tired of the work, wanting to live in a more positive sphere. I get that, and wish him well, always. For me, just as I loved to curl up with Sherlock Holmes as a kid, I love the work I do here and would not trade it for journalism in any form. This is honest and rewarding work.
There have not been too many new discoveries since Straight left, though I have moved far afield of facial analysis. But I do have my eye out. Thus it was that my wife suggested we visit La Recoleta Cemetery while in Buenos Aires with two crypts in mind: That of Liliana Crociati de Szaszak, a young woman killed in an avalanche in Switzerland (left), and Eva Perón, or Evita (right).
I knew very little about Evita other than that movie from 1995 and the Weber/Rice Broadway musical with its associated ear worms. I did not care for most of the movie but enjoyed the opening number in which Madonna sang Buenos Aires, train providing the percussion. The rest was not memorable for me, and anyway, what the hell was Che Guevara doing there? He seemed to be an anachronism. (He was put there for a reason, no doubt, but we can only guess.*)
Continue reading “Eva Perón: The Rest of the Story”
In years past on this blog on the anniversary of the 9/11 event I would put up a memorial post, a trick. I would talk all sad and disturbed about the events of 9/11, but only reveal a the end that I was actually talking about 9/11/1973 and the removal of Salvador Allende from office as President of Chile.
Little did I realize as I wrote those posts that use of the date 9/11 was a signal to the world that we were dealing with a fake event. For those not up to speed on numerical markers, the numbers 8, 11 and 33 seem important to the spooks who stage public hoaxes, almost like a signature. The number 9 is a way of saying 33, that is, it is 3*3, so that 9/11 is really 33 and 11 side by side. But it gets better – in a non-leap year, September 11 is the 254th day of the year, and 2+5+4 = 11. It’s a double whammy.
Continue reading “9/11/73”