|
Post by Hep on Jun 30, 2008 8:29:08 GMT -5
probably because you met Maureen O'Hara.. i think i just burst something too.
|
|
|
Post by Richard on Jul 5, 2008 23:58:31 GMT -5
You're not going to believe this, but I just read this article for the first time. Judy wrote her response to this on another thread and I feel just about the same way. Here it is below. I know many people are down on her at the moment, but it would be nice if Katharine Houghton could do one of these. Would be nice to hear her in a non-hostile environment. Not that the Gay City News interview was hostile in the least, but she clearly did it to set the record straight (you should pardon the expression) and it had an agenda. And as frequently happens in interviews, the follow-up question is not asked - or maybe it was, but the sound bite is more attention grabbing and other material is often edited out - so the person is quoted and, when in print, things aren't always what they seem because one cannot hear tone of voice or see facial expression. Often the writer will indicate those things to give the reader a sense of the mood of the conversation. That was not the case here. So while I'm not saying that she was misquoted - in fact, I don't think she was - I AM saying that one shouldn't rush to judgment about someone whom we know - bottom line - was in Kate's corner. And Spencer's. Because there are many variables at play in any phone interview, which I imagine this was. In fact, my take on that interview was this. If anyone has been maligned MORE than Kate by recent revisionists, it has been Spencer Tracy. In the past decade or so we have been treated to a depiction of him as almost non-human. I'm sure he was quite a piece of work - possibly even MORE difficult than Kate. But I think Katharine Houghton loved him and my feeling is that the main reason she agreed to this interview was to redress some of the terrible things that have been written about him by stressing how much of an emotional support he was to Kate. In other words, it wasn't all just one way from Kate to him. The support flowed both ways. Sorry for going off on a tangent, but what I was saying was that IF she could do one of these radio programs, she would likely be in friendly territory and not feel like she was in the position of trying to defend ANYONE's reputation. So she would likely speak with less tension in her words - as she did at the library and at the Met Museum. However, I was a little irritated when Houghton begins to describe Hepburn as a woman who only had affairs with prominent men -- which may have been true, simply by chance -- but it's in complete contrast to everything I thought I knew, or wanted to believe. I know that in reality I know very little, but still...I would have felt more comfortable hearing this coming from Kate's own mouth and not from Houghton. It can also be damaging if you ask me, because this bit of information can easily be mistaken for snobbery. Haha. I always knew Astaire was capable of saying something like that. Whoa.
|
|
|
Post by Hep on Jul 7, 2008 1:59:25 GMT -5
Fred watch your mouth !! I never knew he said that.
but .. Judy; youre right. i think we ALL would have had a very different take on this whole thing if the interview had been recorded.
Richard i agree with you too though.. i dont want to believe she only involved herself with prominant men. if you think about it; all the men she dated WERE prominant.. but did she really plan it that way?
|
|
|
Post by dreamer on Jul 27, 2008 5:16:56 GMT -5
Fred watch your mouth !! I never knew he said that. but .. Judy; youre right. i think we ALL would have had a very different take on this whole thing if the interview had been recorded. Richard i agree with you too though.. i dont want to believe she only involved herself with prominant men. if you think about it; all the men she dated WERE prominant.. but did she really plan it that way? I guess it depends who we are - as an actress you are not just out on the street / in a bar to learn new people - you learn people to know mostly via your job and those men happenend to be as prominent as she was her self. Not to forget that prominent people seem to attract not only one another. But also the common man and with that the big question: " Are they honest with me?" , " Do they like me or the one they think I am" or " using the prominent me?" Being in the spotlight is not easy I believe - it has many benefits but certainly also a shadow site.
|
|
|
Post by Hep on Jul 27, 2008 14:25:18 GMT -5
true ture. this article is rasing so many issues; this article and Manns book are just not good for the board.
|
|
|
Post by HollywoodHepcat on Jul 27, 2008 14:32:30 GMT -5
Well, hold up. Kathy's is dandy because it's telling the naysayers of the KH/ST realtionship to STFU.
Mann is a scumbag.
What a great post.
|
|
|
Post by Hep on Jul 27, 2008 14:35:19 GMT -5
im sorry. that was bad. i dont know why i said that. but im having a hard time making up my own opinion about this article. i heart a Kathy <3333333 and yes Mann is a douchebag. im banning myself from this thread. kaythanksbye
|
|
|
Post by HollywoodHepcat on Jul 27, 2008 14:41:38 GMT -5
Chile, don't ban yourself. Geez. I'm not scolding you, for the love of heaven.
I say we just agree with Kathy because we all know what she meant. Pop in WOTY and quack around the room and all is well with the world.
|
|
|
Post by Hep on Jul 27, 2008 14:54:47 GMT -5
ok. i need a good Kath movie right about now.
|
|
|
Post by babytheleopard on Jul 28, 2008 8:48:42 GMT -5
ok. i need a good Kath movie right about now. Me too, I've been under a lot of stress so I really need to just sit back and have a Kath marathon. Unfortunately I have to go to work though soon But definitely when I get back ;D
|
|
|
Post by CrazyForKate on Nov 20, 2009 9:54:33 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by HollywoodHepcat on Nov 20, 2009 10:36:40 GMT -5
Lawls, I think my opinions regarding that desperate little tantrum are hiding under a rock somewhere in the Photo Thread, along with everyone else's. We get sidetracked and all a'flustered over here! What an angry little man with a horrible proclivity for hole-ridden wife beater shirts.
|
|
|
Post by CrazyForKate on Nov 20, 2009 11:00:08 GMT -5
Oh dear, I'm sorry! It's difficult to find things that haven't been discussed...not much happening in Kate-land these days except for the theatre...I hope the Chandler biography is really bad so we have something new to talk about...anyway.
|
|
|
Post by HollywoodHepcat on Nov 20, 2009 11:27:28 GMT -5
Oh, don't apologize. ;-D You're new 'round here.
And God, there's always some drah-mah going on as far as Kate is concerned on the Intarnet at all times. I've noticed, though, it's not NEW drama; just the same ole sh!t from the same ole sh!theads. Stay clear of those folks, m'friend. [Nobody on here, relax.] Frankly, I'm not much interested one way or another in this Chandler biography and am too busy looking off into the middle-distance horizon at the ST bio.
|
|