a beautiful shot from Marilyn Monroe’s last unfinished film.
You know, certain cinematographers said that it was so easy to film her and light her because her skin was naturally reflective. Lots of actresses need makeup to pick up all that light – and to have it come across – and of course Marilyn wore makeup – but it wasn’t just makeup that made her look like that – there was something glowing already about her skin. There’s a wonderful grainy photograph of Marilyn, 1955, in an acting class in New York. It’s dingy – there’s a bare bulb – a scratched floor. People like Paul Newman and Joanne Woodward are also in the class. A crowd of people sit in battered wooden chairs, listening to the teacher. Marilyn is just one of that crowd. She’s wearing a trench coat, very plain and simple – no makeup – and I swear, it is as though there is a special spotlight shining down on her. Partly it’s the blonde – your eyes naturally go to the blonde hair – but it’s more than that, and more than the fact that she’s so famous. It is as though she has a key light with her, at all times. I read one photographer say that he had noticed a layer of peach fuzz over her face – almost thicker than other people have – and he thought that that was what gave her that luminous look – the fuzz catching the light – there was nothing MATTE about her face.
There are also wonderful stories about her walking around in New York completely anonymous – she was able to douse that light (by magic, I’m convinced) so that nobody would ever look at her and say, ‘That’s Marilyn Monroe’. She was walking with a friend through the crowded streets of Manhattan – she had a headscarf on, no makeup, she was wearing jeans, sneakers – and completely disappeared into the crowd. The friend was amazed. This was the most famous most desired woman in the world. How did she turn that OFF so completely? They discussed it a bit. And then Marilyn said, with a wicked grin, “Want to see her?” Meaning: Marilyn with a capital M. I love that she referred to her persona in the third person. The friend said, yeah, let’s see “her”;. So Marilyn took off the headscarf, and – without any makeup – any fluffing of hair – anything external – she turned on the light inside. And there “she” was. Marilyn Monroe, walking in the grime of 9th Avenue. And slowly – people noticed – and came over – and asked for autographs – and the whole thing ended with a mob scene – Marilyn surrounded by throngs.
“Want to see her?”
That’s a movie star. It can’t be taught. Whether it was a small layer of fuzz on her face that picked up the lights … or whether it was something magical within … that’s the key to her mysterious appeal.
“Wanna see her?”
Absolutely my favorite movie star story ever.
Alex – I know! Who was the friend she was walking with – do you remember? I thought it was Truman Capote, but now I’m not so sure – I think it’s another actor. An Actors Studio person??
Sheila – Marilyn was walking with Susan Strasberg, who told the story in her book “Bittersweet”.
By the way, the picture that you chose to go with this post is among my absolute favorites!
Ceci – what would I do without you?? You know, I need to get Bittersweet – which I used to have (I have, of course, read it – but I got rid of it along the way of life!) – I especially need to get it NOW because Susan Strasberg starred in Psych out with Dean Stockwell (ahem) and I can’t remember if she said anything about it.
I have the photo of marilyn monroe in class at the actors studio – it’s in a book of mine – but i can’t find it online. I am sure you know the photo I’m talking about!!
Sheila – regarding the pics of Marilyn at the Actors Studio: do you mean the one where you can see Marilyn AND Susan Strasberg? I have that one as a jpg file and could send it to you by email, let me know if you want it! I have others of Marilyn attending class, but they are not the best quality, unfortunately… (but I could send you those, too! – just let me know)
Oh, and I’ll check if Susan says something about Dean Stockwell in Bittersweet – I don’t remember it off the top of my head (unlike all the Marilyn stuff she talks about, hahaha!)
Unaccountably, the line “Want to see her?” reminded me of the Fritz Leiber story, “A Desk Full of Girls.” I say unaccountably, because it’s a durn creepy story.
Ceci – yes, please do some stockwell research for me. It is VERY important. hahahaha!!
I love Susan Strasberg’s books. Have you read Johnny’s book Accidentally On Purpose? Now THAT is a wonderful book. I took a class with him which kind of changed my life forever. What a teacher. Holy GOD. You know that feeling when someone, thru all the bullshit, just SEES you? He saw me. It was almost disconcerting how much he NAILED me. But he did so with love and compassion and I came out of it forever changed. It was a great honor to study with him. Anyway, his book is great! With some terrific Marilyn stories in there too!
I didn’t read Johnny’s book, but now that you recommend it, I’ll try to get my hands on it!
I skimmed through Bittersweet, but only found one reference to Psych Out, which doesn’t mention Dean Stockwell at all. Susan only dedicates a couple paragraphs to that film, her role in it, and one anecdote involving a scene with Jack Nicholson. But no Dean! :(
Do you people all “love” her because she looked as she looked, she had whatever she had – or in retrospective: because she WAS “Marilyn Monroe”?
It’s not an idle question. I’ve been wondering, ever since I first heard about her, whether any of her “fans” would have been able to “appreciate” her if she hadn’t been famous: in other words, if she were her exact self, perhaps even in the movies – just not THE “Marilyn Monroe”.
You see, I know a woman who has – or had – that inborn “inner shine”; she knows exactly how to “turn” it on (and off). Her facial features are very similar (only better) to MM’s; so is her body, except for the legs which are, or were, comparable only to Marlene Dietrich’s legs (not to Marilyn’s, with those sorry dumplings of her knees). Her voice is extremely similar; and she would even smile and talk like a spitting image of her – had MM not taken it away from her, many years after her death.
Yes, that’s right. ;) And, the smile notwithstanding, it’s damn serious stuff. She – the woman I am talking about – was born a “superstar”. It’s visible even in her earliest photos; at age two she already knew how to pose, how to capture the light and make the camera love her, without even knowing what she was doing, the bright little tot.
But as she grew up and people wanted to take her picture – and that smile, that otherworldly shine came through, people – perhaps thinking they were flattering her! – invariably started remarking her similarity to Marilyn Monroe. Whenever she smiled and beamed, some even said: “Oh now you are doing Marilyn Monroe!” (She was SIX the first time she heard that… Just goes to prove how criminally stupid adult people can be.) She didn’t know who the said lady was – but she soon learned not to smile on pictures, because she began to feel like an “impostor”. And photographers, being the cretinous creatures that very many of them are, began telling her that she looked much better in the flesh – that she wasn’t really “photogenic”. She definitely DID look much better in the flesh – but that was because the photographers around her were no good… They were too blind to see that something was keeping her eyes and mouth from smiling; that something was making her self-conscious. They were mostly interested in taking her to bed. Fair enough; but that would still make them no-good photographers.
Once she put on a blond wig, just for fun; with her glowing porcelain skin (no make up), she looked stunning beyond belief. But wouldn’t you know it…? With that blond hair that suited her SO well – and, frankly, might have changed her life for good (and for the better) – all the people saw was a glorious reincarnation of Marilyn Monroe.
She never put on that wig again; not even for “fun”, for the fun was gone.
You mentioned somewhere that many people considered MM a “lucky whore”. I don’t know about the second part, but she sure DID have luck. Big time! She was born in the capital of the film industry, she only had to cross the street, as it were. And she had luck in the sense that she found photographers and, vitally, an agent who LOVED her. You see, unless a photographer loves YOU (not someone else’s image in you), or at least takes the time to bring out the radiance of beauty (by encouraging you to be YOU), that “light” goes out in front of the camera from which you’ve learned to expect nothing but comparison to an “impostor” who came before you.
Yes, she was lucky. There is nothing to pity about her – that, too, was an act. (Hey, I am not blaming her – clearly, she knew how to play her cards in Tinsel Town.) So please, don’t pity her.
Instead, you might want to introduce a “moment of appreciation” in your daily life of all those anonymous women in the world who had or have everything that MM had, and more – except her luck.
Anastasia – what a rude comment! Stop projecting your anger onto us. We are talking about Marilyn Monroe, an actress and an icon we all admire. You’re bringing your own drama to the picture – which is fine – We all do, with icons like Monroe – just stop projecting. Share your story without the rude assumptions you are making about the rest of us. The fact that we admire Monroe takes away nothing from the anonymous others who have struggled with the same issues – and the fact that you cannot see the difference is YOUR problem, not ours.
That’s your answer, Red?
That’s all you have to say to the above..?
Wow… :)
Not much of an answer, is it?
Or… is it?
Because it does confirm many of the suspicions I’ve had about many of so-called M.M. “fans”.
No: I don’t think you WOULD, after all, recognise Marilyn Monroe without a flashing inscription stating so.
“Wanna see her”…?
Good luck! :)
You sound insane, Anastasia. You’re really angry about something. And it is making you sound nuts. We’re talking about Marilyn Monroe here. She’s an actress.
So yes. That actually IS my answer to you. Life’s way too short to invest in a back and forth with every wacko driveby comment that comes my way. You are angry, and rude – and you showed up making assumptions about me – and others – based on one post. That’s nuts, Anastasia Romanova.
That you would come back to this post months after you left your comment – and then leave ANOTHER bitchy comment (“Good luck”?? Huh?) – says everything I need to know.
Pingback: Don’t Bother to Knock (1952); Director: Roy Ward Baker | The Sheila Variations