Rating: 
Summary: God, I HATE Joan Crawford
Review: I can't belive she did this, well I belevie she did but still gezz I would've NEVER knew unless I was there.
Rating: 
Summary: Let the legend speak for herself...
Review: Ever heard the song, "Please Don't Talk about me When I'm Gone"? Sure, Christina truly changed the world with her pioneering glimpse into the imperfections of Hollywood stars that were fantasized to be as angelic in their personal lives as on screen. Well--big surprise here, everyone--Joan was no angel. You don't need to read Christina's flimsy book of emotional allegations (and no proof) to figure that one out.
Joan's image in her heyday was that of the independent woman. She didn't need a man to make it in the world. She could be both man and woman, aggressive and feminine, beautiful and tough. People still seem to be shocked today that an extraordinary woman such as Joan could dare to live on a man's terms (drink, have casual sex, rise to the top in a career, and be loved by millions). However, the secret about Joan is that she was always looking for love. Born into poverty, and a world far different socially from the world of today, Joan was determined to pay any price for success--and she did. To her, it was a fair trade.
There has probably never been a female movie star more successful than Joan Crawford. She got the Oscar, she was one of the most popular actresses of all-time, she endured in the industry for 50 years, she pioneered re-invention (long before Madonna and Cher), and she was a brilliant actress. Most people forget when watching Queen Bee that Joan was actually ACTING. Those lines did not just magically spill from her mouth as she made them up. Writers were behind the picture--Ronald McDougall, who also wrote Mildred Pierce. And if you are in the camp that believes Joan was a poor actress, how can you explain her more vulnerable, tender performances in films such as Autumn Leaves and Humoresque?
That aside, back to Mommie Dearest. It was an important book, for sure. It illuminated a side of Hollywood no one dared existed: the dark side of people who had been glamorized to appear perfect, and child abuse. Well, Joan Crawford was the unjustified sacrifice. Christina knew it. She knew she was basically putting Joan up to be trashed by everyone in the name of child abuse and the disillusionment and immorality of Hollywood. She did it on purpose.
Rating: 
Summary: Nothing Wrong With Revenge For Fun And Profit
Review: Hang onto your hats and wire hangers! It'd be hard to write a dull book about Joan Crawford, who was practically a latter-day Blanche Dubois. Cloying, damaged, pathetic, and only partly conscious of her well-earned status as a woman of ill repute, she was also, it seems, a child abuser and eventual alcoholic. This book is (of course) her daughter's famous account of Joan's transition from eccentricity to lunacy, from merely abusive to REALLY abusive.
And it's pretty funny.
The author, one hastens to add, is not amused. There is no undertone of dark humor, no wink of acknowledgement that golden-coiffed Christina may at times have been less than a thrill to raise. Instead, the book is frightfully earnest: Christina is a survivor of terrible things, period; no one should have to endure what she endured.
And heck, this may be true. But--given that we are told Christina forgave her mother repeatedly and tried to maintain a relationship throughout their lives--why was there so little forgiveness after her mother's death? The answer comes at the end: it turns out Christina might be angrier about Joan's will than about the really old stuff. Which is perfectly fine, but as the reader, I want to have as much fun with the author's revenge as she does. So, deduct one star for unnecessary dourness.
Rating: 
Summary: A shameful tribute to someone who can't defend herself
Review: I am giving this book 3 stars for the suspense features of the saga. However, I would like to know this: if Joan Crawford was on this Earth today, what would be her side of this story? It is disturbing to me that Christina Crawford would wait and write a book about her late mother when she is not around to defend herself! And are those child abuse allegations true--or are they embellishments of what could have been "needed discipline" only to strike back at Joan Crawford the very moment she is not here to confirm or deny those stories? The only person who can set the record straight is Joan Crawford and she must have had her reasons for excluding her from the will for "reasons well known to them." I believe the reason is that Joan Crawford knew that this was going to happen when she passed away. Joan Crawford, rest in peace, and wherever you are, know that your true friends and fans will refuse to dishonor your memory. Christina, it's past time to move on, you have made enough money at the expense of your mother, get over it! Last I have heard, insisting on impeccable manners, keeping your house clean, writing thank-you notes, having you giving your Christmas and birthday presents to the less fortunate, and cleaning your plate at mealtimes is NOT ABUSE, it's called learning discipline and respect for others!
Rating:
Summary: I believe her!
Review: I am one of the people who thinks every word of "Mommie Dearest" is absolute truth. Not just because I love the story and it is so brilliantly written, with humor and honesty. But I like Christina Crawford as a person. All one has to do is watch her speak publicly, like the documentary on the "Mildred Pierce" DVD, or any Joan TV biography. She is very genuine and sincere and is not avaricious at all. I do not believe she wrote this book before her mother died, but even if that were true, GOOD! The reason this book was written, I believe, was to dispel the myth about Hollywood fantasy. She recieved a lot of abuse after this book came out, and in her book Survivor she writes "why is it so wrong to defend one's self?". I agree. Joan must have known the language in the will would become public and embarrass Christina and Chris. I applaud Christina for coming forth and sharing her story. I would love to meet her some day.
Rating:
Summary: Mommie Dearest is a bad book for some people to read.
Review: I give this book 3 stars for the mixed emotions I have about it. While I would like to say, once started I couldn't put the book down. Unfortunately however, was the abuse I endured from this book. My own mother, after reading this book, took some of the examples Christina gave, and used them on my sister and myself. I'm not going to say without this book we would not have been abused, I know that would have happened regardless. It's just scary to read some of the similarities in abuse and to relive them. For those that have been abused as a child, adopted or not, this book may be a very emotional one for you. Take caution before reading it. Mothers do indeed do terrible things to their children when not viewed by the public eye. If anything positive can come out of this book, it is the spotlight being put on child abuse in the home.
Rating:
Summary: I've Read the Original
Review: I have not yet had the pleasure of reading this new version of the 1978 book. (I only recently found out that there was an anniversary edition!). I'm not going to offer much opinion on whether Christina is telling the truth or not, since I am still balancing the original MD against other bios I've read/am reading about Joan, but I can say this: I do believe that sibilings in the same family can be treated very differently by the same parent. I think that could very well explain why Joan's younger two girls have stated that there was no abuse. Perhaps for them, there wasn't. They are about 8 or 9 years younger than Christina, so that would make them very small when she left for boarding school at age 10, and only about 6 or seven when Joan married Alfred Steele. I got the impression from MD that Joan's life was on a much more even keel then. With less financial worry, and a husband that she claimed to love, it wouldn't surprise me in the slightest if she was *able* to be a better mother to Cindy and Cathy than she was to Christina and Christopher. Having grown up with a very strong-minded parent, I can also speculate that if Christina's depiction of Joan's general mind-set is accurate, she may well have desginated Christina and Christopher as her "bad" children and the twins as her "good" children, and then treated them accordingly. And too, there is the simple fact that most people can and do learn from their mistakes. Even if she never admitted to hurting Christina, I could also see Joan looking at the younger girls and thinking "Okay, I have these two children left, and I DON'T want to have such a conflicted relationship with them." So, who of Joan's children is telling the truth? Both, I imagine.
Rating:
Summary: A sad tale...
Review: I really enjoyed this well written account of the childhood of Christina Crawford. But I do wonder why it is so hard to believe that it is true? Is it so hard to comprehend that a famous actress is not the greatest person she pretends to be? Some people are blinded by the glitz they see on screen and refuse to see that the actress tried so hard to gain publicity she adopted two children, verbally and physically abusing them when the cameras were turned away. It is a sad, tear-jerking at times, story...one that is too impossible to be a lie.
Rating:
Summary: i don't believe someone who waits until JC dies...
Review: i'm sorry, but i just finished reading myrna loy's "being and becoming", and she has a few insights about the author being an affected and strange person who lives in her own world. Not merely for sticking up for her old colleague JC but because CC was hired for a stage production myrna was in. She was uncooperative and had to have it all her way... Myrna adds some common sense insight into a trouble maker.... this is what i believe cc is about... yes she could have recalled conversation, she could have quoted letters. but why not have the gall to do all this when her mother was around to defend herself... i find that reprehensible... if not a little sick to live off this as a career.
Rating: 
Summary: Memoirs of the whiny and histrionic
Review: In 1939, at the height of her box-office popularity, Joan Crawford adopted her oldest daughter, Christina. As her career falters and one marriage after another hits the rocks, Hollywood's diva of the 1940's turns to alcohol binges and wild rages towards her adopted child. If one believes Tina Crawford's telling, her starlet mother was an abusive and manipulative borderline personality whom no one dared cross for fear of her nearly-omnipotent retribution. Whether destructive midnight tirades or a drunken attempt to kill her, Christina forgives her mother over and over and tries to make amends. Joan sends Tina to various private schools with irrational instructions that she cannot leave the grounds or even have clothing. When the grown Christina begins a life of her own, her unstable mother attempts to overtake her marriage and her film career, keeping a strangehold on Christina's life until her death in 1977.
Frankly, I didn't find Tina Crawford's story terribly credible. Not that I think she's outright lying, but that her tone often sounds like a spoiled brat, which detracts from the amount
of sympathy the reader can really feel for her. She describes being made to finish her dinner and write thank you notes for her Christmas gifts with the same tone of horrified outrage as she uses for describing her mother flying into a drunken fit. Pretty soon, the whole thing begins to sound like a whiny, histrionic mother raising a whiny, histrionic daughter.
The book just doesn't contain the element of reflection that makes autobiographies interesting. Crawford is self-absorbed and doesn't give her reader anything by writing this story so I resented the instrusion. Giving your reader something is an important part of writing an autobiography. I want the autobiographer's story to not only have changed them, but at least be trying to change me. If I just want to hear someone rant about how terrible somebody's mother is, I can stop any number of people on the street.
I wondered throughout why Tina Crawford wrote this book. There's no indication she did it to reflect on what she had learned from the experience or to gain a greater understanding of it. Her tone throughout is accusatory and bitter -- she wrote it to drag her mother's famous name through the dirt and thereby exact a posthumous revenge. Which just isn't all that interesting to me and even the prose is nothing to draw me.
The epilogue was in extremely poor taste and, without any other answer to the question, "why are you telling me this", we're left to assume that the last few pages of the book answer that question -- she wrote it out of anger at her mother for being left out of the will and at the other actors slighting her at her mother's film memorial. It probably didn't hurt that the late 70's and early 80's, when this was published, tell-alls exposing one's parents as abusive louts had become big money-makers. Especially if anyone in the family was famous. This was published so quickly after Joan's death that Tina must have begun it before her mother was even cold in the grave.
None of this is to say that Joan Crawford was, by any means, June Cleaver. She was known for being a demanding diva throughout her career and an unstable drunk near the end of it. I bet living with her was no picnic for anybody. But should I applaud Tina for using this as a cash cow?
I guess my problem with the story's credibility wasn't that I didn't believe the facts of the story, but that I don't think the way Tina wanted readers to see her (and the way she saw herself) matched with how she presented herself in the story. She clearly saw herself as an innocent victim and wanted her readers to see her that way also. She was banking (probably safely) on the fact that people don't like to criticize or question the truthfulness of autobiographical stories about child abuse. David Pelzer's been making millions off this sort of pity for years because even when his story was PROVEN to be a lie, nobody wants to call him a liar or a bad writer.
I found the story sad, just not for the usual reasons. I think it's sad that Joan Crawford apparently raised someone to be as petty, neurotic, and selfish as she herself was.
|
