I have taken down the picture of Charlie and Paulette from 1943 due to some harassing comments that were posted. Because of this I have disabled "Anonymous" comments.
That's unfortunate - I liked the photo! I want to re-iterate what I said on that thread though - this site is wonderful and thank you for supplying these rare images!
I'd like to reiterate what JustMe just said. It's a shame - and quite cowardly - that people hide behind the Anonymous label to take pot shots at bloggers.
Thanks, Trish. It's extremely cowardly and immature. I was raked over the coals for daring to point out that Charlie was a flawed man. All aspects of Charlie's life are up for discussion in my book--the good and the bad. Charlie was a very complex person and that's one of the many things I find so interesting about him. I love Charlie, warts and all. I can only assume that these people haven't read much about him or know much about him at all. Because if you read any of the books or articles written about Chaplin by people who knew him, such as Alistair Cooke, Max Eastman, Rollie Totheroh, May Reeves, Georgia Hale, etc. You would find that these are not always very flattering portraits. I have always been fascinated by Chaplin the man because I don't think you can truly understand his work unless you understand him.
Another thing. One of the commenters asked how I could say such things about my "hero" on the internet where Charlie's family could see them. How completely ignorant. I highly doubt that Charlie's kids are trolling Chaplin-related blogs and websites looking for information about their father. I'm also fairly certain that nothing I said would come as much of a surprise to them.
"Anon"'s arguments were ridiculous. Suggesting that you should "protect" Chaplin's image by ignoring aspects of his personality that some may find undesirable ... please! I have always found your pages to be well-researched, intelligent, objective and sensitive. You clearly love the man and his art, and so do the rest of us who visit your blog. We come here to celebrate and learn more about the whole man; Charlie and "Mr. Chaplin", to borrow from Georgia Hale! I'm sure you know that "Anon" was not representative of the rest of us. I enjoyed the picture, too, as well as the non-harassing aspects of the conversation that resulted.
Thank you, Amy. You have always been so supportive and it is much appreciated. I was talking to my friend Lucy, who is a knowledgeable contributor to the Yahoo Chaplin group, and she was saying how she has always disliked the word "fan" because "It implies some kind of undying loyalty, a love of everything the artist ever produced, and an inability to offer anything other than complete approval of everything the object of affection did." I totally agree with that statement. Acknowledging Chaplin's flaws does not take away from my admiration of him or make him any less of a genius in my mind.
That's unfortunate - I liked the photo! I want to re-iterate what I said on that thread though - this site is wonderful and thank you for supplying these rare images!
ReplyDeleteThanks for your support. I will post the photo again once all this craziness dies down.
DeleteI'd like to reiterate what JustMe just said. It's a shame - and quite cowardly - that people hide behind the Anonymous label to take pot shots at bloggers.
ReplyDeleteThanks, Trish. It's extremely cowardly and immature. I was raked over the coals for daring to point out that Charlie was a flawed man. All aspects of Charlie's life are up for discussion in my book--the good and the bad. Charlie was a very complex person and that's one of the many things I find so interesting about him. I love Charlie, warts and all. I can only assume that these people haven't read much about him or know much about him at all. Because if you read any of the books or articles written about Chaplin by people who knew him, such as Alistair Cooke, Max Eastman, Rollie Totheroh, May Reeves, Georgia Hale, etc. You would find that these are not always very flattering portraits. I have always been fascinated by Chaplin the man because I don't think you can truly understand his work unless you understand him.
DeleteAnother thing. One of the commenters asked how I could say such things about my "hero" on the internet where Charlie's family could see them. How completely ignorant. I highly doubt that Charlie's kids are trolling Chaplin-related blogs and websites looking for information about their father. I'm also fairly certain that nothing I said would come as much of a surprise to them.
Delete:( It's one of the reasons I logged in to comment! If you have something to say, then say it!
ReplyDeleteHow was this photo? I didn't see it...
ReplyDelete"Anon"'s arguments were ridiculous. Suggesting that you should "protect" Chaplin's image by ignoring aspects of his personality that some may find undesirable ... please! I have always found your pages to be well-researched, intelligent, objective and sensitive. You clearly love the man and his art, and so do the rest of us who visit your blog. We come here to celebrate and learn more about the whole man; Charlie and "Mr. Chaplin", to borrow from Georgia Hale! I'm sure you know that "Anon" was not representative of the rest of us. I enjoyed the picture, too, as well as the non-harassing aspects of the conversation that resulted.
ReplyDeleteThank you, Amy. You have always been so supportive and it is much appreciated. I was talking to my friend Lucy, who is a knowledgeable contributor to the Yahoo Chaplin group, and she was saying how she has always disliked the word "fan" because "It implies some kind of undying loyalty, a love of everything the artist ever produced, and an inability to offer anything other than complete approval of everything the object of affection did." I totally agree with that statement. Acknowledging Chaplin's flaws does not take away from my admiration of him or make him any less of a genius in my mind.
Deletegive 'em hell, tiger!
ReplyDelete