Katharine Hepburn: Star as Feminist
Katharine Hepburn: Star as Feminist
By Andrew Britton
0231132778 260p
Disappointing. I've had this book on my list to read for awhile now, it's always worse when I dislike a book I've been looking forward to reading. Some specifics:
pg 41- Linking her to leading men and trying to get information about her and Spencer Tracy is because the men are stars, not because she has to be seen in relation to a man like the book asserts. We only care because they're both stars, look at Brad Pitt/ Angelina Jolie. Stars married to "commoners"/non-stars don't get much notice because we don't that she's seeing her childhood friend or he's involved with an attorney from Boston. Gender isn't what matters, it's the star status.
pg 42- Unemployment after autumn of 1947 until State of the Union came out! Horrors, when did State of the Union come out? Book doesn't say, turns out if was in 1948. She she was out of work for a few months, at most? Wow, guess her pro-Progressive Party speech didn't hurt her as much as the book pretends.
pg 52- Lesbian theme in Little Women?!? Speechless at that assertion. Reading on, any same-sex friendship in a movie is homosexual apparently, I had no idea.
pg 160- "with 3 exceptions, the first {film} in which so plays a mother"- so it's the *4th*! That's quite an exception to make to prove a point.
pg 180ish- Hepburn/Tracy films, in this book, means more than just the films the two did together. Which is bizarre. How can it be a Hepburn/Tracy film if only one is in it?
pg 206- Ah, well the author doesn't really like Hepburn/Tracy films, maybe that explains it.
pg 241- Talking about one movie "the film merits a marginal distinguishing note- it *is* possible to watch it withought *consistent anger and embarrassment." Meaning what? That the author watches all her other films with anger and embarrassment? Why did he pick Hepburn to write about if he can't stand her work?
Interesting idea here, to take Hepburn films and show how she what? Was ahead of her time? Pushed politics of her time to be more liberal? Encouraged other pioneering women through the roles she chose? All of the above? Would have liked to have read that book.
6/10
By Andrew Britton
0231132778 260p
Disappointing. I've had this book on my list to read for awhile now, it's always worse when I dislike a book I've been looking forward to reading. Some specifics:
pg 41- Linking her to leading men and trying to get information about her and Spencer Tracy is because the men are stars, not because she has to be seen in relation to a man like the book asserts. We only care because they're both stars, look at Brad Pitt/ Angelina Jolie. Stars married to "commoners"/non-stars don't get much notice because we don't that she's seeing her childhood friend or he's involved with an attorney from Boston. Gender isn't what matters, it's the star status.
pg 42- Unemployment after autumn of 1947 until State of the Union came out! Horrors, when did State of the Union come out? Book doesn't say, turns out if was in 1948. She she was out of work for a few months, at most? Wow, guess her pro-Progressive Party speech didn't hurt her as much as the book pretends.
pg 52- Lesbian theme in Little Women?!? Speechless at that assertion. Reading on, any same-sex friendship in a movie is homosexual apparently, I had no idea.
pg 160- "with 3 exceptions, the first {film} in which so plays a mother"- so it's the *4th*! That's quite an exception to make to prove a point.
pg 180ish- Hepburn/Tracy films, in this book, means more than just the films the two did together. Which is bizarre. How can it be a Hepburn/Tracy film if only one is in it?
pg 206- Ah, well the author doesn't really like Hepburn/Tracy films, maybe that explains it.
pg 241- Talking about one movie "the film merits a marginal distinguishing note- it *is* possible to watch it withought *consistent anger and embarrassment." Meaning what? That the author watches all her other films with anger and embarrassment? Why did he pick Hepburn to write about if he can't stand her work?
Interesting idea here, to take Hepburn films and show how she what? Was ahead of her time? Pushed politics of her time to be more liberal? Encouraged other pioneering women through the roles she chose? All of the above? Would have liked to have read that book.
6/10
posted by Amanda | 12:18 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home