Tuesday, October 14, 2014

Progress or Change: Kim Novak vs. Kim Kardashian

Last week, I wrote about Vertigo. It is classic Hitchcock because it is suspense and it has the quintessential American pair. Hitchcock considered America in the form of a couple to be a tall handsome man with a blonde younger woman. Most of his movie pairings are that with Tippi Hedren, Kim Novak, Janet Leigh and Grace Kelly filling the fair haired female role. Novak was the blondie for Vertigo, and seemed destined for stardom. Did not happen. A little hiccup happened.  It reveals a little bit about old America vs. new America. Novak fell in love with Sammy Davis Junior, and her career petered out. The studios would not handle an interracial relationship for its stars in the 1950s; no matter the participants nor the talent.

Kim Novak performs very well in Vertigo. She has to sell you at first that she is a rich, classy but slightly crazy lady. Her switch up is then selling you on her just being a regular girl around town, not wanting to play the part of the classy, elegant dame. She has to fight becoming Madeleine for Scottie. She is not just a pretty face or romantic lead in this one because she is in on the con. Novak's career never took off, and 1950s attitudes is why. Vanity Fair ran a long, great article on the Novak-Davis romance. It is pretty stunning to read today, but maybe not if you watched a little known cheesy docudrama called "Hollywood Babylon". Hosted by Tony Curtis, Babylon would tell the darker tales behind old Hollywood legends. Each show ended with "A Moment with Tony", which he'd start with "have ya gotta minute" and would be related to the subject. The show was terrible but incredibly entertaining, and on VH1 or E! in the early '90s. They did an episode on Novak-Davis. Mob gave him a roughing up session. The Vanity Fair article goes into greater detail as Davis was saved by his Rat Pack friends and forced to marry a black woman quickly. It was not so much about Davis as it was Novak who was going to be Columbia's fresh faced female to push. She would be damaged goods with al the implications of an affair with Davis. America wouldn't go for it no matter how powerful the hype machine.

The progressives who hold the megaphone tell awful lies about the past, but as Steve Sailer is quick to mention, it was "I Love Lucy" not "Louis loves Marilyn". Desi, white with an accent, could be paired with Lucy, but no way was America going to watch Louis Armstrong and Marilyn Monroe play house. Odd coincidence, Lucille Ball had an episode on "Hollywood Babylon" about how she walked all over Desi because she was the star, and he was just the husband. She was the first woman with a production studio. Her studio, not Desi's. Some of the past we are fed is fraudulent, but some taboos did exist. Novak's private life made her career a victim of one. She also crossed an incredibly powerful media mogul.

It is also quite the contrast to today. Look at the Kardashians. How do we know them? Not from papa's legal work on the OJ Trial. If that were the case, you would have known about the girls before a sex tape leaked out of daughter Kim having sex with a black guy. Nothing left to the imagination. Not Sammy Davis Jr. level A Lister, but a D List pseudo-celeb himself. This has launched the Kardashian family into pop culture and paparazzi crack fame, earning them millions and creating terrible role models. In the late '50s, a powerful studio like Columbia could not work with Novak because of a private relationship with a well respected black star. In the 2000s, Kim Kardashian has earned her family millions ($40 million for 3 years of their tv show alone) all because her mom leaked a video of Kim in flagrante delicto with some black nobody. What would be implied in Noak's era was revealed for a t see with Kardashian. Progress? Change? Decline.


PA said...

Certain things are an immutable part of human nature. In the 1950s, people were honest about that particular taboo. Today, nothing has changed, and any tolerance of such interracial pairings is not an indication of a change in our moral judgments; it is a testament to our demoralization.

and forced to marry a black woman quickly

This is where the Christian and the humanist in me sees the horrific anti-human nature of liberalism. I do not like to see human beings degraded even if I don't give a bit a shit abut them. Fuck that jiggy clappy monkey-faced nigger Davis Jr. for fancying himself too good for a woman of his own kind. I do not know what his dusky bride looked like, but it may be safe to say he had his pick of nice looking black women.

Son of Brock Landers said...

PA - Davis married and divorced a black woman quickly and then later was married to a Swede. He divorced her and married a younger black woman I believe.

"Testament to our demoralization" - great phrase.

PA said...

Here is a short clip on interracial marriage from Muhammad Ali.


Honest question about the Kardashians: is it the forty-something in me that sees ZERO appeal in those trashy off-white, cottage-cheese-assed (plus photoshop) mudsharks, or does every White person across all age and class ranges see them as a joke more than anything else?

Son of Brock Landers said...

Ive seen that Ali clip!

Everyone I know dislikes them but then again, my exposure to underclass females is minimal. They have a huge following with the crass and trashy audience. The oldest daughter is pretty cute and has a nice body. The young one they are pushing now who is thin is attractive.

eah said...

Not sure why you would automatically trust an article in Vanity Fair. At the outset I see this sentence:

But, in 1957, she fell in love with Sammy Davis Jr., who, with his immense popularity, was breaking the race barrier of a firmly segregated entertainment industry.

My highlighting. Is that actually so? Was the "entertainment industry" really "firmly segregated"?

Here is a link to the Wikipedia page about Sammy Davis Jr. It contains this bit:

As an African-American, Davis was the victim of racism throughout his life and was a large financial supporter of the Civil Rights movement.

About that one could say this: despite being a "victim of racism throughout his life", he was a fabulously successful entertainer who had relationships with white women and could afford to be a "a large financial supporter of the Civil Rights movement".

Putting all of that together, it does not entirely compute.

bb753 said...

Up until 10 years ago, I can't imagine anybody becoming anything but infamous for a leaked sex tape! Even a white partner in crime wouldn't hav e changed a thing. Things were bad enough 20 years ago but surely disgrace would have been the answer to the tape, not fame and money. When did the world go mad?

Toddy Cat said...

Of course, Ms. Novak wasn't exactly ruined. She became very wealthy, and was appearing in movies well into her '50's. We all should face such viscious discrimination.

nikcrit said...

Certain things are an immutable part of human nature. In the 1950s, people were honest about that particular taboo.


Of course, Joe Pesci is a national treasure; (for some reason, his onscreen look, voice and disposition in Casino and Goodfellas is how i imagine would be a IRL encounter with peterike. lol!)

Honest question about the Kardashians: is it the forty-something in me that sees ZERO appeal in those trashy off-white, cottage-cheese-assed (plus photoshop) mudsharks, or does every White person across all age and class ranges see them as a joke more than anything else?

It's the 40-something in you; I now work beside the demo for Kardashian product; the racial frisson is neither here nor there for them, as a class and as a generational issue. I've stated as much a million times here, even noting how this was a surprise to myself, given my cultural milieu and history up to the point i took on my current gig..
But even in my last vocational culture, entertainment-media, which you could call 'self-actualized Swipples," meaning they had the income and cultural means to act-out their most conceited convictions, I saw few of the historic race safeguards that PA desperately insists maintain; in fact, among this more culturally decisive set, i saw rapidly diminishing taboos against same-sex issues and non-existent taboos among interracial relationships, because they'd already discarded them. To the extent they were monocultural in personal relationships, that too was a byprodcut of their historic networks and contacts, which was something else they deplored and rebelled against.

I say mere technology and other utilitarian forms of 'progress,' by and large a western-white creation, guarantee the dissipation of current racial and ethnic and, for good or bad, gender distinctions; what Wilhelm Reich forecasted 50 years ago is true, i fear: the most currently transgressive forms of culture and media (i.e. porn, taboo politics, etc) become standard mainstream practice in a generation or two.

But: from there, its up to the current culture to re-define such basic cultural form. The mixing of types may be inevitable, but the forming of new myths and ethos to abide by or abdicate goes on and on and on.
Re. Davis' final marriage; a black woman named 'Alverna' i believe; she was wholesome, average looking and probably his most compatible mate in terms of communication and temperament, going by casual oversight and its length.

nikcrit said...

Urrghh! Those uppity, 'bright-skinneded' mulattos can be such an embarassment! lollz!


nikcrit said...

"Testament to our demoralization" - great phrase.

Ok, it's feasible that the preponderance of interracial relationships is a 'testament to our demoralization' ----- yet i would say it's moreso, in this instance, a 'testament' to the racial wishes and nightmares of these two particular white Gen X'ers.

I mean, wouldn't it more logically follow that said preponderance is the 'testament' of the millenials indifference to race mixing? Hmmm?

(This is the point where someone inevitably chimes in with a miscegenation-conspiracy theory instigated by those inimitable 'You-Know-Whos.')

I maintain that on this issue the aggregate 'alt-right' or whatever defining subset you choose, is still too hysterical to give rational assessment.

Son of Brock Landers said...

It's a great phrase nikcrit.

I have no problem with IR marriage. You love who you love but so much of that is revenge on one's parents. Prob pushes into the divorce rates where once the jolt to mum and dad is gone it's time to move on, except BW-WM marriages.

PA said...

Nikcrit, you crow with glee as though White Genocide is a settled affair with nary but two gen-x'ers grumbling about it. But that's a reflection of your solipsism.

First, on the supposed millennial indifference to mixing. I was once twenty-somethimg and I was quite anti-racist then compared to how I am today. A young person without children does not care much about certain things. He begins to care when he viscerally understands that certain things affect the world his children will live in. He becomes invested in their future, like a bear vigilant over the pups. That's the difference between a twenty-something and a forty-somethimg. Your millennial will also turn forty.

Two, I know White millennials too. They do not polemicize on race (not in front of me anyway) but the men, like all humans, gravitate to same-race things. The women too; most will lower their alpha/beta standards for a white boyfriend than go black. It's simple nature.

Three, absent White assistance, blacks would all revert to Ferguson rioters. The Talented Tenth types (or college atjletes) who can score a white girlfriend would be swept away by this reversion to Haiti.

Four, try to step out of you solipsism for a moment. Imagine yourself a white twenty-somethimg. How would you feel about a girl who was into black guys? How about having your sister sneak around with a black guy? How about, as a father of a young white woman, seeing a grinning African face on your daughter? We have those feelings Nikcrit, and they have not gone away.

Five: liberty means to assert your will on your public space. (Peace means that your will is compatible with others who share that space). A free White man will therefore assert the feelings I described with regards to what our genetic imperative recognizes as genetic cuckoldry. The fact that whites collectively do not forcefully assert their objection to miscegenation is a testament to their demorization.

nikcrit said...

Though you somewhat qualified it in subsequent paragraphs, i somewhat feel insulted by your implying that i would revel in white genocide; this, from one who feels genetically and culturally connected to whites.

Your reply more reflects your racial absolutism, which I am not moralizing about your disposition but reminding you that it's not universal. I mean, I can't imagine and reflexively genuflect on a 'culture' in my mind that is 'black,' 'white' and 'both'; i.e., i don't automatically equate interracial marriage and progeny with 'white genocide'

Many whites do not as well; yet i'm not that surprised that an intelligent native of an all-white country does.

PA said...

On Point 1 above, I'll also add that a young person does not understand everything he sees and tends to defer to established authority figures. Even inwardly, and he lacks the first-causes understanding behind the things he sees. Since the established authority figures at the moment are liberals, he will go along to get along.

eah said...

Three, absent White assistance, blacks would all revert to Ferguson rioters.

(Or worse -- eg see Liberia, where Whites are not allowed to be citizens -- cue worldwide outrage and protests! -- just kidding about that last part).

This is true, and is one of the great unspoken -- and unspeakable -- truths of modern America: without government employment, which is often, due to 'diversity' and 'affirmative action' goals/quotas, directly discriminatory against Whites (who still finance most of it), there would probably be no black middle class to speak of. Also 'affirmative action' in private industry (in order to avoid scrutiny and lawsuits, every company over a certain size needs to be concerned about the 'diversity' of its workforce and management) probably plays a role here, but a much smaller one. In some agencies of the federal government, Blacks are hundreds of percentage points over-represented -- when is the last time you saw a news report about that?

Random Black Guy said...

Whoa, Kim Novak? I've watched Vertigo about a dozen times and never would have guessed.

nikcrit said...

re. my 4:50 comment: EDIT: "I can imagine" should've been the phrase in place of "I CAN'T imagine," etc. (if you didn't automatically pick up and assume as much.)

PA said...

yet i'm not that surprised that an intelligent native of an all-white country does

You're compartmentalizing my point by ascribing some personal background circumstances as to why I think a certain way. It's better if you take my argument at its merits. For one, the circumstances of my younger years are not as clear cut as I've disclosed in the past.

More importantly, my observation is that people from all-White countries (or US regions) tend to be more open to other races, because (1) another race is not on their radar as an existential peril, and (2) they have no idea how tribal and ethnocentric (and on the low end, downright animalistic) non-whites can be. In other words, whites in Mississippi are more racisss than whites in Vermont.

An interesting thing I've picked up from older Poles is a kind of sympathetic but patronizing attitude toward blacks. Sort of the default European attitude toward distant dark skinned people whom they've never met. But younger Poles who have worked in London and have been around non-Whites, judging by comments under articles, would make the Grand Kleagle blush.

Anecdote... before I was married I dated and/or socialized with a number of Eastern European girls who were the US as au-pairs. A few who were status-conscious strivers would embrace liberalism in all of its totality, to include aggressively PC views race, homosexual politics, and so on. It was pure posturing toward attitudes they understood as in line with those in power. And yet, one such girl in particular, who was quite obnoxiously liberal on race (blacks, immigration), once released a wonderful stream of vigorous venom on the subject of Gypsies, the one racial minority that she DID have dealings with in her native country.

nikcrit said...

Honest question about the Kardashians: is it the forty-something in me that sees ZERO appeal in those trashy off-white, cottage-cheese-assed (plus photoshop) mudsharks, or does every White person across all age and class ranges see them as a joke more than anything else?

Well, your blog host and fellow white crusader doesn't seem to think Kim K's unattractive, going by a recent post he did awhile back; in fact, he put some outright afro-hottentots on his hottie list..... it's sorta ironic that you call me solopsistic when often it's you who refuses to acknowledge the overwhelming pop aggregates choices, preferences and obessions, evidenced by every market indicator imaginable.
You could simply own your opinions but you seem to want any controversial ones reinforced by fellow whites------ even if evident truth and your own lying eyes get in the way!

nikcrit said...

"You're compartmentalizing my point"

I'm mindful of that tendency and keep it in mind; but I thought it was relevant in this instance, because I see a real partiality in your views on this that I don't see you exhibit in other deliberations...... btw, I have a lot of questions re. certain of your numbered points upthread a bit; some of these should be familiar to you as we frequently have argued about them in the past; whatever, not presuming you wish to resume the debate, but know that my minimal or non-reply to those points aren't tacit acceptance on my part.
Also, FWIW, I didn't see your 7:21 a.m. before I wrote and submitted my 8:26 remark.

Basically, I think you rationalize your racial perceptions into a euro-centered consensus that simply does not exist; to explain the lack of self-interest this would sustain, you and yours (i.e., alt-right theorists) pull-out the global-lib-elite-you-know-whose cabal theories.
And I think that's weak; most telling about is it betrays a sorta weak, half-assed logic that you otherwise never brandish.

I'm just saying...

PA said...

"you and yours (i.e., alt-right theorists) pull-out the global-lib-elite-you-know-whose"

This is something like the fifth time you accused me of Jew-naming when at no point has any such thing been said.

Random Black Guy said...

Let's just say that the Poles in London (I live here) and England in general are closer to Kardashians than Kleagles. Still waiting for the hbdsphere to tackle the urgent problem concerning millions of white guys dating/marrying Asian women.

nikcrit said...

This is something like the fifth time you accused me of Jew-naming when at no point has any such thing been said.

OK, i'll stand corrected on that and explain the thinking behind my rhetoric: I understand that some white alt-righters want to be clear on their position re. jewish influence, or however one may put it, etc.
But for my purposes, when i bundle it with other alt-right claims of 'cause,' it's just that: hence, the 'globalist, liberal, elite, internationalist, jewish-influence, etc.
In other words, i'm claiming jewish blame is part of a catchall that's often used to describe anti-white claims, which I say often are exploitative policies that could just as easily be race neutural, i.e., positions that could serve the powers that be's need in 'racist' or 'anti-racist' environments.
No slander intended and I believe i'm almost always willing to extend the benefit of the doubt.

Son of Brock Landers said...

Random black guy - I tried to tackle the tall white guy dates Asian girl thing.


Honestly, I get page views for that every single day. The search phrase is usually "why is my son dating an Asian".

Anonymous said...

I was recently at a charity event chaired by one of the less famous Bushes (your generation).

Bush Scion told a story about how he visits his grandfather (HW) frequently. The chief activity during these visits, according to Scion, was watching bad television -- in particular, the Kardashians and local news. HW is 90 and as people age the area enclosed by the circle of "no accounting for taste" increases geometrically, so I wouldn't judge HW too harshly. But consider that his adult life fully spans the topic of your post. You don't have to pine for the medieval grace of iron clothing to wonder at the evaporation of mass culture aimed at adults and how few people seem to have noticed its absence.

Topics like this make me miss Larry Auster's indignant tantrums, not for any cathartic relief, but for reassurance that someone else is awake.

By the way, Bush Scion related his story of HW watching the Kardashians as a laugh line.