“People don’t know it, but I’m primarily Irish. We get these dark periods.” — William Powell

William Powell

“I have never gone into a picture without first studying my characterization from all angles. I make a study of the fellow’s life and try to learn everything about him, including the conditions under which he came into this world, his parentage, his environment, his social status, and the things in which he is interested. Then I attempt to get his mental attitude as much as possible.” — William Powell

William Powell was a man of such charm, such wit, and yet also such warmth, he seemed to have chemistry with everyone. He had sparks with every single co-star. There’s nothing better than William Powell opposite a woman who gives as good as she gets. Of course there’s all of the films he made with Myrna Loy – 14, I think? – their chemistry is so dreamy, so exhilarating, it’s like you get drunk watching them. But again, he had chemistry with everyone. Jean Harlow. Kay Francis. Carole Lombard. Jean Arthur. Irene Dunne. These are all very different women, women of different types with different energies. He clicked with them ALL. He also had chemistry with inanimate objects. There was an intimacy in his demeanor and this made him highly aware of his surroundings, alert to everything: people, himself, his clothes, his drink and cigarette.

Now why is that? Chemistry like this is ephemeral, fleeting, impossible to manufacture.

I think the key is William Powell legitimately found women delightful. Truly. With no condescending old-fashioned chivalric patriarchal stuff. He just found women interesting and fun. He liked them. There are many many male romantic leads who don’t seem to like women all that much. They may desire them. But they don’t find them interesting and fun. Burt Reynolds got a kick out of women. He loved flirting and bantering. He lit up when women were around. Nothing was more fun for him. It’s no mystery why Burt Reynolds was one of the biggest sex symbols Hollywood has ever seen. Nothing sexier than a funny man who seems to like women. (Note to incels … Also, note to incels: William Powell was not, how you say, classically good-looking, or buff, or sleek. Look at him. But he was SEXY.) William Powell had what Burt Reynolds had. And if you have THAT, then you have chemistry with all kinds of women. You like hanging out with snooty dowagers and young heedless flirts. They’re all interesting to you.

His chemistry could exist in the amoral decadent world of Kay Francis (they were dynamite together) and in the screwball loopy world of Carole Lombard.

He could be so so silly. (The fly fishing scene in Libeled Lady. The entirety of Love Crazy.) He was devastating when he was tender. (Swoon.) He was witty and urbane, immaculate in his tux and tails and top hat and martinis … but he always had a streak of absurdity, he was attuned to it. He seemed to like when a woman got the best of him. It turned him on. This is why his chemistry with Myrna Loy was so dynamite. Here’s a wonderful piece I found about all the films Powell and Loy did together.

Powell said of their work together:

When we did a scene together, we forgot about technique, camera angels, and microphones. We weren’t acting. We were just two people in perfect harmony. Many times I’ve played with an actress who seemed to be separated from me by a plate-glass window; there was no contact at all. But Myrna, unlike some actresses who think only of themselves, has the happy faculty of being able to listen while the other fellow says his lines. She has the give and take of acting that brings out the best.

Powell was involved with two hugely talented – and FUNNY – women who came to early tragic ends: Carole Lombard (whom he married, and divorced) and, before that, Jean Harlow. He was devastated by their deaths, and filled with guilt about poor Harlow, whom he didn’t marry. In 1940, he married again, to Diana Lewis – an actress and contract player. Their marriage lasted until his death in 1984.

“Unfortunately, or perhaps it is fortunate that I have always been forced to stand on my acting ability. I haven’t a personality such as Jack Gilbert’s, for instance, that attracts women and makes them like me for myself. When I am on the screen I must make them forget me entirely and think only of my acting.” — William Powell

I respect his humility and understand what he is saying, but his personality was attractive and he attracted women to him like the proverbial flies. I mean, look at his girlfriends/wives! Wisecracking funny women! It is also true his focus was on his acting ability: he wanted to be known for it. The way he speaks about acting is intelligent and aware. Look at how he describes what set Myrna Loy apart from other actresses: how she listened. I know I go on and on (and on) about the importance of listening – but it really can’t be stressed enough.

Powell was a great listener, a great actor, and VERY attractive. He had it all.

 
 
Thank you so much for stopping by. If you like what I do, and if you feel inclined to support my work, here’s a link to my Venmo account. And I’ve launched a Substack, Sheila Variations 2.0, if you’d like to subscribe.

Posted in Actors, Movies | Tagged , , , , , , | 6 Comments

Frankenstein First Look: Vanity Fair

Expansive article in Vanity Fair about Guillermo del Toro’s Frankenstein, complete with luscious images – first looks (besides the trailer) – of this film, exclusive to Vanity Fair. They’re still holding back Jacob Elordi as the monster – so smart – he’s not fully seen in the trailer either. But here’s a first glimpse, even though he’s still cloaked.

The article has interviews with almost everyone.

It’s so cool to be at least a little bit involved with this project, and having gotten the chance to talk to all the people responsible: storyboard artists, costume designer, actors, the whole thing. My book is scheduled to come out in October. There will be bookstore events and when I know more I’ll list them here.

It’s also set to premiere at the Venice Film Festival, followed by the Toronto Film Festival. (This past week, four soundstages in Toronto have been renamed after Guillermo. So cool and so deserved.)

If you haven’t seen it, here’s the trailer! It’s going to be a busy fall.

Posted in Books, Movies | Tagged , | 2 Comments

R.I.P. Tom Lehrer

Tom Lehrer was a staple in our household. Just like the Raunch Hands were. We had a Tom Lehrer songbook and we’d play it on the piano. I had no context for him. It was like my equal love around the same time of Max Shulman, another “relic” from the generation before, whom I tripped over by accident and adored. All that Cold War paranoia etc. I still understood something about that, Evil Empire “Star Wars”, etc. These people were MAD magazine people, still a force to be reckoned with at the time. I was drawn to the vibe just naturally, in the same way I was naturally drawn to P.J. O’Rourke later, without really connecting the dots. I was a child of the 80s and their anti-establishment nothing-is-sacred satire was in the air I breathed. I didn’t know Tom Lehrer’s background , but I loved his clever funny songs. “New Math”. Still cracks me up. I didn’t understand every reference but I certainly understood the objects of his mockery.

Which leads me to …

It was a tradition where I went to high school that the junior class would put on a variety show every year. It was meant to bond the class together ahead of the senior year. The show was student-organized, student-directed, with very little administration interference (can you believe this? Like, they did not oversee us and all kinds of insanely inappropriate things happened on that stage!) Its purpose was sound, though. The show was definitely a bonding agent for the class. We had to work together. Nobody was rejected. You want to come on and do a juggling act or a mime act? Go for it. Two of my good friends, Beth and Anne, were the emcees.

We wrote skits and sketches. There were lip synch re-creations of MTV music videos. People dressed up as the teachers, we lampooned the administration, etc. There were musical interludes where kids from the band would play songs. A couple of girls did soulful duets.

I made a bold move on my own to sing a solo. My friend Peter accompanied me on piano. My song was not soulful. I did not, for example, sing the theme from Ice Castles. I chose to sing Tom Lehrer’s gleefully sarcastic anti-war song “So Long, Mom (I’m off to drop the bomb)”. I wore camo pants, combat boots and a military jacket. I marched onstage waving an American flag.

Who the hell did I think I was??

I belted out those crazy funny lyrics with maximum bombast and patriotic fervor. Did I even know what I was saying? Well, in the specifics, no, i.e.

While we’re attacking frontally
Watch Brinkally and Huntally
Describing contrapuntally
The cities we have lost

I mean, okay? But what?

But the rest of it? I knew exactly what he was saying. I lived in fear of war and nuclear winter. Sign of the times. So I belted out lines like

I’ll look for you when the war is over
An hour and a half from now

with rage powered by razzle dazzle jazz hands. And big exaggerated military salutes.

I brought down the house. I was very proud, especially since – I won’t lie – I had a couple of insecure moments backstage, holding my flag, wearing my camo, surrounded by girls in frilly mini skirts and heels, practicing their dance moves … wondering uneasily if I was way too out on a limb all by myself. The other girls all looked so pretty and cute! Whereas I …

Here’s the man himself, singing it:

I got the message.

Don’t believe the bullshit. Interrogate the propaganda coming at you from all sides. Make fun of it. Be loud. Be smart about it. Upholding the status quo and submitting to consensus thinking is for unimaginative bores. At the very least, question everything. Resist. Puncture the self-serious. ROAST them. If it feels like bullshit, it probably is. Resist the group. Very important lessons for a teenage kid to learn.

Thanks for the music, Tom Lehrer. Thanks for your satirical bite. I “got it” at 15 and I’m the better for it.

Posted in Music, Personal, RIP | 2 Comments

“I do not write for the public.” — poet Gerard Manley Hopkins

1340916208-hopkins

“I shall shortly have some sonnets to send you, five or more. Four of these came like inspirations unbidden and against my will. And in the life I lead now, which is one of a continually jaded and harassed mind, if in any leisure I try to do anything I make no way–nor with my work, alas! but so it must be.” — Gerard Manley Hopkins, letter to Robert Bridges, 1885 (referencing the “desolation sonnets”)

Gerard Manley Hopkins is a poet near and dear to my heart. Born on this day in 1844, he died of typhus in 1889. A short life casting a long shadow.

Hopkins was against the grain of traditional Victorian poetry, and the way he worked and how he used language was quite controversial at the time. His poems didn’t look like other people’s poems. The conflict between the spiritual and the worldly is central to his work.

Continue reading

Posted in Books, On This Day, writers | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , | 5 Comments

On This Day, 1957: Jerry Lee Lewis Kicks the Stool Back

Jerry Lee Lewis made his TV debut on the Steve Allen Show. The performance is terrifying. Who else is this terrifying? I suggested the Sex Pistols on Facebook. They did, indeed, terrify. But they were almost 20 years later. Jerry Lee Lewis got there first.

But there’s more to say about this completely unhinged demonic performance.

It just goes to show you how much the world changed in just one year, how much the mainstream world capitulated to what was rising from the South. In 1956, the young phenom Elvis appeared on the Steve Allen Show. He had already caused a lot of trouble for himself with his performance on The Milton Berle Show. Headlines declared him dangerous. Advertisers threatened to pull out of any program that broadcast him. He was denounced from pulpits and school boards across the land. He was under siege. Steve Allen wanted in on all this notoreity but he wanted to undercut it too, to save his skin. So he put Elvis in a tuxedo and had him sing “Hound Dog” to an actual hound dog which … first of all forced Elvis into a static position, he couldn’t move around, he had to stay with the dog … and also completely removed Elvis’ sexual explosiveness. It’s a notorious performance for Elvis fans. Allen humiliated Elvis by putting him in a tuxedo and so his audience could haw-haw at the sight of a hillbilly playing dress up. Allen’s show was a grown-ups pooh-poohing of rock ‘n roll, a square man’s reaction to something he didn’t understand.

Well, here we all are, in 1957, just one measly year later. And Jerry Lee Lewis gives a performance far more threatening than anything Elvis ever did live on television (at least until the 1968 comeback special.) Jerry Lee Lewis makes Elvis look like a good boy. And … Elvis WAS a good boy. With a libido, yes, and one of his most subversive contributions to culture was to allow “good” boys and girls to admit how much they wanted to fuck each other. Okay, fine. But Jerry Lee Lewis was not – never was – a good boy.

Imagine tuning in in 1957 and seeing THAT come out of your screen. Jerry Lee Lewis is an Old Testament preacher, speaking in tongues. He’s a leering sex maniac. He’s a juke-joint boogie-woogie maestro. He’s also a cult leader, telling his audience what to do. He controls that crowd, bringing them up, bringing them back down. He’s a snake charmer. He’s testifying in a muddy field under a tent. He’s hollering from a pulpit. He orders everyone around. And they LOVE it.

All of this is alarming enough.

But then he stands up all of a sudden, pushing the stool behind him – and the shock waves still reverberate.

Miley Cyrus twerking doesn’t hold a candle to what Jerry Lee Lewis did here (although hers is definitely in the same continuum, and the response was – predictably – the same).

It feels like the stool – or Jerry Lee Lewis himself – is going to crash through the screen. He is going to pull down the very foundational structures of civilization, just by pushing that stool back.

None of the “explicit” stuff allowed on television now can hold a candle to the shock of this.

 
 
Thank you so much for stopping by. If you like what I do, and if you feel inclined to support my work, here’s a link to my Venmo account. And I’ve launched a Substack, Sheila Variations 2.0, if you’d like to subscribe.

Posted in Music, On This Day, Television | Tagged | 11 Comments

“I write out of a jumble of emotions and vague notions and scraps of knowledge. At some stage a form or, rather, a shape mysteriously emerges.” — Michael Longley

Poet Michael Longley was born on this day in Belfast in 1935. He died in January of this year.

He went to Trinity where he studied classics. Much of his poetry shows a classical influence, with references to the ancient Greek and Roman mythology. Much of his inspiration (as is true for many Irish writers) comes from the wild west of Ireland. But history looms large in that landscape, and Longley’s perspective is always panoramic, gigantic. His poems can easily be read as metaphors of current-day Irish issues; this was especially true in the 70s when Northern Ireland was exploding in violence.

Longley was a teacher for many years, and was married to critic Edna Longley. He won numerous prizes, published many volumes of poetry (including a “Collected Poems”), and also published a memoir. From 2007 to 2010 he was “Professor of Poetry for Ireland”, a relatively new post, sort of like a Poet Laureate but with more of an academic slant. The post was held before him by John Montague (my post about him here), the wonderful Nuala Ní Dhomhnaill (post on her here) and Paul Durcan (post on him here).

My friend – Therese Cox (we met at a Bloomsday celebration 20 years ago and have gone every year ever since) left a fantastic comment on an old post I wrote about Longley, and I will re-post it here:

There is a poem by Michael Longley called “The Dome” that’s inscribed in the glass ceiling of a new building in Belfast in Victoria Square. It’s this massive glass dome, segmented almost like a clear soccer ball, and you climb a tall winding staircase in this shopping centre to get to the top and see the poem. What I love about it is how subtle it is — if you weren’t looking for the poem, you might miss it. My cousin and I climbed up there last April “to see the Michael Longley poem” — one of many fun geeky pilgrimages I’ve enjoyed over the years.

Of course the poem itself is great, a nod to Belfast’s industrial past. I find it all the more fragile and beautiful to contemplate when you consider that 10, 15 years ago, a glass-encased building called Victoria Square would NEVER have gotten built in Belfast. (It was unveiled in 2007, and Longley was there to read “The Dome.”) And then there is this poem up there, as if to say, “Go on. You bomb me, you bomb this poem.” And no one touches it. Kind of majestic, really.

When I was in Belfast in the mid-2000s, I went out for drinks with my friend Carrie, and she pointed out the glass windows of the bar, a whole wall of glass. She told me they weren’t bullet-proof. The fact that she even had to mention it shows what a huge deal it was.

Here’s Longley’s poem in the dome:

The Dome

Raise high the roof-beam, engineers, make room

For tradesmen who come crowding in from yesterday –

Greengrocers, haberdashers, tobacconists,

old Dears in home bakeries and sweetie shops – ice-cream

Pokes, sherbet suckers, liquorice sticks, Paris buns – Butchers, costermongers – yes, beneath the dome

Make room for all to stargaze through the ceiling. Near the fountain a horse through that’s no longer there

Reflects the dome, and the dome reflects in turn

The shoppers’ upturned faces for years to come

Taking in this fantastical construction’s

Bridges, walkways, viewing-platforms like lily-pads

Afloat in the atmosphere. Raise high the roof-beam.

The dome has been here always. Or so it seems. Pegasus, winged horse of our imagination,

Has drunk from the fountain in Victoria Square.

 

The history of Belfast, its decades of explosions, underlines the significance of a gigantic glass domes. A new hope and belief in political stability. This glass will not shatter.

Longley’s poem below is dedicated to Irish poet Eavan Boland (I love her). While much of this poem basically describes a walk he took along the beach, watch what he does with the language. Every other phrase has some startling and perceptive image. I read the last four lines over and over, thinking about what they mean. The “privilege of vertigo”. What a fascinating phrase. Why the “privilege”? It is a perfect term rhythmically, but it’s also unexpected. You aren’t ready for it. The line itself has vertigo in it, the whole poem is vertigo. He writes that his eyes “slowly accept panorama”. Again: perfect. Unfortunately, I cannot replicate here the staggered nature of his lines, and what they look like on the page. It makes a difference, what a poem looks like, the indentations and step-ladder line-length. If you Google the poem, you’ll be able to see it elsewhere, where it at least looks right.

In the meantime, let us “slowly accept panorama”. Longley knows it’s difficult. But we are given the “privilege of vertigo”.

The Hebrides
for Eavan Boland

I.

The winds’ enclosure, Atlantic’s premises,
Last balconies
Above the waves, The Hebrides –
Too long did I postpone
Presbyterian granite and the lack of trees,
This orphaned stone,
Day in, day out colliding with the sea.
Weather forecast,
Compass nor ordinance survey
Arranges my welcome
For, on my own, I have lost my way at last,
So far from home.
In whom the city is continuing,
I stop to look,
To find my feet among the ling
And bracken – over me
The bright continuum of gulls, a rook
Occasionally.

II.

My eyes, slowly accepting panorama,
Try to include
In my original idea
The total effect
Of air and ocean – waterlogged all wood –
All harbours wrecked –
My dead-lights latched by whelk and barnacle
Till I abide
By the sea wall of the time I kill –
My each nostalgic scheme
Jettisoned, as crises are, the further side
Of sleep and dream.
Between wind and wave this holiday
The cormorant,
The oyster-catcher and osprey
Proceed and keep in line,
While I, hands in my pockets, hesitant,
Am in two minds.

III.

Old neighbours, though shipwreck’s my decision,
People my brain –
Like breakwaters against the sun,
Command in silhouette
My island circumstance – my cells retain,
Perpetuate
Their crumpled deportment through bad weather,
And I feel them
Put on their raincoats for ever
And walk out in the sea.
I am, though each one waves a phantom limb,
The amputee,
For these are my sailors, these my drowned –
In their heart of hearts,
In their city, I ran aground.
Along my arteries
Sluice those homewaters petroleum hurts.
Dry dock, gantries,
Dykes of apparatus, educate my bones
To track the buoys
Up sea lanes love emblazons
To streets where shall conclude
My journey back from flux to poise, from poise
To attitude.
Here, at the edge of my experience,
Another tide
Along the broken shore extends
A lifetime’s wrack and ruin –
No flotsam I may beachcomb now can hide
That water-line.

IV.

Beyond the lobster pots, where plankton spreads,
Porpoises turn.
Seals slip over the cockle beds.
Undertow dishevels
Seaweed in the shallows – and I discern
My sea levels.
To right and left of me there intervene
The tumbled burns –
And these, on turf and boulder weaned,
Confuse my calendar –
Their tilt is suicidal, their great return
Curricular.
No matter what repose holds shore and sky
In harmony,
From this place in the long run I,
Though here I might have been
Content with rivers where they meet the sea,
Remove upstream,
Where the salmon, risking fastest waters –
Waterfall and rock
And the effervescent otters –
On bridal pools insist
As with fin and generation they unlock
The mountain’s fist.

V.

Now, buttoned up, with water in my shoes,
Clouds around me,
I can, through mist that misconstrues,
Read like a palimpsest
My past – those landmarks and that scenery
I dare resist.
Into my mind’s unsympathetic through
They fade away –
And, to alter my perspective,
I feel in the sharp cold
Of my vantage point too high above the bay,
The sea grow old.
Granting the trawlers far below their stance,
Their anchorage,
I fight all the way for balance –
In the mountain’s shadow
Losing foothold, covet the privilege
Of vertigo.

 
 
Thank you so much for stopping by. If you like what I do, and if you feel inclined to support my work, here’s a link to my Venmo account. And I’ve launched a Substack, Sheila Variations 2.0, if you’d like to subscribe.

Posted in Books, On This Day, writers | Tagged , , , , | 4 Comments

Review: Folktales (2025)

Folktales is the latest documentary from powerhouse pair Heidi Ewing and Rachel Grady, whose 2006 documentary Jesus Camp is one of the best docs of the 2000s. (You wonder, while watching, “How on earth did they get this community to trust them?” It’s like Louis Theroux’s doc on hanging out with a group of isolated white nationalists. He actually is invited in – to a degree.) Jesus Camp wasn’t a fluke. They come out with a doc every three or four years – it takes time to embed yourself in insular communities – like New York’s Hasidic community, for example, like they did in One of Us. Folktales is their latest, following three 19-year-old kids attending one of Scandinavia’s “folk schools”, this one located 200 miles above the Arctic Circle. The students learn dog sledding, wilderness survival, hunting, and other traditional “activities”. I reviewed Folktales for Ebert.

Posted in Movies | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

“If I could say it in words there would be no reason to paint.” — Edward Hopper

It’s his birthday today.

I wrote about Edward Hopper quite a bit in my Present Tense column at Film Comment, detailing the Hopper-y vibe of Tom Noonan’s great film about urban loneliness, What Happened Was… In fact, I have a sneaking suspicion that Karen Sillas’ deep-rose-colored dress might be inspired by this painting. Her apartment is all windows, too, in the movie.

I love the loneliness in Edward Hopper’s work. The insomnia. The urban midnights. The voyeurism. The emptiness. If you’re heartbroken, Hopper is your kindred spirit. I find his paintings very sad, sadness you can wallow in. Many (most?) people do what they can to avoid loneliness. I have never been able to pull it off. All the lonely people, where do they all come from?

Living in a major metropolitan area, you are constantly up against other people’s lives. People have private moments in public. You can peek into people’s windows as you walk by. You give each other privacy as best you can. People can weep on the subway, and nobody freaks out. Everyone clams up, goes into their own private head-space, and the weeping person may as well be in her own room for all the attention she gets. Believe me: having been that weeping person, there’s a comfort in anonymity. There is nothing quite like the freedom to be left alone.

At the same time, there is the sense of being privy to other people’s secrets. There are just so many damn windows. How do other people live? How are they managing?

Sometimes, if you’re alone, and feeling your alone-ness acutely … seeing glimpses of other people living their lives, through windows, connects you to something human. Reminds you you are a human being, you are real. It doesn’t eradicate loneliness. The kind of loneliness I’m talking about can’t be eradicated. I wonder if there are some people who have never felt loneliness like that. Loneliness that literally wakes you up at nights. Like Laing writes in her great book The Lonely City, where Edward Hopper is featured prominently, loneliness like that is like being hungry.

I found a really wonderful article about Edward Hopper’s paintings of movie theatres.

Hopper evokes a world gone by, and yet not all that unlike our own. People are people, no matter the era.

I have been all of these women.

Even when Hopper moves out into the country, the loneliness follows him. Or maybe this is just me projecting. That’s the power of his work. There’s a blankness there somewhere, a nothing-ness, giving great permission to the viewer to place herself into the painting, to see her own life there. Or not. I grew up in a beach town. My first kiss was on a foggy beach. The ocean is the background to most of my childhood memories. So I look at these two, and yes, I wonder what they might be talking about, but I also wonder if they aren’t talking at all, if they are just listening to the sound of the lonely surf breaking on the beach below?

“Maybe I am slightly inhuman … All I ever wanted to do was to paint sunlight on the side of a house.” — Edward Hopper

Terrence Malick knew his Hopper, that’s for sure.

So does Tommy Lee Jones.

Only Edward Hopper could turn a gas station into an image piercingly sweet and sad. Pungent and poetic. I don’t feel like analyzing why. These are feelings that hurt, not particularly pleasant, but they’re familiar. I’ve had them since I was very very young, before I understood anything about love and loss. It’s a human-inheritance kind of thing.

As I observed in the article linked at the top: one thing to note about his most famous painting: The diner has no door. No way in, no way out.

Loneliness is not pleasant. People go to mad extremes to avoid being lonely; it’s that excruciating an experience. Loneliness has ruined long stretches of my life. I look back and wish to spare myself. But at least I had some company. Edward Hopper had already been there.

Last year, Allison and I went to the stunning Edward Hopper exhibit at the Whitney. I had been hearing about it for months and watching enviously as friends attended (via their Instagram feeds). Allison and I finally went. And we lost ourselves to the world. What an AMAZING exhibit. Edward Hopper’s New York. It was not just the usual suspects, although I got to see those too. It dug into his early advertising work, lots of that on display – so different! – his sketches – the sketches of “Nighthawks” – and also his relationship with movies/theatres. We wandered around, sometimes together, sometimes alone. There were so many people there, which – after the last couple of years we had – did my heart good. People clustering before famous paintings. Edward Hopper’s paintings are stories. You can “read into” them. I ended up talking with two other women about one of the paintings. We talked about what we saw. We read into the behavior. It was so awesome.

Allison and I both saw some Hopper-in-real-life visuals DURING our time there. We weren’t together when we saw these things, but we both noticed and both took pictures, of the exact same thing. We are kindred spirits. See if you can spot them.

I was so excited I got to see that one. ^^

I got full-body goosebumps when I saw that one in person. ^^

 
 
Thank you so much for stopping by. If you like what I do, and if you feel inclined to support my work, here’s a link to my Venmo account. And I’ve launched a Substack, Sheila Variations 2.0, if you’d like to subscribe.

Posted in Art/Photography, On This Day | Tagged , , , | 36 Comments

Happy Birthday, Edward Herrmann

primary_Ed_H2

With a career as long and diverse as Edward Herrmann’s there is much to discuss. When he died, I wrote a piece for Ebert, focusing on just one moment in Warren Beatty’s Reds, a moment that (in its small way) helps make the whole thing possible.

That’s the job of a character actor.

Just one line: Edward Herrmann, 1943-2014

 
 
Thank you so much for stopping by. If you like what I do, and if you feel inclined to support my work, here’s a link to my Venmo account. And I’ve launched a Substack, Sheila Variations 2.0, if you’d like to subscribe.

Posted in Actors, Movies, On This Day | Tagged , | 2 Comments

“The rhythm is jazz.” — Hart Crane

“What I want to get is … an ‘interior’ form, a form that is so thorough and intense as to dye the words themselves with a pecularity of meaning, slightly different maybe from the ordinary definition of them separate from the poem.” — Hart Crane

It’s his birthday today.

There are good poets. There are major poets. And then there are the ones who disturb the waters, who disrupt, who create new space in their chaotic wake. Walt Whitman. T.S. Eliot. Yeats. And Hart Crane. His life was so short and yet his influence seems to just grow in intensity as the years pass. He was the inspiring force for a whole new generation of writers, each of whom struggled to get out from under his shadow (as Crane struggled to get out of Eliot’s shadow). Tennessee Williams was honest about his feeling of debt to Crane. He used Crane quotations as epigraphs in many of his plays, and dedicated many of his plays to Crane. He kept a picture of Hart Crane over his writing desk for decades. They did not know one another.

Continue reading

Posted in Books, On This Day, writers | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 6 Comments