Hollywood Lesbians

Rating:
Summary: Rare interviews and intrusions with classic actresses
Review: Boze Hadleigh is certainly one of the best historians of gay and lesbian Hollywood, as he proved in the superior 'Lavendar Screen'. In this book, he interviews classic actresses who were widely considered to be lesbian or bisexual, but not every actress interviewed confirms or denies her sexual preference. The true value of this book is that all of the subjects interviewed have since passed on. A rare interview with Barbara Stanwyck finds the actress livid at Hadleigh's accusations that her marriage to Robert Taylor was a sham, and she throws him out of her house. Marjorie Main is far more forthcoming, and Patsy Kelly admits outright that she was an out and proud lesbian.

Whatever these actresses sexual preference, it is a great historical record of talented women who have passed on. I feel that Hadleigh badgers some of the actresses into fessing up to their sexual preference, and focuses mainly on that, with little regard to their career achievements. Still, reading what these ladies have to say is fascinating, and a great record of women who can no longer speak for themselves.

Rating:
Summary: Too sermonizing!
Review: Hadleigh seems to think that everyone (without exception) must follow PC guidelines to living their lives! He favors those subjects who actually admit that they are lesbian ( Marjorie Main, Patsy Kelly, Nancy Kulp, Sandy Dennis ) but is openly scornful of those who do not ( Barbara Stanwyk, Dame Judith Anderson, Edith Head and Agnes Moorehead )! I wish he had focussed more on these women's *entire* lives- as opposed to egging them on to admit it and proseltyzing them to the 'glory' of being out of the closet in a ' Are you now or have you ever been a lesbian and, if you say no, I will refuse to believe you' tone! I would have particularly liked to have read more about Marjorie Main's life as a drama teacher, on the Chautaqua circuiteer and contract player than his continually trying to get her to spill the beans on those no longer alive! Of all the women interviewed, she seemed to have the healthiest attitude towards life and men. She admitted that her marriage wasn't idyllic and that if she could have done it over she would not have married her husband but, she also admitted that she grieved over his passing "like a member of the family"! Of course, when she didn't agree to meet him for a subsequent interview, he patronizingly sniffed that she was ashamed to talk about her sexuality. Perhaps, she was merely bored to have focus on that with him rather than the many other facets of what appears to have been a fascinating life that Hadleigh and other interviewers failed to cover in adequate depth! Patsy Kelly was downright lewd in her description of her intimate life with Tallulah Bankhead and, while Hadleigh obviously favored her the most for her spilling the beans, I thought her attitude was somewhat self-pitying and downright misandristic! Nancy Culp was a good intellectual subject and,along with Main, seemed to have been someone I'd have liked to have spent an afternoon conversing with the most! He seemed to me to enjoy making Dorothy Arzner uncomfortable and I felt sorry for the poor woman as she vainly tried get him to change the subject by telling him about her experiences as the first prominent woman director - only to have him constantly asking her to confirm his suspicions over the phone! I think she was far more polite to him than he deserved! Of the 'hostile' subjects, I agree that he was somewhat cruel to Barbara Stanwyk but I did agree with him that her assertation that she, while she loathed Christina Crawford's book, that she was felt that (as a result of this book ) it was better thing that the public viewed Joan as a child abuser rather than a lesbian was downright appalling! The most entertaining 'hostile' interview was with Dame Judith Anderson! The whole time I kept rooting for her as he kept spouting his PC jargon. He started a discussion of her two disastrous brief marriages with " In the totally pro-marriage ' People ' Magazine, you are quoted as saying ." . Since when is 'People' magazine 'totally pro-marriage'? It has always reported in domestic abuse, drug addictions, and adultery leading to divorce and has been supportive of those stars who divorced their spouses for the above reasons! So it has nice pictorials on weddings- big deal! I was totally rooting for Dame Judith when she exclaimed that she had worked hard to gain her status without anyone's help and didn't owe any group anything and if they wanted to struggle for rights, she cheered them on but " Leave me alone! Do you hear? Just leave me alone!" It was with some satisfaction to read that she outshouted him and compelled an early retreat from her premises! Overall, this book adequately covers their lives but seems more of a single sermon continuously repeated than actual interviews!

Rating:
Summary: Hollywood Lesbians reveals much about subjects and author.
Review: Hollywood Lesbians is one of author Boze Hadleigh's "exposes" of homosexuality in show business. While the interviews are entertaining and informative, I find that Mr. Hadleigh tends to be self-righteous, and exploitative in the name of "helping" gays and lesbians. His interview with Barbara Stanwyck is downright cruel, and he displays much insensitivity in dealing with Agnes Moorehead and Dame Judith Anderson. Mr. Hadleigh seems to believe that he is qualified to tell everyone else how to run his or her life. Instead of trying to show some understanding towards these women who were forced to stay in the closet, he chooses to blame them for the attitudes of society. (Tellingly, Mr. Hadleigh is much kinder towards the men he interviewed in "Hollywood Gays", implying misogynistic impulses on his part.) In any event, this book is eye-opening and ultimately earns sympathy for the subjects, and makes one look forward to the day when everyone can live his or her life openly.

Rating:
Summary: hollywood privates ,legendary ladies speak out ,
Review: i found the book highly entertaining, specially the interview with DAME JUDITH ANDERSON ,a hell of an actress ,and a indomitable personality to boot/ ,so what if many of them refused to come out ,i still believe in the freedom of choice , they are a product of their times ,and you can't really blame them ,could you? more power to them /and to anybody strong enough in their convictions ,to decided what is more beneficial, to them, even in the last decades of their lives,,,good book, WRONG APROACH and OVERALL ACTITUD on the writter questions.

Rating:
Summary: Apparently EVERYONE on earth is gay according to this author
Review: I read this book primarily for the interview with Barbara Stanwyck, who I adore. What a book. The author seems to believe that it is his calling in life to FORCE people, primarily the dead ones, to admit that they are gay, whether or not they are, mainly because HE is. Barbara Stanwyck had class, was intensely private, and so what? If people want to discuss their sex lives and have the information published for the world to see, fine. Personally, I have a lot more respect for people, gay or otherwise, who mind their own business and expect the rest of the world to do the same. I have yet to see a connection between one's sexuality and one's artistic ability. (...) I'm honestly ashamed I read the damned thing.

Rating:
Summary: A good read
Review: Let me tell you, it was a lot easier to get through this invasion than "Hollywood Gays!" It was an OK read, full of facts about classic stars' sexuality, but, just as in the male version, I would have liked to know more about these women. The interviews are good and revealing, which is a plus, but something is definitely missing here.

Rating:
Summary: A good read
Review: Let me tell you, it was a lot easier to get through this invasion than "Hollywood Gays!" It was an OK read, full of facts about classic stars' sexuality, but, just as in the male version, I would have liked to know more about these women. The interviews are good and revealing, which is a plus, but something is definitely missing here.