d120421

Glad to hear it, Patful. Every now and then, my existence seems to be justified. lol!

But I would argue that I'LL SEE YOU IN MY DREAMS wasn't really a musical, but like several other films with a bumper crop of musical numbers (e.g., WITH A SONG IN MY HEART, THE GREAT CARUSO, INTERRUPTED MELODY, LOVE ME OR LEAVE ME, etc.) a biography of a muscial personality with several muscial sequences in it. Personally, I found the more intimate and genuine focus on the Gus Kahn-Grace LeBoy relationship/marriage in I'LL SEE YOU IN MY DREAMS far more entertaining and satisfying than the invariably turgid and enbalmed non-musical sequences of overblown MGM extravaganzas like TILL THE CLOUDS ROLL BY and WORDS AND MUSIC. The poor actress who plays "Eva Kern" in CLOUDS has her role reduced almost to a cameo appearance when Robert Walker's Kern bicycles to her house and we see her singing a few bars of "They Didn't Beleive Me," while the even alway-excellent Betty Garrett can't perk up the preposterous "romantic" storyline concocted for Mickey Rooney's (over-the-top) Lorenz Hart. I agree that some (but by no means all) of the production numbers in both films were excellent, but they often came far too infrequently for the pompous, pandering and posturing non-musical longeurs one had to endure between them in both productions. I'LL SEE YOU IN MY DREAMS was one of the few cinematic biographies of a musical talent/personality from that era that I didn't find affected by this condition (it also was, despite the standard biographical fictions, more accurate than most biographies of the time), and I would rate it very highly in any survey of musical biogrpahies of that era.

Hi Patful The numbers are used to announce the number of the selection(s) being played by the Professor and his Orchestra during the park concert. Hope this helps to prevent your impending demise from overwhelming curiosity.

As far as I know, it's not an authorized biography, and Deanna has not given her blessing to it. However, I have heard that Mr. McRobbie has sent Deanna copies of the various drafts he's produced of the book in its' various stages, so she is aware of it.

It's a fine list overall, NZ, though I'm puzzled at you including I'LL SEE YOU IN MY DREAMS on it. Although this musical biography of lyricist Gus Kahn contained the standard biographical alterations anjd fictions endemic to most film biographies of that period, I thought it was one of the best of the "composer" biographies. I realize this genre is hardly praiseworthy as a rule, but unlike bloated biographical misfires like WORDS AND MUSIC and TILL THE CLOUDS ROLL BY, which strove for "greatness" in their depictions of the rather mundane lives of Richard Rodgers and Jerome Kern (and couldn't show the more controversial/explicit aspects of Rodgers' partner, Lorenz Hart's private life), DREAMS, in delineating the conflict between Kahn and his loving but controlling wife, Grace, was much less ambitious, and, I thought, much more natural and likeable than these other unfortunate efforts. In so doing, I thought I'LL SEE YOU IN MY DREAMS also gave one of her best roles/performances to the often too over-eager and over-emphatic Doris Day, who, in the role of Mrs. Kahn, was for once playing a young woman of her own age and thus was able to shed the canonfire coyness and eviscerating energy of her trademark "adolescent" parts, for which she was almost a decade too old even by 1952.

I missed A NIGHT AT THE OPERA this time around, Jack, but I must say, other than the Marx Bros. trademarked shenanigans, I've never been terribly impressed with the singing, etc. in the IL TROVATORE sequence from any of the performers involved. I like both Allan Jones and Kitty Carlisle in some other things I've seen/heard them in, but don't think they appear to advantage here. It all seems rather underpowered and somewhat 'flat" to me. Then again, how can anyone compete with Harpo and Chico slipping the sheet music to "Take Me Out To The Ballgame" in the middle of hte conductor's Verdi score and subsequently batting a baseball into the Met's Golden Horseshoe? Has anyone seen any of the movies starring "legit" opera stars of the period like Grace Moore (e.g, ONE NIGHT OF LOVE), Lily Pons (e.g., I DREAM TOO MUCH) and Gladys Swarthout (e.g, CHAMPAGNE WALTZ), and, if you have, what did you think of their (and other notable opera stars' efforts? Just curious.

My turn to apologize for the delay in getting back to you, CH3. My excuse is not nearly so dramatic or potentially life-altering as yours. I've just been overwhelmed with a good deal of work the last few days. I'm sorry to hear about your homeowner horror stories, but relieved to hear that none of you were harmed in the meteorological melee. Hopefully, you've at least gotten your house back in order following these bouts of severe weather. I walk to and from work most days and it seems as if every week there's a new (very large) tree branch lying across the middle of one of the side streets I pass. As this street (and the trees that line them) is situated between two churches, I'm always surprised that the trees don't get some sort of protection from higher powers, but I guess the good Lord truly doesn't discrminate when it comes to weather wrongdoings. I actually kinda like the reconciliation scene between Jane and Howard in 7Bs for 7Bs as is, with Jane at her loveliest in that early American quilt dress and she and Howard doing a marvelous job of expressing the awkwardness they feel at meeting up after being apart for so long. That said, I agree 100% that more should have been done with both leads after the barn raising sequence. Jane remains as sort of a "mother hen" for the (mostly) non-descript brides, but she's almost always part of tout ensemble and doesn't get much quality "alone" time to express herself, and it is extremely regrettable that neither she nor Howard are even given a single song to sing in the last third of the film. I don't know why the Deanna biography isn't listed on Amazon.com. I've wondered about that myself. Perhaps Amazon is waiting for a confirmation on the publication date before advertising the book. I think the impossible exorbitant 1996 volume you mentioned is a book called DEANNA DURBIN FAIRY TALE by a devout Durbin fan named W.E. Mills. I haven't read the whole book, though I have seen excerpts, in which, to say the least, Mr. Mills reveals himself to be a most devout fan of Miss D's, but I get the impression that the book is more about his devotion to her than a critical, objective analysis of her work. Oh well, at least the title suggests he's put the reader on notice that this is not a work of objective scholarship. While I'm not at all opposed to a fan expressing his/her admiration for a performer, and, as you well know, am quite an admirer of Miss D's myself, I can't imagine paying $132 for a biography on her....or anyone. I even balked at paying the full price for Gloria Jean's memoir and, at roughly $40 for the hardcover edition (including shipping), that was a far less expensive proposition.

> Every Sunday is going to be broadcast on TCM > on August 8, 2006 at 5:45am EST. This is the early > MGM short that Miss Garland made with Deanna Durbin. > It was considered somewhat of a "screen test" for > the two lasses; after which, of course, Miss Durbin > was released to Universal while Miss Garland > languished in minor roles for the next few years > until Dorothy Gale came blowing in on a twister... > The short follows the classical v. popular singing > formula that Judy would be involved with Miss > Durbin, and later with Betty Jaynes. Actually, from what I've read on Deanna Durbin's career, the oft reported contention that EVERY SUNDAY was something of a screen test for Judy and Deanna is somewhat inaccurate, as Deanna was no longer under contract to MGM at the time the short was produced. She was actually released by MGM in June, 1936, and signed up almost immediately by Universal at the insistence of the studio's new casting director, Rufus LeMaire, who had come to Universal from MGM. Some sources indicate that LeMaire placed Deanna under personal contract to himself until he could negotiate a contract with another studio. In any case, Deanna's contract with Universal did contain a provision specifically prohibiting the studio from releasing her until she had appeared in at least one feature film. EVERY SUNDAY, according to the material I've seen on it, wasn't shot until July, 1936. There is a blurb in the July 1st edition of the HOLLYWOOD REPORTER stating that "Universal is changing Edna Mae Durbin's name to 'Diana' (sic)." However, Deanna's MGM contract contained a provision which entitled the studio to call on her services for up to sixty days following the termination of her MGM contract, provided she was not working on another project for another studio. As filming for THREE SMART GIRLS was not ready to begin when Metro called Universal to request Deanna's services for the short, Deanna found herself back on the Metro lot filming EVERY SUNDAY with Judy. This may explain, at least in part, why EVERY SUNDAY seems to be more slanted to favor Judy over Deanna in many sections (e.g., more lines of dialogue, an original song, etc.). It seems unlikely that MGM would give the same consideration to a performer under contract to a rival studio as they would one of their own contractees. Of course, Deanna's lack of experience before the camera compared to Judy's (and lack of performing experience in general) may also have been a factor, but she sure learned fast once she got over to Universal! > > [Further Oz tangent: Betty Jaynes was > originally slated to play the Princess of Oz who > would sing "classical" while Judy Garland sang > "jazz". Thankfully, this idea never came to > fruition.] AMEN & HALLELUIAH TO THAT, BROTHER!! (I think Kenny Baker was also considered to play the role of a singing Prince of Oz at one point. Not sure about that one, though.)

Well, she certainly wasn't from a wealthy background in NATIONAL VELVET, her most famous role as a child actress. I recall her father in this film (Donald Crisp), admonishing Taylor to wear the corrective dental plate she's been given with the line: "How many times must I tell you girls that you have only your faces for your fortunes." Nor was she wealthy in CYNTHIA, as the perpetually ill teen who nevertheless manages to wow the musical director of the local high school with her performance of a Strauss waltz ("I love the melody of Spring. Lilacs in bloom. Birds on the wing," etc., etc.) And I don't think she was wealthy in LIFE WITH FATHER either. At least she expresses genuine delight and surprise at being invited to dinner at the elegant New York restaurant, "Delmonico's" So no, although Taylor's characters were often quite well-to-do, I think there are several instances in her film career when she was to quote one of those girls on THE FACTS OF LIFE: "hopelessly Middle Class"...or less.

My understanding is that THE HELEN MORGAN STORY was originally one of the three projects envisioned for "Miss Garland" at the time she and husband Sid Luft signed their contract with Warner Bros. to make A STAR IS BORN. The subsequent perceived economic failure of that film, part of which, rightly or wrongly, was ascribed to Garland's temperamental and mercurial behavior during production, caused Warner to cancel the two additional film projects with Garland and Luft. However, even though Judy was now "out" of the running, Warner still wanted "a Garland type voice" for Morgan, leading to Gogi Grant's hiring to ghost Ann Blyth's vocals. This is somewhat ironic, since, as anyone who has heard the real Helen Morgan can attest, her singing voice was much more soprano than alto, though a lighter soprano even than Blyth's lovely lyric voice. It's also possible that Warner's choice of Grant may have been influenced by a very successful television adaptation of Morgan's life story produced around the same time as the film, starring alto vocalist, Polly Bergen. While it's too bad Blyth didn't get to do her own singing, at least Warner's choice of Grant isn't as odd as Rodgers and Hammerstein's decision to dub Juanita Hall's vocals in the film version of SOUTH PACIFIC. Although Hall had originated the role of "Bloody Mary" in the original Broadway production of SP, R & H apparently preferred Muriel Smith's voice to Hall's and signed her to do Hall's singing for her in the film.

Good to hear all's well with you & yours, CH3: I'm doing fairly well m'self. Thanks for asking. Personally, I have nothing against the Freed Unit talents, but to hear Donen and some others talk, you'd think that's all there was to MGM which just ain't so. I mean, to cite just one example, MGM's first feature film produced in three strip Technicolor was the 1938 MacDonald/Eddy opus, SWEETHEARTS, not an Eleanor Powell extravaganza. As for the "Whozzat?" attitude of Donen & others toward the chronically, criminally underrated Janie P., I just don't get it. I mean, the lady's films almost always made big bucks for the studio, even when they put her in schlock, and she almost always netted good to excellent notices for her own work, even when the films themselves weren't considered to be very good. What more do they want? While I agree that the dance sequences in 7Bs For 7Bs are spectacular and should be acknowledged, they're what? 10 minutes at most in a movie with a 103 minute running time? Given that the dancing brothers and brides are pretty much interchangable personality-wise, if the performances of Powell and Keel didn't anchor the film, the crowds would have avoided it like the proverbial plague, much as they did with the too-arty Kelly dance opus, INVITATION TO THE DANCE. As she did in ROYAL WEDDING and would later confirm in THREE SAILORS AND A GIRL, in 7 BRIDES, Jane re-enforces the impression that, despite being primarily a singer, when it came to being fleet of foot she was a very gifted artist. Would it kill the Metro brigade to acknowledge her talents for once? Apparently so, but, like I said, I just don't get it. I am glad to see that TCM's dedicating a day to Jane next month. It's belated, but at least it's a start. I'm very interested to read the Durbin bio and will be interested to see if there's any reaction from the lady herself. My feeling is that she'll probably just ignore it, though she might issue some comment through her fan club's newsletter. Time will tell...

The DRACULA in which, as more than one critic noted, "Drac" looked like Elton John as he prowled the streets of London in those 90s "shades"? Yes, regrettably I remember it well, CH3, a very apt comparison. It's to Kiri's credit that she still managed to look lovely despite the horrors the wardrobe department imposed upon her. Made me wonder why Don G. didn't stop with Donna Elvira. PS Always nice to hear from you, CH3. Hope all is well with you and yours...and the delightful Janie P., of course! PPS A POX on director Stanley Donen! Not only is his monotone commentary on the deluxe DVD edition of SEVEN BRIDES FOR SEVEN BROTHERS a sure cure for chronic insomnia, but, while he says several flattering things about Howard Keel, he says next to nothing about Jane P. or her performance: only a fleeting reference to her talent as a dancer compared to other singers/sopranos and having run into her recently. Boo! Hiss!

Also, on IMDB there is a real eye-opener of a posting about Bolger, the man, under the listing for his TV show, originally called "Where's Raymond?" (Get it? Where's Raymond/Where's Charley?) Anyway, this poster has heard some not very nice things about Bolger, although he praises his dancing, and his WWII entertaining of the troops in the South Pacific. Ah, another childhood idol with possible feet of clay! I recall reading a couple of not-too-flattering comments about Ray Bolger in a few showbiz-themed books: The first was from the Steven Coyne Sanders history of the JUDY GARLAND SHOW, RAINBOW'S END, in which the charming Jane Powell, who appeared as a guest on the Garland show in the same episode Bolger did, alleged that Bolger "flashed" her behind the scenes. Her general assessment of Bolger as a performer was that, although he was a marvelous dancer, she believed he thought he was much funnier than he actually was. The second was from Doris Day's memoir HER OWN STORY. Day recalled that during production of APRIL IN PARIS, director David Butler frequently chastised Bolger for attempting to crowd Day out of their joint onscreen segments. Bolger repeatedly denied doing anything of the sort, but Butler didn't buy it, warning Bolger that it'd all be futile anyway, since he (Butler) could fix the scenes in editing. Bolger countered testily that it wouldn't matter what Butler thought he could do in editing since Bolger could take the whole matter up with Jack Warner. Oh well, we're all human....

I don't think anyone has mentioned the Lossey version of DON GIOVANNI, CH3: Glad you did, though. I agree it's an excellent eye 'n earful for the opera lover, and it's interesting to see Raimondi's older Don G., too. Only caveat: Why did the producers dress the lovely (both vocally and physically) Miss Te Kanawa like "Smurfette's" Italian cousin?

Hi dreivierteltakt1985: As far as I know, the biography will be generally available, though the only internet site I've seen it listed on to date is Barnes & Noble (barnesandnoble.com). There isn't a picture, but it lists a September 2006 release date. I think the price for the book was $26.98, but it's been a while since I checked the site, so that may be inaccurate.

Well, I imagine it's just a misprint on the publicist's part, though it's odd that they let the release go into print without correcting it. Still, the book sounds like it will be an interesting "read," in any case. She certainly had some impressive admirers.

Blood Moon Productions has announced the forthcoming publication of a biography of Deanna by Australian journalist Alexander McRobbie. Here's the blurb on the book for anyone who may be interested: The Deanna Durbin Story, by Alexander McRobbie. In the early 1930s, Deanna Durbin was the world's most famous teenager?the Canadian songbird with a voice that simultaneously charmed Mussolini, Sir Winston Churchill, Josef Stalin, Hitler, and FDR. Each of them, amazingly, defined her as his favorite Hollywood singer. For four years she was the world?s highest-paid female entertainer. In the late 1930s, actor Robert Donat claimed, ?Cinema?s five greatest performers include Charlie Chaplin, Greta Garbo, Paul Muni, Spencer Tracy?and Deanna Durbin.? In 1940, during Britain?s darkest hour, when an invasion of England from Nazi Germany appeared imminent, Lord Rothermere in The Daily Mail declared (amazingly) ?What England needs now is more Deanna Durbin movies.? Later, Mussolini pleaded with Durbin to use her influence with FDR to avoid American intervention in World War II. Durbin refused. Now, at last, Deanna Durbin?s saga is unveiled by the well-respected Australian journalist Alexander McRobbie. Compiled with love and respect over a period of more than 40 years, it?s the first major insight into the life of one of Hollywood?s least-understood, least-celebrated major stars. Available around August of 2006. Note the "early 1930s" misprint. As Deanna's first film didn't go into wide release until January 1937, she obviously couldn't have been a film star in the early 1930s. Since Deanna has said on prior occasionas that she doesn't wish to have a biography done on her life, it will be interesting to see how she reacts to this one, if at all.

Two excellent ones, Cee: Another terrific one was when Gene Tierney first appears in the raincoat in LAURA. We've seen her character onscreen before, of course, but, for those who haven't seen the film, this "introductory entrance" has special significance. Of course, as was the case with Garbo and Hayworth, given her looks, almost any entrance Gene Tierney made was special! I kept trying to recall a "Best Introduction" scene from a Judy Garland movie, but really couldn't think of one. Then I remembered GIRL CRAZY when she first emerges from working under that broken down truck to the delight of a sunbeaten Mickey Rooney. Very nice, indeed!

Deanna Durbin's introduction in THREE SMART GIRLS with special billing as "Universal's New Discovery" and accompanying instrumental fanfare as a prelude to a wonderful close-up of her radiantly singing, "My Heart Is Singing." One of the few times I can recalll when a big fuss was made to introduce a new star where the introduction lived up to the hype. I also liked Cary Grant's introduction in THE PHILADELPHIA STORY when he goes to strike a haughty Kate Hepburn for tossing out his pipes and golf clubs, realizes he can't hit her and instead pushes her in the face. Audrey Hepburn, perched in a tree, staring forlornly at the glamorous party of her chauffeur father's employers in SABRINA. Even in her pre-glamorized state, she somehow made everyone else seem somewhat ordinary by comparison.

I've never thought June was any good in dramatic roles, at least of those I've seen. I thought she gave a competent performance in her most atypical vehicle, THE SHRIKE, but beyond that, less said the better, in my opinion. I thought she was a terrible "Jo March" in the sugar-coma inducing MGM remake, though with that basso profundo voice and a little more facial hair she might have made an acceptable "Mr. Laurence." I remember catching the last half hour or so of the movie when I was a kid and it was being shown on television. Right after the movie ended, it was followed by a segment of a show called FURY about a Wild Stallion. As the title four-legged character came running up to the camera in the opening credits of that show I said something like, "Now I know where the lady with the bullfrog croak and the onions in her blouse got her wig!" My sisters didn't like June Allyson either (at least not in that film), so maybe it's genetic in my case. I liked June okay in her musical segments, such as "Treat Me Rough" in GIRL CRAZY and I think her best film and performance is probably GOOD NEWS, even if first-time director Charles Walters seems to be compelling her to do a "Judy Garland imitation," but I always hated it when she turned on the waterworks. June's later career as a spokeswoman for adult diapers did inspire a funny bit on the TV series DESIGNING WOMEN. One of the woman stars (Dixie Carter's character, I think), wound up on a sequestered jury and was desperate to resolve the case in time to have dinner with former President Carter and First Lady Rosalyn. She eventually started browbeating her fellow jurors to follow the judge's comments to them and acquit the defendant which one elderly female juror resented and said so, something along the lines of "I don't think jurors are supposed to threaten each other. I don't appreciate that." Carter's character responded sarcastically, "Oh really? Well, I do not appreciate you leaving your big ol' box of 'June Allyson bladder pads' on my nightstand for the entire hotel staff to see every day. Of course, you don't care if you NEVER get out of here. You don't even have to get up to go to the bathroom!"

Actually, I'd say a good argument can be made that the reverse is true. Though now rightly recognized as one of the iconic figures of 20th century popular entertainment, the onscreen evidence clearly indicates it took a loonnnnggg time for Metro to fully awaken to Judy's potential. She spent approximately half of her career at the studio in supporting roles, playing a singing sounding board to the likes of Mickey Rooney and Lana Turner, didn't attain the top, solo, above-the-title billing that was an essential earmark of a true superstar until her 14th feature filim, FOR ME AND MY GAL (which was also her first adult role) and, in contemporary reviews of even her most notable film performances, saw much of her cinematic thunder stolen by co-stars like Bert Lahr, Margaret O'Brien, Fred Astaire, Ann Miller and Gene Kelly. By contrast, Universal, with much more to lose by promoting her (the studio was in receivership when she was signed and there had never been an adolescent film star, much less one who with an operatic lyric soprano), realized immediately what it had in Durbin. She received special billing in THREE SMART GIRLS as "Universal's New Discovery," in a film that was re-written to launch her as a star, as indicated by the publicity for the film, which centered entirely around her.By contrast, three years after she'd been signed by Metro, the best the studio could find for Judy was playing prominent support to Mickey Rooney in LOVE FINDS ANDY HARDY. Even after her alleged "triumph" in THE WIZARD OF OZ, all the studio could find for her to do for the next 2.5 years was again supporting Mickey Rooney in more of the same ANDY HARDY type fare . It's interesting to note that, while Mickey appeared in many non-Garland "A" list productions duirng their years as a team (e.g., HUCKLEBERRY FINN, YOUNG TOM EDISON, THE HUMAN COMEDY, MEN OF BOYS TOWN, A YANK AT EATON, etc.), the only "Judy Garland" vehicle produced during this time was the disposable 1940 MGM "B" LITTLE NELLIE KELLY, for which Judy received prominent below-the-title billing, an indication of MGM's enduring reluctance to let her carry a major film on her own star power. Given her delightful and versatile work durinng this period, I'm as surprised as anyone that MGM had these reservations, but it's clear that they did, in a manner that Universal did not where Durbin was concerned. Deanna Durbin not only had greater importance in her films (and was a more important asset to her studio) than Judy, she received a much larger salary (in 1945 and 1947 she was the highest paid woman in the United Staes and, according to many other sources, also in 1943, 19444 and one of the "Top Ten" money earners from the late 1930s until she retired), attained stardom more quickly, her films received more twice as many "Best PIcture" nominations as Judy's, she had a larger and more organized fan base (reportedly the largest fan club at the time), and made a greater cultural impact at the time (e.g., false reports of her "tragic death" were employed by the Axis powers as a means of demoralizing Allied troops during World War II), her impact in foreign countries such as Russia and Japan/Asia, also seems to have far outstripped Garland's. Among those who desperately wanted to sign Durbin after her departure from Unviersal, was MGM producer Joe Pasternak, who continued to pursue her avidly to make a motion picture comeback at Metro until he himself left the studio in the late 1960s, and MGM czar Louis B. Mayer himself reportedly offered her a $1,000,000 contract to sign with the studio. The "few" others who cared after she retired? Well, they undoubtedly included the BBC's public, which, over the past four decades has consistently submitted more reqeusts for Durbin's films and music than for those of any other star of Hollywood's Golden Age, the purchasers of the VHS releases of her films by MCA/UNIVERSAL in the 1990s, which became the best-selling videos in the history of MCA/UNIVERSAL's "Classic" series, which includes videos devoted to Crosby, Dietrich, Colbert, etc., etc., not to mention the patrons of various public television stations which ran her films as part of their fund-raising efforts during the 1980s and early 1990s (This is where I first saw several of them.) But by all means, don't let the cold light of reality impact your interpretation of Deanna Durbin's talent and career and ephemeral and second-rate.. I realize that "fantasy" is an important and enduring element of the cinematic experience. lol! My own opinion of Deanna Durbin and Judy Garland is they both were wonderfully gifted and charismatic one-of-a-kind talents who made a major impact on popular culture and entertained millions of fans while doing so, and continue to do so as their work is discovered by new generations. Nevertheless, by almost any objective criteria you'd care to consult, Deanna Durbin's career was the more spectacularly successful of the two girls during their concurrrent tenures at their respective studios, and you don't make that sort of impact by lacking "magic."

Talk about the ultimate "get" for Robert Osborne's "Private Screenings"! Can you imagine Deanna Durbin sitting for an interview in 2006? It would be fascinating. Not likely to happen, though. By the way, thanks for the link. I enjoyed reading the blog about Gloria Jean, though I can't say I share the author's high opinion of her memoir. As a fan of both Gloria and Deanna Durbin, I found it to be one of the most superficial, poorly edited, sloppily construced, poorly researched biographies I've ever read. An uneasy and disjointed mix of "autobiography" (the personal recollections of Gloria and her sister, Bonnie Schoonover) and "biography" (the alleged research conducted by Gloria's co-authors), it never successfully manages to meld the two genres into a cohesive whole/ presenting a disjointed, superficial and, I suspect, highly biased account of Gloria's career, Universal Studios, her co-stars and co-workers, To top it off, while I think Gloria deserves tremendous credit for surviving the vagaries of the Studio System as well as she did, she still came across to me as somewhat bitter and resentful of the past, taking potshots at both Durbin and their fellow Universal soprano contractee that I felt were completely uncalled for, and in the case of Deanna Durbin, completely unsubstantiated by any objective or credible evidence. I'm just grateful that I was smart enough to purchase the considerably less expensive "online" edition rather than the prohibitively expenisve hard and soft cover editions. I agree, that, as the most extensive account of Gloria Jean's life and career, it's worth taking a look at if you're a Gloria Jean fan, but beyond that, let there be peace.

You're welcome, Classicblackandwhite: I suspect that Garbofanatic may have understood the reason for the comparison as well. At least, he/she made a reference to understanding why you made the comparison. It will be interesting to see how the author of the Durbin biography that's due to be published later this year deals with her "retirement" years, if at all. It will also be interesting to see how Deanna reacts to the book, if at all. Given that she has stated on prior occasions that she's opposed to having a biography done, I'm sure it hasn't been published with her approval, though she may just choose to ignore it.

And, how could you put Greta Garbo and Deanna Durbin in the same sentence? (Ha! But, I know what you mean.) I know what you mean too, Garbomaniac, and yet references to Garbo often appear in commentary on Deanna, as in her 1980s interview with David Shipman, Richard Lamparski's comments about Deanna in one of his WHATEVER BECAME OF? series of books, and in a (somewhat dismissive) "salute" to Deanna by Eric Myers in OPERA NEWS a few years back. Undoubtedly, as the previous poster and others have suggested, the allusion keeps appearing because both Garbo and Durbin retired not only from filmmaking, but from public life, while still young women, and neither ultimately was successfully tempted to return to the screen or otherwise attempt to re-capture some of the enormous fame they had enjoyed during their respective careers.

Deanna has pretty much shunned publicity since she retired, but she hasn't been a recluse, travelling regularly with her third husband, Charles David throughout Europe and South America (and occasionally, the U.S.,) and enjoying their interests in theater, opera, etc. in places like London, Rome, etc. She also remained very friendly with many of her associates from her Universal days, including Henry Koster, Vincent Price, Buddy Pepper, and Helen Parrish, and her best friend, Anne Shirley, etc. As far as her fan mail is concerned, prior to M. David's death in 1999, Deanna was generally acknowledged to be one of the most courteous and reliable of celebrity correspondents. When her husband died, Deanna wrote a letter to her fan magazine, THE DEANNA DURIBN SOCIETY, announcing that, on the advice of family and friends, she was "re-retiring," and would no longer be able to respond to fan mail. Her fan mail was extremely voluminous, and unlike other celebrities, she never has employed a secretary or other staff to held her handle it. I have read comments from some other Durbin fans in recent years that Deanna has begun to answer her fan mail again, though I think her response these days generally consists of a small autographed photo of herself. Of course, it should be kept in mind that, God willing, Deanna will turn 85 this December, and she hasn't been a public figure for almost 60 years. As far as stars owning their life's blood to their fans until their dying day, I respectfully disagree. I think a performer owes the best that's in him/her at the time when a performance is given and, so long as they choose to remain in the spotlight, should be willing to put up with a certain amount of inconvenience and intrusion into his/her private life, but once the celebrity chooses to retire, I think he/she should have the right to do so and their privacy should be respected. Just my opinion, of course, By all accounts I've read, however, Deanna Durbin has been extremely considerate and generous toward her fans.