Sharon Tate would be my nomination for sexiest woman who ever lived. I only remembered this week, when I saw a clip from the Beverly Hillbillies episode Jethro's First Love. Janet Trego, played by Sharon Tate, had been getting closer and closer to Jethro as Jethro was trying to hear the sound of true love. Quickly pushing the two apart, Jane Hathaway says to Janet "I'll meet you in the pool." "But we don't have a pool, Miss Hathaway," replies Janet. "The secretarial pool" says Jane as she pushes Janet out the door and quickly wraps her own arm around Jethro for an momentary embrace.
Those lines were burned into my memory, I know for sure, even if I couldn't remember who played Janet Trego, or even that the character was named Janet Trego. I am sure I saw that scene many times, as Beverly Hillbillies was my favorite show, ever, bar none. And this particular scene my favorite scene. I'm not exactly sure if I saw it when it originally aired in 1962, but I might have. I certainly saw it later. I might have even seen it, sometime after the murders, when somebody (perhaps the announcer, or maybe my sister) pointed out to me that the girl was played by Sharon Tate, who by then I knew had been murdered by the Manson Family. I might have really been really really sad for a moment. I remember something like that. But then I quickly forgot who Sharon Tate was, as much as when I first heard the name Sharon Tate, it had unfortunately only been in connection with the murders, and at that time I figured Sharon Tate was some actress in old movies I had never seen. And that had been my default thought about Sharon Tate, until the last couple weeks, and especially this week seeing that scene from the Beverly Hillbillies.
I also got a DVD of Valley of the Dolls, and just watching on scene with the character played by Sharon, the whiff of pure sexiness that I got from the Beverly Hillbillies reveals itself to be no momentary chimera. She just does everything in the most sexy possible way, with perfect rhythm too. She also seems like the perfect actress. She reminds me a lot of Lindsay Wagner, just a lot sexier.
What a terrible tragedy that we lost this beautiful and supremely talented woman near the beginning of what could have been the grandest of movie careers.
As with being Jethro's 'first love,' that lady teller was the first girl on TV I remember falling in love with that was not a cartoon. And yet, until the last two weeks, I couldn't have placed her name with the face.
What brought me to this was very strange. I was at the 6th Floor Museum in Dallas, Texas, and I noticed the book about the JFK assassination by Vincent Bugliosi. Having read his writings on the Bush v Gore election, and the War in Iraq, I have felt him to be the best of writers, and astute analysts. But it puzzles me how anyone could believe in the still official Warren Report conclusions, that Oswald acted alone, and there was no conspiracy. Actually, the US Congress reported in the 1970's that there was a conspiracy of some kind, but they couldn't decide any more than that. Anyway, the Museum seems to push the Warren Commission line, and so does Bugliosi. It seems Bugliosi goes as far as dismissing all the JFK conspiratorialists as insane or crookedly trying to make money.
That suddenly gave me an entirely different view about Bugliosi. And if I can't trust his judgement on the JFK book which took him 21 years to write (starting, btw, in 1967, before the Sharon Tate murders), can I trust him on something else, which he whipped out much quicker in fact, the official prosecution of Charles Manson and the book Helter Skelter? I'm sorry to say right now I'm not sure I trust any of it.
Sharon Tate herself was not outside the political whirlwinds of the 1960's. She was a supporter of Robert Kennedy in 1968 and met the Senator and his wife the day before he was killed in Los Angeles.
OK, I don't want to get too conspiratorial just yet, but that's interesting. It might have been more interesting had she actually been at the Ambassador Hotel...but I have not seen that mentioned.
Tate also came to Hollywood around 1961 from Dallas, where she had won at least one beauty pagent. That was the city JFK was assassinated in, two years later. I wonder if she had gone back to Dallas then or any preceding time? You would think she would have some interest in both assassinations.
Perhaps she didn't meet individuals who might have been JFK or RFK conspirators, though a colonel's daughter, beauty pagent winner, and grande dam of Hollywood would have been much more likely to have such access than the average joe. But having been close to both crimes, she certainly must have had some feel for how people there felt, in general. Along with one of the most brilliant directors in movie history, she could have had some revealing visions of these scenes that would be useful to a brilliant director, and could have been world changing for us. I for one did not know until the 2000's that there was pungent hatred of Kennedy in some quarters of Dallas. And now I know names such as HL Hunt and Gen. Walker, who were known to have extreme hatred of Kennedy, and have often been spun into conspiracy theories.
But some people might not have liked that idea, of so revealing of a film. It might get in the way of the new conservative revolution.
Another thing some people might not have liked about the future grand lady of cinema was her identity. A beautiful, sexy, white southern liberal. As we know, that wasn't the way the south split, but that was largely after her murder. Southern white democrats en masse (but not en toto) gave up any pretense of new dealism and became racist conservatives.
Manson was not of the political stripe to appreciate liberals like Tate (and nor was Oswald of the political stripe to appreciate Kennedy IMO...though an actual Communist would have). But could any heterosexual man have ordered the murder of such a beautiful woman?
It's much easier to believe that a false flag queer like J Edgar Hoover might have. And he might have had motives, also, strong motives, related to his corrupt mafia connections and involvement in coverups related to the two assassinations. Along with motives...it's easy to imagine he just didn't like that type (or her husband), and want them not to get the upper hand.
What would Sharon Tate do? Somehow I find it hard to not see her smiling. So I think that's what we must do, always.
*****
People have forgotten how cynical we were in the aftermath of the Kennedy assassinations, the War in Vietnam, and so on. In 1969 absolutely no one believed the Warren Commission Report. I remember a buddy in my Junior High School (in Los Angeles!) telling me, "Bugliosi just didn't want to get scooped on the ultimate JFK assassination movie." So he assassinates the wife of a fellow Angelino, and gets to prosecute the case as well, nailing some cultivated nutcase who actually believes he programmed some women to do the deed? That's how cynical we were about LA and big names in LA and everywhere. But the image of the FBI had not yet begun to fade. Or at least I recall circa 1967 arriving in the living room of some relatives in Montana, the marque of the program "The FBI" appeared and the room full of people, including me, applauded, I though it was a reflection of our feeling of support for the agency as well as the TV program, which might have been a welcome change.
*****
I'm sure some of my friends would say it's much easier to conclude that Bugliosi is not some sort of master conspirator, just not as competent as he thinks. He's a great prosecutor, and part of that job is leaving little or know doubt. But this is not the scientific orientation, which ought to concede that doubt is always there. But still, he could easily be stupid about JFK and absolutely square about Manson, because of not weighing the doubts properly.
Bugliosi looks at evidence. Fine. But if evidence is tampered with by a higher power, what good is that? That may be especially true in the case of the JFK assassination, where the most important evidence was shipped back to Washington DC almost immediately.
*****
Regardless of Hoover's guilt in the Tate murders and/or related coverup (often Hoover's actual charge and expertise), Hoover has condemned millions to die and billions to suffer in the War on Drugs. Hoover was behind the federalization of drug prohibition. The war on drugs has done far more harm than good and continues to this day. Worldwide the drug war is easily seen as a war on poor people. Then look at the USA and you see the same thing. Drugs should be legal and regulated, and taxed to support free and guilt-free treatment.
The War on Drugs supports both a police state (more money for Hoover) and more money for organized crime (many of Hoover's friends). It was born in corruption, disguised as public hygene, sold throough sensationalized media.
The prohibition of prostitution is another very socially harmful policy. Prostitution should be legal and regulated. And pay for sex should not be looked down on. I am happy to pay to get more of what I want.
A male friend dismissing the Marriage contract proclaimed (as if were the ultimate put down) "Marriage is just prostitution."
I meant to say "And that's the best part of it."
Those lines were burned into my memory, I know for sure, even if I couldn't remember who played Janet Trego, or even that the character was named Janet Trego. I am sure I saw that scene many times, as Beverly Hillbillies was my favorite show, ever, bar none. And this particular scene my favorite scene. I'm not exactly sure if I saw it when it originally aired in 1962, but I might have. I certainly saw it later. I might have even seen it, sometime after the murders, when somebody (perhaps the announcer, or maybe my sister) pointed out to me that the girl was played by Sharon Tate, who by then I knew had been murdered by the Manson Family. I might have really been really really sad for a moment. I remember something like that. But then I quickly forgot who Sharon Tate was, as much as when I first heard the name Sharon Tate, it had unfortunately only been in connection with the murders, and at that time I figured Sharon Tate was some actress in old movies I had never seen. And that had been my default thought about Sharon Tate, until the last couple weeks, and especially this week seeing that scene from the Beverly Hillbillies.
I also got a DVD of Valley of the Dolls, and just watching on scene with the character played by Sharon, the whiff of pure sexiness that I got from the Beverly Hillbillies reveals itself to be no momentary chimera. She just does everything in the most sexy possible way, with perfect rhythm too. She also seems like the perfect actress. She reminds me a lot of Lindsay Wagner, just a lot sexier.
What a terrible tragedy that we lost this beautiful and supremely talented woman near the beginning of what could have been the grandest of movie careers.
As with being Jethro's 'first love,' that lady teller was the first girl on TV I remember falling in love with that was not a cartoon. And yet, until the last two weeks, I couldn't have placed her name with the face.
What brought me to this was very strange. I was at the 6th Floor Museum in Dallas, Texas, and I noticed the book about the JFK assassination by Vincent Bugliosi. Having read his writings on the Bush v Gore election, and the War in Iraq, I have felt him to be the best of writers, and astute analysts. But it puzzles me how anyone could believe in the still official Warren Report conclusions, that Oswald acted alone, and there was no conspiracy. Actually, the US Congress reported in the 1970's that there was a conspiracy of some kind, but they couldn't decide any more than that. Anyway, the Museum seems to push the Warren Commission line, and so does Bugliosi. It seems Bugliosi goes as far as dismissing all the JFK conspiratorialists as insane or crookedly trying to make money.
That suddenly gave me an entirely different view about Bugliosi. And if I can't trust his judgement on the JFK book which took him 21 years to write (starting, btw, in 1967, before the Sharon Tate murders), can I trust him on something else, which he whipped out much quicker in fact, the official prosecution of Charles Manson and the book Helter Skelter? I'm sorry to say right now I'm not sure I trust any of it.
Sharon Tate herself was not outside the political whirlwinds of the 1960's. She was a supporter of Robert Kennedy in 1968 and met the Senator and his wife the day before he was killed in Los Angeles.
OK, I don't want to get too conspiratorial just yet, but that's interesting. It might have been more interesting had she actually been at the Ambassador Hotel...but I have not seen that mentioned.
Tate also came to Hollywood around 1961 from Dallas, where she had won at least one beauty pagent. That was the city JFK was assassinated in, two years later. I wonder if she had gone back to Dallas then or any preceding time? You would think she would have some interest in both assassinations.
Perhaps she didn't meet individuals who might have been JFK or RFK conspirators, though a colonel's daughter, beauty pagent winner, and grande dam of Hollywood would have been much more likely to have such access than the average joe. But having been close to both crimes, she certainly must have had some feel for how people there felt, in general. Along with one of the most brilliant directors in movie history, she could have had some revealing visions of these scenes that would be useful to a brilliant director, and could have been world changing for us. I for one did not know until the 2000's that there was pungent hatred of Kennedy in some quarters of Dallas. And now I know names such as HL Hunt and Gen. Walker, who were known to have extreme hatred of Kennedy, and have often been spun into conspiracy theories.
But some people might not have liked that idea, of so revealing of a film. It might get in the way of the new conservative revolution.
Another thing some people might not have liked about the future grand lady of cinema was her identity. A beautiful, sexy, white southern liberal. As we know, that wasn't the way the south split, but that was largely after her murder. Southern white democrats en masse (but not en toto) gave up any pretense of new dealism and became racist conservatives.
Manson was not of the political stripe to appreciate liberals like Tate (and nor was Oswald of the political stripe to appreciate Kennedy IMO...though an actual Communist would have). But could any heterosexual man have ordered the murder of such a beautiful woman?
It's much easier to believe that a false flag queer like J Edgar Hoover might have. And he might have had motives, also, strong motives, related to his corrupt mafia connections and involvement in coverups related to the two assassinations. Along with motives...it's easy to imagine he just didn't like that type (or her husband), and want them not to get the upper hand.
What would Sharon Tate do? Somehow I find it hard to not see her smiling. So I think that's what we must do, always.
*****
People have forgotten how cynical we were in the aftermath of the Kennedy assassinations, the War in Vietnam, and so on. In 1969 absolutely no one believed the Warren Commission Report. I remember a buddy in my Junior High School (in Los Angeles!) telling me, "Bugliosi just didn't want to get scooped on the ultimate JFK assassination movie." So he assassinates the wife of a fellow Angelino, and gets to prosecute the case as well, nailing some cultivated nutcase who actually believes he programmed some women to do the deed? That's how cynical we were about LA and big names in LA and everywhere. But the image of the FBI had not yet begun to fade. Or at least I recall circa 1967 arriving in the living room of some relatives in Montana, the marque of the program "The FBI" appeared and the room full of people, including me, applauded, I though it was a reflection of our feeling of support for the agency as well as the TV program, which might have been a welcome change.
*****
I'm sure some of my friends would say it's much easier to conclude that Bugliosi is not some sort of master conspirator, just not as competent as he thinks. He's a great prosecutor, and part of that job is leaving little or know doubt. But this is not the scientific orientation, which ought to concede that doubt is always there. But still, he could easily be stupid about JFK and absolutely square about Manson, because of not weighing the doubts properly.
Bugliosi looks at evidence. Fine. But if evidence is tampered with by a higher power, what good is that? That may be especially true in the case of the JFK assassination, where the most important evidence was shipped back to Washington DC almost immediately.
*****
Regardless of Hoover's guilt in the Tate murders and/or related coverup (often Hoover's actual charge and expertise), Hoover has condemned millions to die and billions to suffer in the War on Drugs. Hoover was behind the federalization of drug prohibition. The war on drugs has done far more harm than good and continues to this day. Worldwide the drug war is easily seen as a war on poor people. Then look at the USA and you see the same thing. Drugs should be legal and regulated, and taxed to support free and guilt-free treatment.
The War on Drugs supports both a police state (more money for Hoover) and more money for organized crime (many of Hoover's friends). It was born in corruption, disguised as public hygene, sold throough sensationalized media.
The prohibition of prostitution is another very socially harmful policy. Prostitution should be legal and regulated. And pay for sex should not be looked down on. I am happy to pay to get more of what I want.
A male friend dismissing the Marriage contract proclaimed (as if were the ultimate put down) "Marriage is just prostitution."
I meant to say "And that's the best part of it."
No comments:
Post a Comment