Jump to content
Mister Hepburn

New Lucy Books

Recommended Posts

Review of the Queen of Tuesday book. Oh boy, will I be yelling back at this book. 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/entertainment/books/in-the-queen-of-tuesday-darin-strauss-dreams-up-an-affair-between-lucille-ball-and-his-grandfather/2020/08/10/347f8e04-db1f-11ea-b205-ff838e15a9a6_story.html

Also I came across another book using Lucy's life for fiction called Lucy's Last Honeymoon in Havana.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I’m going to get it from the library because I don’t want to spend money on this book. I might be driven too crazy by the book to get through the whole thing. I know it’s “fictitious” or whatever, but I’m really tired of the narrative that Lucy was a washed up nobody before I Love Lucy began. Lucy was thinking about crawling back to Jamestown in 1949 because she’s an aging actress going nowhere? Ugh. 🙄

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, HarryCarter said:

I’m going to get it from the library because I don’t want to spend money on this book. I might be driven too crazy by the book to get through the whole thing. I know it’s “fictitious” or whatever, but I’m really tired of the narrative that Lucy was a washed up nobody before I Love Lucy began. Lucy was thinking about crawling back to Jamestown in 1949 because she’s an aging actress going nowhere? Ugh. 🙄

Same thoughts and I have it on hold at my library too. No way am I paying for this. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It sounds like an interesting concept, to be sure, and I love the title, but historical fiction of this kind makes it easy for misinformation to spread. There are certainly people who will unfortunately take this as gospel.

I hope his next book isn't a dramatic retelling of the years she was confined to bed due to RA. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Mot Morenzi said:

It sounds like an interesting concept, to be sure, and I love the title, but historical fiction of this kind makes it easy for misinformation to spread. There are certainly people who will unfortunately take this as gospel.

I hope his next book isn't a dramatic retelling of the years she was confined to bed due to RA. 

Well, why not? We could do that, too ...and some of us already have our "theories" about that period of her life anyway! :HALKING:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, JoeySoCal said:

Well, why not? We could do that, too ...and some of us already have our "theories" about that period of her life anyway! :HALKING:

Ah. Now that's the book I should write. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, HarryCarter said:

Strauss has written an article for Vanity Fair about the cheating of Lucy's "big-boned spouse." 😐

https://www.vanityfair.com/hollywood/2020/08/the-legendary-marriage-of-lucille-ball-and-desi-arnaz

Of all the ways I would think to describe Mr. Arnaz, "big boned" is not one of them!  :HALKING:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/13/2020 at 9:36 AM, JoeySoCal said:

Well, why not? We could do that, too ...and some of us already have our "theories" about that period of her life anyway! :HALKING:

I meant I hoped he wouldn’t write a book proclaiming the RA theory as factually correct. Chronicling other explanations for that time in her life would be another matter. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Neil said:

Queen of Tuesday "Winner of the National Book Critics Circle Award"

Correction: the smaller print above this reads "A New Novel From the ..."

Reminds me of the time I bought a 99 cent My Fair Lady album that said in big print LOLA FISHER AND  (next legible line) THE ORIGINAL BROADWAY CAST, without noting the VERY small print line in between "members of".

Lola is better known to us as "Franchise Fiasco"'s Bunny Westcott.  You should have seen the look on her face when a certain teenager told her he had her album! (wish I still did).  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/20/2020 at 9:21 PM, Neil said:

Correction: the smaller print above this reads "A New Novel From the ..."

Reminds me of the time I bought a 99 cent My Fair Lady album that said in big print LOLA FISHER AND  (next legible line) THE ORIGINAL BROADWAY CAST, without noting the VERY small print line in between "members of".

Lola is better known to us as "Franchise Fiasco"'s Bunny Westcott.  You should have seen the look on her face when a certain teenager told her he had her album! (wish I still did).  

You have such fun stories. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My review for The Queen of Tuesday.

In this review I'm not going to review the storyline of the book, but rather the content. 

The author in his afterword says that he read many of the well known biographies on Lucille Ball to get an idea of who she was, but also admits to changing some facts and overall the Lucille portrayed in this book is his version. It certainly is because nowhere did I feel I was reading about the woman I've come to love for over 20 years.
 
Lucille in this book is by 1950 a washed up actress who has not achieved fame or fortune in movies, her radio show has just been cancelled and she is now venturing into TV as one last shot to have a career. Lucy actually was doing very well in films by this point and making good money. She took a risk going into TV so her and Desi could be together more. The vaudeville act is a key plot point in the overall story of the affair with a man in NYC named Isidore. The act and subsequent I Love Lucy pilot are portrayed as failures. They weren't. The pilot sold the show and vaudeville sold them as a couple to the American people. Later in the 50s it has Lucille driving Desi out of the studio so she can take control, thus gaining back some of her self worth. In reality Lucy never had these ambitions and never wanted to run the studio. 
 
Lucy's marriage is a key point to the story and why she decides to have an affair. Even in the opening to the book in 1950 Desi's wandering eye and openness to cheat is portrayed. It continues to be a huge part of the rest of the book, and Desi makes no apologies for it, even throwing it back to Lucy why he does it. It makes Lucy despise Desi and do so for the next 10 years. It was rough in the late 50s but what this book never camptures about their marriage is how in love they were. They fought as hard as they made up.
 
Desi's portrayal really pisses me off. Once the show gets big, he becomes an egotistical, demanding person because he is the top dog and wants everyone to cater to his ways. Many seem to fear him and he doesn't care (or even know half their names) because every show must be better than the last. In reality Desi was a wonderful boss, he knew all the employee's names( Lucy too), let the creative team do their work without interference, and when he thought something could be better he used his wonderful charm. The HUAC press conference at the ranch is used and again it's Desi being a jerk to Lucy, but sweet in front of the cameras. If you've ever read anything about that week, Desi was 100% on her side and fought for her.
 
Then we have the problem of fact changing. The first being that the author knows Lucy was on Monday night but for some reason changes it to Tuesday. There is a long passage that uses Lucille's internal monologue about shooting the first episode, but the episode used is the first aired (not shot). Movie titles are thrown out to illustrate a point of Lucy being forgettable in films but uses films where she has some background bit part alongside a film like Lured where she was wonderful. I wonder if the author even watched any of her pre 1950 films. The author did change the date of Desi Jr's birth to fit the story and I'll say it was the first time I wanted to throw the book across the room for that reason. 
 
The overall story is a good one and there is a beautiful chapter with Lucille and Isidore that I enjoyed. What kills the story though is the author took real people, and their real life and career, changed so much about them and their world to fit the narrative. It would have been a much better book if he just made up a fictional husband and wife from the 1950s who had a #1 TV show, but a failing marriage behind the scenes. The reader would know you are talking about Lucy and Desi. What historical fiction in this case does is muddy the waters about Lucille Ball. I sincerely hope a reader doesn't pick up this book because they like I Love Lucy and think this is who Lucy and Desi really were and the events surrounding them happened the way portrayed. 
 
Two last thoughts. I was surprised Gary was mentioned. And Nanette Fabray??? 
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Luvsbway said:

My review for The Queen of Tuesday.

In this review I'm not going to review the storyline of the book, but rather the content. 

The author in his afterword says that he read many of the well known biographies on Lucille Ball to get an idea of who she was, but also admits to changing some facts and overall the Lucille portrayed in this book is his version. It certainly is because nowhere did I feel I was reading about the woman I've come to love for over 20 years.
 
Lucille in this book is by 1950 a washed up actress who has not achieved fame or fortune in movies, her radio show has just been cancelled and she is now venturing into TV as one last shot to have a career. Lucy actually was doing very well in films by this point and making good money. She took a risk going into TV so her and Desi could be together more. The vaudeville act is a key plot point in the overall story of the affair with a man in NYC named Isidore. The act and subsequent I Love Lucy pilot are portrayed as failures. They weren't. The pilot sold the show and vaudeville sold them as a couple to the American people. Later in the 50s it has Lucille driving Desi out of the studio so she can take control, thus gaining back some of her self worth. In reality Lucy never had these ambitions and never wanted to run the studio. 
 
Lucy's marriage is a key point to the story and why she decides to have an affair. Even in the opening to the book in 1950 Desi's wandering eye and openness to cheat is portrayed. It continues to be a huge part of the rest of the book, and Desi makes no apologies for it, even throwing it back to Lucy why he does it. It makes Lucy despise Desi and do so for the next 10 years. It was rough in the late 50s but what this book never camptures about their marriage is how in love they were. They fought as hard as they made up.
 
Desi's portrayal really pisses me off. Once the show gets big, he becomes an egotistical, demanding person because he is the top dog and wants everyone to cater to his ways. Many seem to fear him and he doesn't care (or even know half their names) because every show must be better than the last. In reality Desi was a wonderful boss, he knew all the employee's names( Lucy too), let the creative team do their work without interference, and when he thought something could be better he used his wonderful charm. The HUAC press conference at the ranch is used and again it's Desi being a jerk to Lucy, but sweet in front of the cameras. If you've ever read anything about that week, Desi was 100% on her side and fought for her.
 
Then we have the problem of fact changing. The first being that the author knows Lucy was on Monday night but for some reason changes it to Tuesday. There is a long passage that uses Lucille's internal monologue about shooting the first episode, but the episode used is the first aired (not shot). Movie titles are thrown out to illustrate a point of Lucy being forgettable in films but uses films where she has some background bit part alongside a film like Lured where she was wonderful. I wonder if the author even watched any of her pre 1950 films. The author did change the date of Desi Jr's birth to fit the story and I'll say it was the first time I wanted to throw the book across the room for that reason. 
 
The overall story is a good one and there is a beautiful chapter with Lucille and Isidore that I enjoyed. What kills the story though is the author took real people, and their real life and career, changed so much about them and their world to fit the narrative. It would have been a much better book if he just made up a fictional husband and wife from the 1950s who had a #1 TV show, but a failing marriage behind the scenes. The reader would know you are talking about Lucy and Desi. What historical fiction in this case does is muddy the waters about Lucille Ball. I sincerely hope a reader doesn't pick up this book because they like I Love Lucy and think this is who Lucy and Desi really were and the events surrounding them happened the way portrayed. 
 
Two last thoughts. I was surprised Gary was mentioned. And Nanette Fabray??? 

Thanks for this. Your last paragraph sounds completely on the nose. Why not come up with your own characters instead of twisting and distorting the lives of real people to fit a fictional narrative? 
 

I think I’ll give this one a pass...or else wait for Lindsay Lohan to do the Lifetime Original Movie version.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Mot Morenzi said:

 

I think I’ll give this one a pass...or else wait for Lindsay Lohan to do the Lifetime Original Movie version.

Ha! Yep Lindsey's walk through of the part would be a better version then the one in the book

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...