Rabu, 30 November 2011

Afternoon at Hillwood House

To celebrate Thanksgiving, and for a change of scenery, I headed down to our nation's capitol.  On my list of things to do was to visit Marjorie Merriweather Post's estate in north DC called Hillwood. Marjorie Merriweather Post (188 -1973) was the daughter of C.W. Post who invented a coffee substitute called Posties as well as Grape Nuts.  At the time of his death, when she was 27, she inherited $20 million dollars which is something like over a $100 million dollars in today's money.  Suffice it to say, girlfriend didn't have to clip coupons.  Although she could have spent the rest of her life counting her money, Marjorie was a shrewd businessman. She served on the board of her father's company The Postum Cereal Company,  which he'd founded in 1895.  With her second husband, E.F. Hutton (anyone remember those commericals, "When E.F. Hutton talks, people listen?), she developed a wider range of products including Birdseye.  The company eventually became the General Foods Corporation in 1929.

In the 1950's Marjorie Merriweather Post bought Hillwood House, which she extensively renovated.  It's now home to her large collection of French and Russian decorative arts.  The web-site has an awesome orientation video.which you can watch here  The house is gorgeous, but it is not easy to find, let me tell you. I got lost along the way, and ended up almost in Maryland! However, I did manage to find the Politics and Prose bookstore which was also on my list of places to visit.  After I managed to turn myself around, I finally got to the museum but with only an hour to look around before it closed for the day.  So I quickly headed over to the Adirondack House on the property to see the Wedding Belles exhibition.

The exhibition features not only all 4 of Marjorie Merriweather Post's wedding dresses, to husbands Edward Bennett Close (who later remarried, Glenn Close is his granddaughter), E.F. Hutton, Joseph Davies, and Herbert A. May, but also her mother Ella Merriweather's dress, and the wedding dresses of her daughters Adelaide, and Eleanor Close and Nedenia Hutton (the actress Dina Merrill). It's amazing to see how not only fashion, but wedding fashions have changed since the 19th century.  Back then, very few women wore white wedding dresses unless they were rich, most women like Ella Merriweather wore an afternoon dress, something that they could wear again. The exhibit also features the flower girl and bridesmaids dresses worn by Dina Merrill as a child.

I had enough time after the Wedding Belles exhibition to visit the main house. During her third marriage, her husband Joseph Davies became the second American ambassador to the Soviet Union.  During that time, Marjorie acquired many valuable works of art from the Soviets.  Not just decorative arts but paintings and photographs of the Russian Tsars.  I don't think I've ever seen so many portraits of Tsar Nicholas II as I did at Hillwood House, not to mention some fabulous portraits of Catherine the Great and Empress Alexandra.  There are also several Faberge eggs, Sevres porcelain, French furniture, tapestries, and many, many Russian icons.


This little beauty is what Princess Alexandra of Hesse wore at her wedding ceremony to Tsar Nicholas II in 1894.  The crown consists of bands of diamonds sewn into velvet-covered supports and surmounted by a cross of six large, old mine-cut diamonds.



This small brooch was most likely made soon after Tsar Nicholas and Tsaritsa Alexandra’s wedding. On it, Alexandra wears a headpiece and jewels similar to the ones in the couple’s wedding portraits. Nicholas is depicted in the uniform of the Life-Guard Hussars Regiment that he wore at the wedding.





These objects are part of a large dressing table set from the dowry of Grand Duchess Ekaterina Mikhailovna, a niece of Tsar Nicholas I. Commissioned for her wedding to the duke of Mecklenburg-Strelitz in 1851, this set reflects the tradition of grandiose objects produced in the eighteenth century deemed indispensable to the ceremonial acts of grooming and dressing.




The museum houses more than 16,000 objects that Post collected over the years.  I definitely want to go back in the spring when the garden is in full bloom.  The estate covers 25 acres of land, including the main house, the cafe, the dacha, the Adirondack house, the Butler's house, etc.  Hillwood was just one of Marjorie Merriweather Post's estates.  Mar-a-lago, her estate in Palm Beach, was bought by Donald Trump and turned into an exclusive club.  It originally had 115 rooms! She also owned Camp Topridge in the Adirondacks as well as a home in Brookville, NY which she sold to Long Island University for $200,000.  It is now the C.W. Post Campus of LIU.

What I loved about Hillwood was that it still felt like a private home. Interspersed amongst all the art work and expensive furniture are tons of family photographs and portraits.  I could just imagine Marjorie Merriweather Post sweeping down the staircase in an evening gown to greet her guests at some swanky party that she was hosting. However, one of the best parts of the visit, was wandering through the gift shop and seeing my book, Scandalous Women perched between Leslie Carroll's Royal Pains and Kris Waldherr's Doomed Queens!

If you are ever in Washington, DC, I encourage you to visit Hillwood House.  You won't regret it!

Selasa, 29 November 2011

Guest Blogger Debra Brenegan on The Remarkable Life of Fanny Fern

Scandalous Women is pleased to welcome author Debra Brenegan to the blog today to talk about Fanny Fern, once one of the highest paid columnists in the United States, making $100 a week way back in 1855.

Talk about a scandalous woman! Fanny Fern helped define the term. And the sad thing is that most people have never heard of her. I had never heard of her either until one day, in graduate school, I took a nineteenth-century American Literature class with a professor who told me, “I know a writer you’re just going to love.” This writer, Fanny Fern, wasn’t on our reading list that semester, so, he added her book, Ruth Hall, to the reading list of a course I took with him the next semester. And, he was right – I adored her!

Fanny Fern was the highest-paid, most-popular writer of her era. She served as a literary mentor to Walt Whitman, earned the respect of Nathaniel Hawthorne and was friends with Harriet Beecher Stowe. Fern’s personal life was a rollercoaster of highs and lows. She was widowed, escaped an abusive second marriage, and then married a third man, eleven years her junior.

I became so interested in Fern and her amazing life that I started writing papers about her. I applied for and got a graduate school fellowship to visit Fern’s archives at Smith College in Massachusetts. As I learned more about Fanny Fern, I couldn’t stop telling people about her. And people were amazed with her rags-to-riches story. They couldn’t believe that they had never heard of her. When it came time to write my dissertation, I combined my interest in creative writing, literature and Women’s Studies to write a historical novel about this forgotten journalist, novelist and feminist. I wanted everyone who hadn’t heard of Fanny Fern to learn about her; I wanted to bring her back to life.

That dissertation became my first published book, the historical novel Shame the Devil (SUNY Press). My book tells the remarkable and true story of Fanny Fern (the pen name of Sara Payson Willis). Well ahead of her time, Fern (1811-1872) scrabbled in the depths of poverty before her meteoric rise to fame and fortune. She penned one of the country's first prenuptial agreements and served as a nineteenth-century Oprah to her hundreds of thousands of fans. Her weekly editorials in the pages of the New York Ledger over a period of about twenty years chronicled the myriad controversies of her era and demonstrated her firm belief in the motto, "Speak the truth, and shame the devil."

You can learn more about Fanny Fern, her life, and the book Shame the Devil on my website: http://www.debrabrenegan.com/.

Have you ever heard of Fanny Fern? If you haven’t (and many people haven’t), why do you suppose that is?

Sabtu, 26 November 2011

Scandalous Movie Review: My Week with Marilyn

Cast

Michelle Williams as Marilyn Monroe
Kenneth Branagh as Sir Laurence Olivier
Eddie Redmayne as Colin Clark
Judi Dench as Dame Sybil Thorndike
Emma Watson as Lucy
Dougray Scott as Arthur Miller
Dominic Cooper as Milton H. Greene
Julia Ormond as Vivien Leigh
Derek Jacobi as Sir Owen Morshead
Zoë Wanamaker as Paula Strasberg
Richard Clifford as Richard Wattis
Philip Jackson as Roger Smith
Simon Russell Beale as Admiral Cotes-Preedy

Directed by: Simon Curtis
Written by Adrian Hodges based on the memoirs of Colin Clark
Produced by David Parfitt, Harvey Weinstein, The Weinstein  Company and BBC Films



Synopsis: In the summer of 1956, and 23 year old Colin Clark is looking for a job as an assistant on a film.  He talks his way into a job working as the 3rd Assistant Director on the British film of The Prince and the Showgirl (based on the The Sleeping Prince by Terrence Rattigan), starring Knight of the British theatre Laurence Olivier and American film star Marilyn Monroe, who is also on honeymoon with her new husband, playwright Arthur Miller. Things on the set start rocky and get worse as Marilyn's insecurities get the best of her.  Olivier is frustrated by her lateness and her dependence on her acting coach Paula Strasberg, wife of Method guru Lee Strasberg. When Arthur Miller leaves the country to do some work, Marilyn begins to rely on Colin to keep her company.  Olivier tells Colin to do anything to make Marilyn happy and get her to the set on time. Colin, who of course falls immediately under Marilyn's spell, introduces her to th wonders of British life as they spend a week together, during which time she escapes from the pressures of work. But the idyll has to end, leaving Colin sad but happy with his memories of the magical time that he spent with Marilyn.

My thoughts:  I read Clark's memoirs when they first came out back in the 1990's on a trip to England. Like many people, I've been fascinated with Marilyn Monroe since childhood. I've read pretty much every book ever written about her, her combination of sexuality and vulnerability has rarely been duplicated by any actress. So when I heard that they were making a movie out of the book, I had my misgivings.  Does anyone remember the HBO movie where Ashley Judd and Mira Sorvino shared the role of Marilyn, Ashley played the pre-nose job, pre-blonde Marilyn as a tough cookie, while Sorvino played the later Marilyn.  It didn't really work, and I've avoided biopics about Marilyn ever since.  Still, I couldn't help but wonder, especially given the cast that had been assembled for the film.  The movie premiered at The New York Film Festival but I wasn't not paying $50 to see the film.  However, when the film opened the day before Thanksgiving, I thought I would make it my Thanksgiving film.

I'm happy to see that my fears weren't realized, although at first I was worried, the first few scenes were not promising.  Initially, they just seemed a catalog of Monroe stereotypes, breathy voice, the giggle, as the film progresses, it goes deeper into Monroe's psyche as Colin gets to know the real Marilyn. Michelle Williams doesn't do an impersonation of Marilyn Monroe, she is Marilyn from the tips of her platinum blonde locks to the wiggle in her walk.  Williams has said in interviews that she spent six months not just reading Monroe biographies but also studying her walk and her vocal inflections, and it paid off. However, her work clearly went deeper than that. Williams captures Marilyn's fears, her vulnerability, her neediness, vanity, foolish, and her ability to turn the character that she called 'her' on and off when necessary. Marilyn's emotions are never very far from the surface, and Williams has the ability to portray her ability to turn on a dime from sadness to happiness in the blink of an eye. The scene where she reads her husband's work and realizes that he's created an unflattering portrait of her are devastating.

This film is a coming of age story with Colin Clark, played by the dynamic Eddie Redmayne, going from a boy who is unsure about what he wants to do with his life to a man. It's lovely to see his fumbling attempts to woo Lucy, the wardrobe assistant played by Emma Watson, and to defy the low expectations of the filmmakers who see him as just a gopher initially. Some of the best scenes in the film are when he goes above and beyond the call of duty much to the chagrin of his bosses.

Both Colin and Marilyn have to deal with expectations, for Colin it has to do with having a famous father, art historian Sir Kenneth Clark, and a famous brother, conservative politician and military historian Alan Clark.  For Marilyn, it's the expectations of the public and her fellow actors.  On the Prince and the Showgirl, she worries that she's not good enough to work with the English actors in the cast, most of whom are theatre veterans.  Dame Judi Dench does superb work as usual in the small role of Dame Sybil Thorndike, who goes out of her way to make Marilyn feel welcome on the set, something that Olivier seems incapable of doing.

At first Kenneth Branagh seemed miscast as Laurence Olivier, he's shorter, blonder, doughier with no upper lip, but he manages to capture the impatience, and the narcissism of a man who has been told that he's the greatest actor in England, and feels that his poop doesn't stink. When Olivier has to eat crow later in the film, acknowledging that Marilyn has a gift for film acting that he doesn't possess, it's brilliant. Of course the film is peopled with wonderful actors in supporting roles such as Sir Derek Jacobi, Simon Russell Beale, Toby Jones, and Michael Kitchen.  Zoe Wanamaker almost steals the film as Paula Strasberg.  One longs for someone to make a film out of Susan Strasberg's memoir about what it was like to have her parents virtually adopt Marilyn, neglecting the needs of their own children. Only Dominic Cooper is miscast as Milton Greene, Marilyn's former lover and business partner.  He's too young for the role and lacks the gravitas for the part.  Unfortunately Dougray Scott is given very little too do as Arthur Miller.

While the film is not quite as emotionally satisfying as The King's Speech, it does evoke nostalgia for a time and a world that no longer exists.  The film rests squarely on the more than adequate shoulders of Michelle Williams and Eddie Redmayne.  It was a more than pleasant way to spend my Thanksgiving.

My verdict:  Two thumbs up!

Rabu, 23 November 2011

The Mysterious Disappearance of Aimee Semple McPherson

Sex scandals involving men of the cloth are not new (see Jimmy Swaggart. Jim Bakker, etc.); as far back as 1874 Henry Ward Beecher’s former assistant Theodore Tilton sued the preacher for ‘criminal intimacy’ with his wife Elizabeth Tilton. But a scandal involving a female evangelist was something new entirely. Aimee Semple McPherson was no ordinary female evangelist; she was also a media celebrity, one of the first evangelists to combine religion and popular entertainment in America. In the 1920's, Aimee was more famous than movie stars, such as Douglas Fairbanks and Mary Pickford.  Her radio show sometimes reached as far as Australia. Over more than 30 years, Aimee Semple McPherson touched the lives of millions across the country.
Born in Canada in 1890, Aimee was exposed to religion at an early age. According to biographer Daniel Mark Epstein, Aimee was consecrated to God at her birth, by her mother Mimi, who was a soldier in the Salvation Army. Strong-willed and inquisitive by nature, Aimee suffered a spiritual crisis in her teens; trying to reconcile the theory of evolution she was taught in school with the teaching of Genesis in the Bible. Attending a revival meeting one day, she met her first husband, a charismatic Irishman named Robert Semple who was a guest preacher. Aimee found her calling and a husband at the same time. They soon married, partners in the Pentecostal faith, intent on spreading the word, but their happiness was short-lived. Robert died of dysentery and malaria four months after the couple arrived in China to do missionary work. Aimee was eight months pregnant with their daughter Roberta, penniless and alone. She managed to make her way back to New York, where her mother arranged a job for her working for the Salvation Army. It was there that she met her second husband, a restaurant accountant by the name of Harold McPherson.

Aimee tried to settle down as an ordinary housewife in Rhode Island, giving birth to a second child, a son named Rolf but she began suffering from depression and various ailments. In the hospital, she heard a voice saying “Now will you go? Now will you go?” Aimee decided to return to her ministry, buying 2 white servant uniforms, which became her signature look. With no savings, no church backing, and no guarantees, she set off to make a name for herself as a female preacher. From that point on, she would be known simply as “Sister.”

Over the next seven years, Aimee would criss-cross the country six times. She didn’t just talk of the gospel but of her own experiences as a wife and a mother. She turned the usual gospel of hell-fire and damnation into a gospel of love. But the constant touring took a toll on her marriage, and her husband eventually filed for divorce. After touring around the country for several years, Aimee decided to settle down in Los Angeles. Although she preached a conservative gospel, against evolution and for temperance, Aimee used modern technology, radio, movies and magazines, to get her message across. Her revival meetings were more like stage shows, dramatizing scenes from the Bible, with a full orchestra. In Los Angeles, she founded the Church of the Foursquare Gospel, building the huge Angelus Temple, which seated 5,300 people. Aimee was also one of the first women to preach a radio sermon, and she racially integrated her tent meetings and church services. By 1926, she was one of the most influential and charismatic women of her time.

On April 24, 1926, evangelist Aimee Semple McPherson returned from a three month trip to Europe and the Holy Land. She returned home to a life of loneliness, overwork, bickering with her mother, and the pressures of fame. “At the end of each day,” she wrote, “…dear people would go to their homes arm in arm, while I would sit in silence.” Aimee had almost immediately plunged back into her crusade against evolution. If that wasn’t enough on her plate, she’d also stuck her nose into local politics, campaigning to keep Venice Beach’s blue laws on the books, which prohibited things like dancing on Sundays. Her actions just added to her list of enemies which already included fellow evangelist Robert P. Schuler who felt that she was a poacher, raiding other church’s congregations. He also believed that she was more of a personality than a preacher, McPhersonism rather than Christianity.

Almost five weeks later, on May 18, 1926, Aimee went with her secretary to Ocean Park Beach north of Venice Beach for a swim. She often went to the beach to work on her sermons. That day she ate waffles with her secretary, wrote for a little while, and then went for a swim. After an hour, her secretary grew alarmed that she hadn’t returned. McPherson was scheduled to hold a service that day; her mother Minnie Kennedy preached the sermon instead, concluding with the words, "Sister is with Jesus," sending parishioners into a tearful frenzy. Thousands flocked to Venice Beach to watch the hunt for Aimee’s body as parishioners held day and night seaside vigils. Merchants did a big business selling photos of the evangelist. The hunt hurt the bootleggers business since they couldn’t bring in the booze without drawing attention to themselves. One parishioner drowned while searching for the body and a diver died of exposure. McPherson's mother received a ransom note (signed by "The Avengers") which demanded a half million dollars, or else the kidnappers would sell McPherson into "white slavery". She later claimed that she’d tossed the letter away, believing her daughter was already dead.

Aimee’s disappearance was a boon to the local newspapers circulation, The Los Angeles Times and William Randolph Hearst's Los Angeles Examiner competed to see who could get the latest scoop. Daily updates appeared in newspapers around the country, the story helping to attract new subscribers. The New York Times printed the same number of articles that they had on the Scopes Monkey trial one year earlier. Americans eagerly followed each new tidbit in the story. The Los Angeles Times chartered a plane to scan the ocean for Aimee’s body and even hired a parachutist. Other papers, lacking the resources, printed excerpts from Aimee’s autobiography. More than 50 reporters were assigned to the story. When there was no news, they simply printed rumor and innuendo.

On June 23, just when everyone assumed she was knocking on heaven’s door, Aimee knocked on the door of a cottage in Agua Prieta, Sonora, a Mexican town across the border from Douglas, Arizona. She claimed she had been kidnapped, drugged, tortured, and held for ransom in a shack by a man and a woman, "Steve" and "Mexicali Rose". She had managed to escape from her captors,  walking 13 hours through the desert to freedom. She was quickly taken to a hospital. On the surface, the story seemed plausible; the FBI had been investigating a number of kidnapping rings in Southern California, but things didn’t seem to add up. Aimee's shoes showed no signs of a long desert trek, nor did they have grass stains on them. Aimee had also been wearing a bathing suit when she disappeared, but turned up in a dress, wearing a wristwatch that she hadn’t worn to the beach. Although she claimed that had been tortured and drugged, she seemed in surprisingly good health for someone who been through an ordeal nor was there any evidence of sunburn or dehydration.
A crowd of at least 50,000 people gathered to welcome her home after her ordeal, which was the largest crowd that had ever gathered to greet anyone arriving in Los Angeles—including sports figures, presidents, politicians or movie stars. The Los Angeles police department assigned a special guard to protect her and the Fire Department turned up in their parade uniforms.  Aimee stood surrounded by 7 young women dressed in white as rose petals were tossed from planes overhead. Gossip columnist Louella Parsons covered the event for Hearst’s Los Angeles Examiner.

Within days, many were calling for a full investigation into Aimee’s “kidnapping.” The Los Angeles Examiner offered $10,000 for information about the kidnappers and $1,000 if anyone could locate the shack where Aimee was allegedly kept. However, the police seemed to have no interest in trying to find the kidnappers. Instead they focused on investigating Aimee’s personal life. They focused in particular on Kenneth Ormiston, the married engineer of the radio station she owned, who mysteriously disappeared around the same time. People quickly put two and two together and came up with the idea that the two were having an affair. Others, however, believed that the story was just one big publicity stunt.
A grand jury convened on July 8, 1926, but adjourned 12 days later citing lack of evidence to proceed. Witnesses came forward claiming to have seen Aimee at a seaside cottage in Carmel-by-the-Sea, the cottage rented by Kenneth Ormiston under an assumed name. Ormiston admitted he had rented the cottage but claimed that the woman --known in the press as Mrs. X--was not Aimee but another woman with whom he was having an affair. When the grand jury reconvened on August 3, it heard further testimony along with documents from hotels, all said to be in Aimee's handwriting.

Aimee never wavered from her story, that she was approached by a young couple at the beach who had asked her to come over and pray for their sick child, and that she was then shoved into a car and drugged with chloroform. When she was not forthcoming with answers regarding her relationship with Ormiston, the judge charged Aimee and her mother with obstruction of justice. She showed up in court every day with seven female attendants who were dressed like her in a white uniform with a navy cape. Not content to leave her fate solely in God’s hands, Aimee hired three of the most powerful lawyers in Los Angeles. To combat the bad newspaper publicity, Aimee spoke freely about the court trials on the air from her radio station. She likened herself to Joan of Arc, claiming that the forces of evil were trying to sacrifice a woman preacher. Just like in the 15th century, men were threatened by a powerful woman who challenged the status quo.

The prosecution of Aimee generated support for her among local flappers who attended the trial in support, they regarded her as a modern woman similar to themselves, and whose prosecution they believed was motivated by issues of gender. Newspaperman and cynic H.L. Mencken, previously a vocal critic of McPherson's,  came away from the trial impressed with Aimee and disdainful of the prosecution. He concluded that that if you want to discredit somebody’s political agenda, then you go after their private life (now a fact of life for politicians) but still somewhat new at the time. Aimee had been very vocal about getting the teaching of evolution out of California schools and Bibles into every classroom. The same civic leaders, who had had once embraced her, now saw her as an embarrassment. In the end, the district attorney had no clear evidence that she and her mother had obstructed justice, and the charges were dropped. However, the damage to Aimee’s reputation was done.

To this day no one knows what really happened to Aimee Semple McPherson. Biographer Matthew Avery Sutton concedes that Aimee may have simply wanted to disappear for a break, or for good, not realizing the uproar that would be created by her disappearance. Others believed that Aimee would have risked everything that she had worked so hard for just to throw it away on a sexual affair or a publicity stunt. Theories and innuendo abounded: that she had run off with a lover, she had gone off to have an abortion, she was taking time to heal from plastic surgery, or she had staged a publicity stunt. Nevertheless, her disappearance produced a turmoil that convulsed Los Angeles, and enthralled millions of spectators who watched the unfolding drama in the press and on radio.

Aimee struggled for several years after the kidnapping, trying to re-establish her public image. She lost weight, and bobbed her hair, appeared in a Broadway show about her life, which was less than successful since she refused to talk about the kidnapping. There were dozens of lawsuits, and she even became estranged for a time from her mother and daughter. She eloped with a singer named Dave Hutton, who had appeared in one of her productions, outraging some of her parishioners who believed that divorcees should never remarry (the couple later divorced). As the country entered the Depression, Aimee began preaching to the poor and disenfranchised, particularly the African-American and Mexican communities in Los Angeles. Finally, she returned to her Pentecostal roots, publicly speaking in tongues, preaching that the country needed not just an economic revival but a spiritual one as well. In 1944, she arrived in Oakland to preach. One night before she went to bed, she took some barbiturates to help her sleep. She never woke up. Her son found her unconscious on the floor of her room. Although the official coroner’s report stated that her death was an accident, it was initially reported as a suicide.

More than 50 years later, the story of her disappearance still continues to fascinate novelists such as Sinclair Lewis and Nathaniel West, songwriters, and filmmakers. It is one of the great unsolved mysteries in American history.

Sources:

Epstein, Daniel Mark. Sister Aimee: The Life of Aimee Semple McPherson. New York: Harcourt, Brace & Company, 1993.
Sutton, Matthew A. Aimee Semple McPherson and the Resurrection of Christian America. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press, 2007

Rabu, 16 November 2011

Scandalous Women around the Blogosphere

Just a quick round up of some links relating to various Scandalous Women.

Historian Tracy Borman, whose new book Matilda: Queen of the Conqueror, was published by Jonathan Cape on 1 September, has a great podcast over at BBC History Magazine about Matilda. Borman is one of the History Chicks, along with Alison Weir, Kate Williams, and Sarah Gristwood, who lecture in the UK.  How I long to be included in that group!

At History Today, there is a great article about Louis XV's mistress Madame de Pompadour, entitled Madame de Pompadour: The Other Cheek, detailing some of the obscene and irreverent 18th-century drawings targetting the royal mistress.  Thanks to Kathrynn Dennis of The History Hoydens for finding the article.  I would love to read a historical fiction novel from the POV of Madame de Pompadour.

Robert K. Massie, whose new biography of Catherine the Great, just came out this month has an interesting article over at The Wall Street Journal entitled: Catherine the Great's Lessons for Despots.

Speaking of women in power, TIME magazine had a nice cover story on Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.

Was Jane Austen murdered? That's what crime novelist Lindsay Ashford wants to know.

Another fascinating article on the Bronte Sisters.  Why has no one filmed a miniseries or a film about the sisters? I had heard rumors that Michelle Williams was involved in a project but there's nothing on Internet Movie Database.  I, personally, think that James McAvoy would make an interesting Branwell Bronte, and I would definitely cast Cary Mulligan as either Charlotte or Anne. Given the interest in remaking Jane Eyre and Wuthering Heights ad nauseum, you would think a film about the sisters would be a slam dunk.

Selasa, 15 November 2011

Scandalous Women on Film: Iron Lady Trailer


I can't tell you how excited I am to see this movie. Meryl Streep as Margaret Thatcher? How could this movie go wrong.  Have a look at the brand new trailer of upcoming biopic movie ‘The Iron Lady’ based on Margaret Thatcher, the UK first female Prime Minister. The film focuseson Thatcher's charismatic political persona and her personal vulnerability as a woman. Meryl Streep recently shared that it took a lot out of her to don the role, but it was a privilege to play Margaret Thatcher.


The movie is directed by Phyllida Lloyd and besides Meryl Streep, the movie features Jim Broadbent, Richard E. Grant, Harry Lloyd, Roger Allam, Anthony Head and Olive Colman. The movie hits the US  on December 30, 2011 and on January 6, 2012 in the UK.  I think that it is a given that Streep will earn yet another Oscar nomination, but she has stiff competition in Glenn Close who plays a woman who disguises herself as a man in Albert Dobbs.

This is a banner fall for films about Scandalous Women.  Along with Iron Lady and Albert Dobbs, new films include Keira Knightly (who is in everything) as Sabina Spielrein in A Dangerous Method, Madonna's new film about the abdicaiton W.E., and Michelle Williams channeling Marilyn Monroe.

Which one of these films are people particularly looking forward to? I can't wait to see A Dangerous Method and W.E.

Kamis, 10 November 2011

Winner of The September Queen and more

The Winner of Gillian Bagwell's THE SEPTEMBER QUEEN is.......



Teabird


Congratulations! I will be emailing you to get your address.  And thanks to everyone who entered the giveway.

Now on to more news.  I'm contemplating adding a monthly Scandalous Women podcast to the blog.  The podcast would allow me to go into a little bit more depth about some of the Scandalous Women in history that I've been bringing you the past 4 years. 

I've tentatively going to attempt to launch the podcast in December.  If the first one is successful and there's interest, the goal is to have one every month.  I'm lining up a great group of guests to join me, to discuss everything from Eleanor of Aquitaine to the Grande Horizontales of Paris during the Belle Epoque.  I've added a poll to the sidebar, to see whether or not my readers would be interested in a podcast.

Stay tuned to the blog for details of the first podcast, date, time etc. and who my first guest will be.  I'm really excited about moving Scandalous Women into a different phase.  I will still continue to post articles about interesting women as well as reviews of books and films that I think you will all be interested in.

Selasa, 08 November 2011

Scandalous Book Review: Sybil Exposed by Debbie Nathan

• Title: Sybil Exposed

• Author: Debbie Nathan
• Pub. Date: October 2011
• Publisher: Free Press
• Format: Hardcover, 320pp

I remember watching the TV mini-series Sybil as a pre-teen and being riveted. The story of Sybil Dorsett, a young, shy graduate student who suffered such traumatic abuse by her mother, that her psyche shattered into 16 distinct personalities, was Must-See TV. Sally Field, who played the title role, won an Emmy Award for her work, and totally changed her career around, proving that she could handle serious drama as well as light comedy. But it was the story of Sybil and the idea of multiple personalities that really got me. I was fascinated by the idea that someone could suffer such trauma that the only way they could deal with it was by splinting into different personalities. I eagerly watched The Three Faces of Eve, based on one of the earliest known cases of multiple personality disorder. But Eve only had 3 personalities while Sybil had 16. Later on, the TV soap opera One Life to Live featured a mother and a daughter who both suffered from what has become known as Dissociative Identity Disorder. I even bought the book that the miniseries was based on to read more. The story terrified and fascinated me. I’m one those people who reads about a disease and then thinks that she has it. Not that I thought that I had DID, but I’ve often felt that I have more than one person inside of me. Little did I know that the entire story was based on a lie.

Picking up a copy of Debbie Nathan’s new book Sybil Exposed, I felt the same way that I did when I found out that Go Ask Alice wasn’t the real diary of a teenage drug addict who died tragically. I felt cheated, that book scared the crap out of me so much, that I vowed then and there that I would never do drugs. Finding out that the story was just a novel somehow cheapened it a little. But Sybil Exposed is a powerful story of how three women managed to pull the wool over not just a nation of readers but also over the whole psychiatric establishment.

What is interesting about Nathan’s book is that neither Dr. Connie Wilbur, the psychiatrist who treated Shirley Mason (Sybil) nor Shirley nor Flora Schreiber who wrote the book planned on deceiving anyone. Shirley just wanted to please the doctor who she had developed an unhealthy attachment to, Dr. Wilbur wanted the respect of the medical establishment that she felt that she had been denied during her years practicing, and Flora Schreiber was eager to move beyond writing fluff pieces for the women’s magazines. Nathan’s book Sybil Exposed examines how the whole thing went down. It’s a sad and cautionary tale about how the trust between a patient and a doctor can be abused, and how overwhelming ambition can warp one’s sense of right and wrong.

Shirley Mason was a young woman who grew up a member of the 7th day Adventist Church in a small town in Minnesota. Shirley was an only child, born when her parents were in the 40’s. Her mother, Mattie, had great difficulty carrying a pregnancy to full term so Shirley was doubly precious. . Imaginative and creative, Shirley devised various ways of hiding the stories that she wrote from her mother who was not only over protective but a bit neurotic. Shirley would cut up letters and words from magazines, like the word magnets that they sell today, and use them to create her stories. As a child, Shirley felt torn between her desire to paint and write and the teachings of her church which discouraged such activities, placing her already in conflict. She also suffered throughout her childhood from various ailments. Doctors diagnosed anemia, and after a few treatments, she would feel better but then she would go into a decline. The condition continued throughout her high school and early college years. It was in Omaha that Shirley met Dr. Connie Wilbur who was one of her first therapists.

It’s a testament to Nathan’s judicious reporting that Wilbur manages to come across as both a caring psychoanalyst as well as an ambitious monster. Wilbur had an overwhelming sense of her own importance. Her father, who was a noted chemist, had told her that she wasn’t smart enough to go to medical school, so she had to prove him wrong. She’d tried and failed to invent a cure for athlete’s foot. She became a psychiatrist at the time that there were very few women not only in medical school but in psychiatry. From the beginning, she was willing to try experimental techniques, including electro-shock therapy. For her the ends truly justified the means, although she genuinely wanted to help people.

The irony of this whole story is that after she finished her initial treatment with Dr. Wilbur, Shirley was fine for several years, until she moved to New York and started treatment with Dr. Wilbur again. Nathan concludes that Shirley was suffering from pernicious anemia, and that if she had been diagnosed properly, she probably would never have gone back into therapy with Dr. Wilbur. Another doctor who briefly treated Shirley when Dr. Wilbur was out of town, thought that Shirley was a hysteric who was highly suggestible under the influence of hypnosis.

The relationship between Doctor and patient was clearly co-dependent or countertransference. Wilbur, who was unable to have children, needed to be needed by her patients, and Shirley liked the attention that she received from Dr. Wilbur. From the beginning, Dr. Wilbur crossed professional lines which should have gotten her thrown out of the AMA if it had been known; she took Shirley on trips, gave her money, and made house calls to treat her. Later on when Shirley went back into therapy with Dr. Wilbur, she helped pay her rent, found her jobs and allowed her to rack up thousands of dollars’ worth of therapy. Why? Because at some point, Dr. Wilbur decided that Shirley suffered from multiple personality disorder, and she became determined that Shirley’s case would establish her at the forefront of American psychology. She pumped Shirley almost daily with Pentothal which Shirley quickly became addicted to, along with a whole host of other psychotropic drugs including Demerol, Benzedrine; Daprisal, Seconal, Equanil, Edrisal, Dexamyl, Thorazine, and Serpatilin, a combination of Ritalin and a tranquilizer, and Phenobarbital. Shirley was like a walking pharmacy. It’s a wonder that she could remember her name.

Nathan includes snippets of the therapy sessions (which were taped) which clearly indicated that Wilbur was leading Shirley along the path that she wanted her to go. Wilbur was relentless, increasing the dosages of Pentothal until Shirley came up with increasingly bizarre stories about her mother including lesbian orgies and repeated brutal rapes with various instruments. The more outrageous the story, the more Wilbur was happy. Shirley, to her credit, attempted to tell Dr. Wilbur at one point that she was making the whole alternate personalities/abuse stories up, but Wilbur made it clear that she would not only stop treating Shirley, but end the friendship. By this time, the only friend Shirley had was Dr. Wilbur. The involvement of Flora Schreiber, the journalist who like Dr. Wilbur, never felt that she’d gotten the recognition that she deserved completed the trio. The book’s success had a different effect on the 3 women. For Dr. Wilbur, MPD or DID was finally accepted as a genuine diagnosis, but Flora Schreiber began to resent having to share not just the money but also the spotlight with Dr. Wilbur. And poor Shirley, after spending several years after her ‘integration’ happily teaching art at a small college, the book’s publication turned her eventually into a total recluse, as soon as someone realized who she was.

If you have any doubts about psychiatry or psychoanalysis, this book will just reinforce your feelings about the profession. On the other hand, it just goes to show easy the doctor/patient relationship can be abused, if one is not careful. Nathan doesn’t indict psychiatry but she goes to show how repressed memories and DID had gotten a little out of hand over the past thirty years. Nathan gives a brief overview of how psychiatry and psychoanalysis evolved in this country, moving away from Freud’s theories, as well as the different treatment one gets if one has the money versus if one is poor. She also examines why Sybil became such a phenomenon, coming out as it did when the women’s movement was really taking off in this country. Nathan believes that MPD “became a kind of language” for women to explain their roles as wife, mother, friend, boss, employee etc. She also makes the valid point, that women historically had been the guinea pigs for any new kind of psychiatric treatment, particularly in the 19th century when so many women were diagnosed as hysterics.
Sybil Exposed is  thoroughly and meticulously researched. Nathan was able to listen to the tapes of Shirley’s sessions with Dr. Wilbur, as well as Flora Schreiber’s papers which are housed at John Jay College in New York. Unfortunately, after Dr. Wilbur’s death, a large number of her papers were destroyed. It’s amazing that this book wasn’t written before now. Even now the book is still controversial, with many people still believing that the story of Sybil couldn’t possibly have been made up, along with those who doubted the veracity of the story from the beginning. The book made me grateful that I found a therapist who was sympathetic to my needs and didn’t have a hidden agenda. I felt pity for Shirley, anger towards Dr. Wilbur, and frustration that Flora Schreiber didn't walk away when she had the chance.

Senin, 07 November 2011

Movie Review: Sophie Scholl - The Final Days

Cast

Sophia Magdalena 'Sophie' Scholl - Julia Jentsch
Hans Fritz Scholl - Fabian Hinrichs
Robert Mohr - Gerald Alexander Held
Else Gebel - Johanna Gastdorf
Dr. Roland Freisler - André Hennicke
Christoph Hermann Probst - Florian Stetter
Willi Graf - Maximilian Brückner
Alexander Schmorell - Johannes Suhm
Gisela Schertling - Lilli Jung
Magdalena Scholl - Petra Kelling
Robert Scholl - Jörg Hube
Werner Scholl - Franz Staber


Director: Marc Rothemund

Written by: Fred Breinersdorfter

Released: February 13, 2005

 
Synopsis:
 
Arrested for participating in the White Rose resistance movement, anti-Nazi activist Sophie Scholl (Julia Jentsch) is subjected to a highly charged interrogation by the Gestapo, testing her loyalty to her cause, her family and her convictions. Based on true events, director Marc Rothemund's absorbing Oscar-nominated drama explores maintaining human resolve in the face of intense pressure from a system determined to silence whistle-blowers.
 

My thoughts: I've been intrigued by World War II partly because my father and uncle were in the army and navy respectively during the War.  Neither of them would talk to me about their experiences, so I've become a little obsessed over the years at reading and watching films and documentaries.  Most of my reading has been focused on England and America, but recently I've become more interested in what was going on in France and Germany.  I don't remember when I first heard the name Sophie Scholl. It may have been while browsing through the Dramatist Play Service catalog and reading the description of Lillian Garrett-Groag's play The White Rose. Recently I found a copy of the 2005 German film Sophie Scholl - The Final Days in the library. Before I knew what I was doing, I had picked the copy off the shelf and walked over to check it out.

Words fail me to describe just how powerful and heartbreaking this film is. The film is directed almost like a thriller.  It takes place over 5 days ending in Sophie's death on February 22nd 1943, 4 days after her arrest. It opens with a charming scene of Sophie and her best friend Gisela singing along to an American jazz song on the radio.  The action quickly shifts to Sophie, her brother Hans, and their friends mailing out leaflets that they've printed out on a mimeograph machine (this was before Xerox machines.  We actually had one in my school when I was growing up). Soon they've run out of envelopes, so Hans comes up with a risky plan to take the remaining leaflets to the university while the students are in class. Hans is reminded that since the seige of Stalingrad, the university has been infiltrated by informers. Sophie offers to go with her brother to help out, since a women would never be suspected. What follows is a nail-biting scene as Hans and Sophie hurry to the university, trying to put down as many stacks of leaflets as they can before classes get out. With only minutes left, Sophie rushes to the top floor with the rest of the leaflets and impulsively pushes them over the edge of the balustrade. Thinking that they've made a clean getaway, Hans and Sophie are just leaving the building, when they are stopped by a janitor who saw Sophie in action.  They are arrested and taken to the Munich Stadelheim Prison.

We never see Hans interrogated, only Sophie who is interviewed by Gestapo investigator Robert Mohr. The two play a cat and mouse game as Sophie wisely admits to what is the truth, but denies being the one who dropped off the leaflets. She tells Mohr that it is part of her nature to play pranks, and that she was carrying a suitcase to pick up her laundry from her mother back home in Ulm (see college students brought their laundry home even back in the 1940's!). At first it looks like she's going to get away with it, but the investigation soon finds proof that she and Hans were involved. Mohr shows Sophie her brother's signed confession. Sophie soon admits what she has done that and that she is proud of it. It turns out that The White Rose had written and distributed 5 Anti-Nazi leaflets calling for passive resistance prior to the one they dropped at the University (Sophie was not involved in the writing of the pamphlets, just the distribution). In their second interrogation, Mohr takes more of a fatherly attitude towards Sophie. He admonishes her for breaking the law, considering that the Reich has paid for her education. 

Sophie is not buying it. She reminds him that pre-1933, people still had free speech.  She tells him about the rounding up of the mentally ill as well as the Jewish population to concentration camps where they have been exterminated.  Mohr tells her that some lives are unworthy. Despite the fact that Sophie is only 21, in many ways she is more mature than Mohr.  She is able to match him argument for argument. You can see in their scenes together that he reluctantly admires her even though he believes that she is misguided and wrong.  Mohr offers Sophie a chance to save herself by repudiating her actions and naming names. Sophie refuses to name names and takes full blame. She insists that she receive whatever punishment her brother receives.

What follows next is a kangaroo trial. They are brought before Judge Roland Freisler in the People's Court.  Even before Sophie, Hans and another member of The White Rose, Christoph Probst are brought into the courtroom, it's clear that the verdict is a foregone conclusion. Their lawyers make no attempt to defend them, and they are barely allowed to speak in their own defense.  Sophie managed to tell the People's Court. "Somebody, after all, had to make a start.  What we wrote and said is also believed by many others.  They just do not dare express themselves as we did. "All three are pronounced guilty and sentenced to death.  However they are allowed one final statement. Sophie tells the court that "where we stand today, you will stand soon."

All three prisoners are told that their execution is that day, they are not even given the normal 99 days after their conviction before execution. Sophie, a devout Lutheran, goes to her death with dignity.  She is allowed to see her brother and Christoph Probst before their executions. She remarks as she is led out to the courtyard where the guillotine awaits her that the "The sun is still shining."
 
So what is movie review about a heroine like Sophie Scholl doing on a blog called Scandalous Women. Well, Sophie's actions scandalized Nazi Germany. At one point in the film, Sophie is contemptuously referred to by one of the police officers as the weaker sex. As if she had led the men astray with her misguided beliefs. She is treated by Mohr as some sort of wayward child that he can school, teaching her the true meaning of right and wrong. The idea that Sophie had a mind of her own, that she had thought seriously and thoughtfully about her actions, and even in the face of death, didn't waver, must have been mind boggling to them. Women were supposed to be the epitome of Aryan womanhood, giving birth to good Aryan children, teaching them about the glories of the Third Reich, not working underground to dismantle it.
 
At the end of the film we are told that after Sophie's death, another pamphlet was smuggled out of Germany, where it was utilized by the Allies. In mid-1943, they dropped millions of copies over Germany.
 
I urge everyone to watch this film about how one person can make a difference just by having the courage to speak out.

Kamis, 03 November 2011

Guest Post: Author Gillian Bagwell on Jane Lane – The Girl who Saved the English Monarchy

Scandalous Women is very pleased to welcome author Gillian Bagwell to the blog today to talk about her new book The September Queen which came out on November 1st. Happy Release week Gillian! 

While researching The Darling Strumpet, my novel about Nell Gwynn, I read Derek Wilson’s book All the King’s Women, about the numerous women important to Charles II. As all of us who know anything about Charles II are aware, he liked women. His mistresses were many and famous, whether loved by the people like Nell Gwynn or hated like Louis De Keroualle.

So I was intrigued to read his account of Jane Lane, an ordinary Staffordshire girl who played a starring role in an extraordinary part of Charles’s life – his six-week odyssey after the Battle of Worcester trying to escape to safety in France.

The Battle of Worcester took place on September 3, 1651. Charles and his ragged and outnumbered army knew that all their hopes rested on that day, and the 21-year-old king believed that the outcome for him would be “either a crown or a coffin.” Cromwell triumphed, and the bloody rout ended the Royalist cause. Once Charles had been convinced that the best he could do was survive, he fled as his supporters made a last ferocious stand, and legendarily dashed out the back door of his lodgings as the enemy entered at the front, slipping out the last unguarded city gate.

From that disastrous night until he finally sailed from Shoreham near Brighton on October 15, he was on the run, sheltered and aided by dozens of people – mostly simple country folks and very minor gentry. One of Charles’s companions during his flight from Worcester was the Earl of Derby, who had recently been sheltered at a house called Boscobel in Shropshire. He suggested that the king might hide there until he could find a way out of England.

Jane Lane, a young woman of about 25 years old, lived at Bentley Hall in Staffordshire, not far from Boscobel. She became involved in the king’s flight because she had a pass allowing her and a manservant to travel the hundred miles to visit a friend near Bristol – a major port where the king might board a ship. In a story that sounds like something out of fiction, the 21-year-old king disguised himself as Jane’s servant, and Jane rode pillion (sitting sidesaddle behind him while he rode astride) along roads traveled by cavalry patrols searching for Charles, through villages where the proclamation describing him and offering a reward for his capture was posted, and among hundreds of people who, if they recognized him, had every reason to turn him in and none – but loyalty to the outlawed monarchy – to help him.

It was an improbable scheme. Charles was six feet two inches tall and very dark complexioned, not at all common looking for an Englishman of that time. But time after time he rode right under the noses of Roundhead soldiers without being recognized. He narrowly eluded discovery and capture so many times that the whole event eventually became known as the Royal Miracle.

Jane Lane played a much more important part in great events than women usually did in those days, especially women who were not monarchs. The fugitive king had been proclaimed a traitor, and anyone who was found to have helped him would be executed for treason. What Jane did took great bravery, as she was not only risking her life but the lives and lands of her family.

I was convinced by the evidence Wilson presented that Jane and Charles became lovers when they were in each other’s company, in close physical contact, and in perilous circumstances from September 9 to September 18, 1651. Jane remained in touch with Charles until he was restored to the throne in 1660. Then she became famous, and Charles rewarded her richly, awarding her a pension of £1000 pounds a year – quite a lot of money then – as well as giving her a watch that had belonged to his father, paintings of himself, and many other personal mementoes. He also offered her brother a title and gave her family the right to add the three Lions of England to their coat of arms.

The time that Charles spent on the run was an enormously formative experience, he told the story for the rest of his life, and Jane was clearly someone who he regarded with respect and affection until his death. He When Jane returned home she married a neighbor, Sir Clement Fisher, who she had likely known before embarking on her adventures with Charles. But she had no children, and towards the end of her life she declared that her hands would be her executors, i.e., that she would spend all she had. She did more than that, and because her pension was not being paid on time, she was in debt and died with an estate worth only £10.

If Charles had been caught, he would certainly have been executed, and it is an open question whether the monarchy would have been restored as it eventually was in 1660, after the death of Oliver Cromwell. So Jane’s courage had far-reaching results and her story deserves to be remembered.

Gillian Bagwell’s novel The September Queen, the first fictional accounting of Jane Lane’s adventures with the young King Charles, was released on November 1. Please visit her website, www.gillianbagwell.com, to read more about her books and read her blog Jane Lane and the Royal Miracle www.theroyalmiracle.blogspot.com, which recounts her research adventures and the daily episodes in Charles’s escape after Worcester.

One lucky winner will receive a copy of the book THE SEPTEMBER QUEEN. Here are the rules for the giveaway. This giveaway is open solely to my American readers! The contest runs from today through Tuesday, November 8th.

1. Leave your name and email in the comments. Email is very important so that I can contact you for your address.
2. If you are not a follower and become one, you get an extra entry
3. If you tweet about the giveaway, you get an extra entry.

Good luck!

Rabu, 02 November 2011

Happy Birthday Marie Antoinette!

On this day in 1755, Marie Antoinette (baptised Maria Antonia Josepha Johanna ) was born at the Hofburg Palace in Vienna, Austria.
No, this is not Marie Antoinette, this is moi, dressed as Marie Antoinette.  Two years ago, I had the privilege of reading at Lady Jane's Salon here in New York. The date fell on November 2nd which is Marie's birthday as well as mine. So I decided to dress like her and read a piece on Marie and her relationship with Axel Fersen. The dress I liberated from a theatre company that I worked for years ago.


This is the real Marie! Can't you see a resemblance? :) I had planned on writing a post on Marie Antoinette's impact on fashion, but instead I've decided just to post some photos instead. It's clear that in the more than 200 years since her death, Marie Antoinette continues to inspire designers.



These photos are from John Galliano's Spring 2010 collection.  Aren't they gorgeous, allthough it must have been a bit to wear.




Christian Louboutins! Not sure where I would wear these, but they are gorgeous. Definitely not shoes you wear out on the street, running errands. More the 'getting out of the limousine at the gala ball or Academy Awards' shoes.


Imagine trying to get through a door wearing this dress!




Selasa, 01 November 2011

Book of the Month: Sleeping with the Enemy: Coco Chanel's Secret War

Title:  Sleeping with the Enemy - Coco Chanel's Secret War
Author: Hal Vaughn
Pub. Date: August 2011

Publisher: Knopf Doubleday Publishing Group
Format: Hardcover , 304pp



Overview:  “From this century, in France, three names will remain: de Gaulle, Picasso, and Chanel.” –André Malraux


Coco Chanel created the look of the modern woman and was the high priestess of couture.

She believed in simplicity, and elegance, and freed women from the tyranny of fashion. She inspired women to take off their bone corsets and cut their hair. She used ordinary jersey as couture fabric, elevated the waistline, and created bell-bottom trousers, trench coats, and turtleneck sweaters.

In the 1920s, when Chanel employed more than two thousand people in her workrooms, she had amassed a personal fortune of $15 million and went on to create an empire.

Jean Cocteau once said of Chanel that she had the head of “a little black swan.” And, added Colette, “the heart of a little black bull.”

At the start of World War II, Chanel closed down her couture house and went across the street to live at the Hôtel Ritz. Picasso, her friend, called her “one of the most sensible women in Europe.” She remained at the Ritz for the duration of the war, and after, went on to Switzerland.

For more than half a century, Chanel’s life from 1941 to 1954 has been shrouded in vagueness and rumor, mystery and myth. Neither Chanel nor her many biographers have ever told the full story of these years. Now Hal Vaughan, in this explosive narrative—part suspense thriller, part wartime portrait—fully pieces together the hidden years of Gabrielle “Coco” Chanel’s life, from the Nazi occupation of Paris to the aftermath of World War II.

Vaughan reveals the truth of Chanel’s long-whispered collaboration with Hitler’s high-ranking officials in occupied Paris from 1940 to 1944. He writes in detail of her decades-long affair with Baron Hans Günther von Dincklage, “Spatz” (“sparrow” in English), described in most Chanel biographies as being an innocuous, English-speaking tennis player, playboy, and harmless dupe—a loyal German soldier and diplomat serving his mother country and not a member of the Nazi party.

In Vaughan’s absorbing, meticulously researched book, Dincklage is revealed to have been a Nazi master spy and German military intelligence agent who ran a spy ring in the Mediterranean and in Paris and reported directly to Nazi propaganda minister Joseph Goebbels, right hand to Hitler.

The book pieces together how Coco Chanel became a German intelligence operative; how and why she was enlisted in a number of spy missions; how she escaped arrest in France after the war, despite her activities being known to the Gaullist intelligence network; how she fled to Switzerland for a nine-year exile with her lover Dincklage. And how, despite the French court’s opening a case concerning Chanel’s espionage activities during the war, she was able to return to Paris at age seventy and triumphantly resurrect and reinvent herself—and rebuild what has become the iconic House of Chanel.