Jump to content

The Great Lady Gives An Interview -- Modern Times


Brock
 Share

Recommended Posts

Journalists Tom Johnson and David Fantle recount their experiences with Lucy, Gary and Howard McClay at Roxbury while interviewing Our Gal around the time of Lucy Moves To NBC. Interesting recollection and the not-too-shabby interview is included here:

 

http://www.moderntimesmagazine.com/page19/160314-Arts-Lucille-Ball-Reel-Real/160314-Arts-Lucille-Ball-Reel-Real.php

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Interesting how they focused on her childhood and she seemed to get snippy. Well Lucy your comings and going from NYC are sort of vague and contradictory. It’s hard to pinpoint a timeline of them after the whole drama school debacle. And this isn’t the first time I’ve seen her get this way in an interview when her NYC days are mentioned.

 

I’m assuming the Dean Martin special she refers to is the Lucy Show episode as she has called that her favorite episode of all her shows.

 

Odd that she goes into the whole story about the filming of The Exorcist to explain Mame, but whatever. I don’t think it was lack of publicity Lucy that it didn’t do better.

 

The commentary they offer in this article makes me laugh. Gary looming in the background. I guess if he is there she can’t say anything bad about him. Wonder why she was all pissed about the childhood question. It didn’t seem that bad and she has done way more personal interviews. Not a good lead off question though, it puts her on the defensive right away. Maybe that is what pissed her off. “Oh this is an ambush interview?”

 

“Offstage she could well have been the funniest person in the room, but the Lucy we interviewed that September day came across as a tough-as-nails, pensive businesswoman who didn’t sugarcoat anything.”

 

Um, what you got was Lucy, she wasn’t the image you thought guys.

 

I thought all her poodles were boys? Could be wrong.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't know why it's entitled "Having LESS than a Ball with Lucy". She seemed cordial enough. I don't know she got, in their opinion, "snippy" about her jamestown childhood.

I think it's possible there's a skeleton in her childhood closet. As much as she waxed nostalgic about her New England upbringing, she did leave home at 15

to go to New York. That would have been 1926. Which I assume means she did NOT graduate from high school? There's never been a mention, I read anyway, that

she had family to go to in New York City.

When I had my brief conversation with Betty Hannah Hoffman (ghost writer of "Love Lucy"), Lucy got very nervous when Betty went back to

Jamestown to do a little research.

The years between 1926 and 1933 when she made the trek to Hollywood are rather vague, including the rheumatoid arthritis story,

which has always sounded fishy to me, mainly because I SWEAR I read in some publication that she was laid up after being hit by a car.

The hypothesis that this was to cover up an unwanted pregnancy has never been proven to my knowledge, but it's not totally far-fetched.

If she did have a wild past, what possible difference should it make? (Except maybe her middle-aged Beverly Hills matron conservative views on the 60s and 70s morality

might be viewed as a bit hypocritical.)

And that topless photo of her published in one bio looks nothing like her...But again, so what if she had?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Which I assume means she did NOT graduate from high school? There's never been a mention, I read anyway, that

she had family to go to in New York City.

 

Lucy did briefly return to high school after her try at drama school, but she never graduated. Lucy said when she was in New York she stayed with friends of the family and they lived on Dyckman Street, which is the equivalent of 200th Street in Manhattan. I've never heard Lucy elaborate on who these family friends were, but her story remained consistent through the years.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

which has always sounded fishy to me, mainly because I SWEAR I read in some publication that she was laid up after being hit by a car.

 

And that topless photo of her published in one bio looks nothing like her...But again, so what if she had?

The car accident story was the given story through the mid 1950s. It was even mentioned on the Ed Sullivan Show in 54' right to her face.

 

Ball of Fire also had a topless pic in that looked nothing like the girl in the picture in Lucille by Brady. Why are authors so he'll bent on making that a thing?

 

I wish I had the balls one year in Jamestown to ask Brady about that topless pic during the author Q and A. I debated it for a long time but chickened out.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Since I'm FROM here, gonna stick my nose in (shouldn't; but, here goes):

 

Lucille WAS NOT running for President; she is entirely entitled to her PRIVACY; AND, in my humble opinion, whatever she wanted to hide; she is GONE; leave it the F alone; if she chooses to keep things a secret, she AND EVERYONE is entitled to her/his secrets; those who dig for it are, in my opinion, not worthy of digging, unless, of course, they are dug, as well. 

 

This woman, more than ANY I can think of, made it SO WELL, AFTER MUCH HEARTBREAK; not to even TOUCH on the HARD WORK, to get there, GOT THERE; and what she doesn't want her family; fans, any, and ALL others, hurt by, should be honored.

 

SORRY; BUT, THAT'S JUST THE WAY IT SHOULD BE!!!!  period....

 

We are fans, here....I HOPE

 

JK :fabrary:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Since I'm FROM here, gonna stick my nose in (shouldn't; but, here goes):

 

Lucille WAS NOT running for President; she is entirely entitled to her PRIVACY; AND, in my humble opinion, whatever she wanted to hide; she is GONE; leave it the F alone; if she chooses to keep things a secret, she AND EVERYONE is entitled to her/his secrets; those who dig for it are, in my opinion, not worthy of digging, unless, of course, they are dug, as well. 

 

This woman, more than ANY I can think of, made it SO WELL, AFTER MUCH HEARTBREAK; not to even TOUCH on the HARD WORK, to get there, GOT THERE; and what she doesn't want her family; fans, any, and ALL others, hurt by, should be honored.

 

SORRY; BUT, THAT'S JUST THE WAY IT SHOULD BE!!!!  period....

 

We are fans, here....I HOPE

 

JK :fabrary:

I agree some things are personal but today everyone wants to know everything about every public fogure. I wouldn't call Lucy a hypocrite even if something happened as a youth it bothered her and didn't reflect her values. Lucy unlike some of her generation was liberal in her morals she just didn't like all the pornography and violence being called entertainment starting in late 60s. Really I agree with her there.

Link to comment
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...
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...