------------------------------
The Old-Time Radio Digest!
Volume 2002 : Issue 314
A Part of the [removed]!
ISSN: 1533-9289
Today's Topics:
image [ Frank Absher <fabsher@[removed]; ]
Re: Reality VS. Fantasy [ Michael Biel <mbiel@[removed]; ]
Candy Candido [ Richard Pratz <[removed]@[removed]; ]
"If You Can't Say Something [removed]" [ dougdouglass@[removed] ]
Lone Ranger: say it ain't so! [ chris chandler <chrischandler84@yah ]
Is X gay? [ JackBenny@[removed] ]
Re: Brace Beemer Gay???? [ "Garry Lewis" <glewis@[removed] ]
Muskrat Love [ "Martin Grams, Jr." <mmargrajr@hotm ]
Brace Beemer [ Rick Keating <pkeating89@[removed]; ]
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 12 Aug 2002 14:34:01 -0400
From: Frank Absher <fabsher@[removed];
To: [removed]@[removed]
Subject: image
Thank you to James Hunt for a thoughtful posting on image vs. reality.
It's a pleasure to read all the different opinions here, although I disagree
with those who castigate anyone who expresses negativity. Rumors to the
contrary, radio stars are only human - ego-driven, insecure, talented,
short-tempered perfectionists. If we are using talent as a comparison, the
following may not be adequate, but bear with me.
Today's show business "stars" adopt an image created for them by flacks,
just as many of Hollywood's early stars did. Many of today's "stars" aren't
terribly intelligent and they do stupid things, but it's up to the flack to
rescue them and maintain the image. It's sad to see yesterday's "stars"
appearing at small town shopping center openings or on celebrity boxing
matches on the Fox network, but these people can't seem to accept the fact
that their fifteen minutes have passed and it's time to move on. They have
started to believe their own hype.
I've done interviews with lots of show biz types over the years and watched
them "turn it on" as soon as the mic is open. It's a fact of life. They're
no different from politicians, pop musicians, etc., and I think most of the
general public realizes this. If we in the audience want to believe the
image, that's fine. If we're willing to accept them with all their
imperfections, that's fine too.
Image is their bread and butter. They have chosen this life in anticipation
of some sort of payoff, whether it be fame, money, or even a sense of
professional accomplishment. In the process of persuing celebrity, they gave
up a few things, sometimes even their true identities. For some it was worth
it.
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 12 Aug 2002 15:26:07 -0400
From: Michael Biel <mbiel@[removed];
To: [removed]@[removed]
Subject: Re: Reality VS. Fantasy
From: Grbmd@[removed]
. . . I think it is important for George or anyone else to present
at least some evidence whenever one is going to smear the reputation
of a public or private figure. . . . Let's hear some allegations
with some first-person data. Either that or abide by the old adage,
"If you can't say something nice about a person, ...." Spence
I second this motion that smears be accompanied by FIRST PERSON
evidence, especially considering the inexcusable smear about Brace
Beemer that Don Hunt then related from an old memory of what some
apparently half-witted Atlanta DJ told him. How DARE you repeat such a
story without first posting a question like "Can anyone tell me if Brace
Beemer had any children?" and then waiting a few days for an answer. If
you had, you would have found out that the DJ was quite mistaken when he
said that Beemer was childless and might have been gay because he
brought little boys to the studio and embraced and kissed them. In all
probability the little boys were Beemer's two sons. He also had a
daughter. Charles D. Livingston is quoted on page 111 of "Who Was That
Masked Man" as saying that one of Beemer's sons went on to portray the
character of Jason Colt "on a radio program on another network."
Furthermore, in the second of Beemer's two appearances on TV's "I've Got
A Secret", January 22, 1964, three of Beemer's grandchildren appeared
(in masks!) with the secret that their grandfather was radio's Lone
Ranger.
I and some of the other researchers on this list have occasionally been
accused of intimidating people from posting items from their memories
when we follow up with a little research and correct their errors from
authoritative sources. "Isn't this supposed to be just a fun hobby?"
it's been asked. Sure, but being correct does not have to be very
difficult. All it would have taken was a quick question. Your using
this story as a way of showing how rumors can sometimes run counter to
the public persona of a celebrity ironically turned out to be a very
strong case in point in a very different way. Now that we all know that
the story is false, we can see the truth in the problem of spreading
unconfirmed innuendo. This story should have been debunked as being a
lie BEFORE posting it, instead of having to wait a day for the truth to
come out.
Michael Biel mbiel@[removed]
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 12 Aug 2002 15:32:01 -0400
From: Richard Pratz <[removed]@[removed];
To: "OTR (Plain Text Only)" <[removed]@[removed];
Subject: Candy Candido
It's funny how some names stand out more than others. One OTR name that
stands out from my distant past is that of Candy Candido (1913-1999). You
have to admit it's an unusual name but one I recall hearing often on The
Jimmy Durante Show (1947-50). He was a support comic and character actor
with a so-called "miracle voice" that allowed his characters to have very
high or very low ranges. Although the IMDb lists many of his credits from
1934 to 1990 there is precious little about him in my OTR reference books.
DeLong has the most, and it's only 11 lines long.
He came to mind after I caught a bit of Disney's 1953 classic "Peter Pan" on
TV recently. The film featured the voice talents of three great OTR actors -
Hans Conreid as Captain Hook and Mr. Darling - Bill Thompson as (what else?)
Smee - and Candy Candido as the Indian Chief.
With a name as intriguing as his, the mere mention of it brought back lots
of memories. Anyone out there ever work with, or know more about Candido and
can fill the rest of us in on his career? Or perhaps a photo to place a face
to the voice?
Rich
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 12 Aug 2002 15:32:11 -0400
From: dougdouglass@[removed]
To: [removed]@[removed]
Subject: "If You Can't Say Something [removed]"
I think it was Tallulah Bankhead who said
"If you can't say something nice about someone, sit right over here next
to me."
--- Doug
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 12 Aug 2002 15:34:26 -0400
From: chris chandler <chrischandler84@[removed];
To: [removed]@[removed]
Subject: Lone Ranger: say it ain't so!
Don Hunt [removed]
It was obvious, to him, that "The Lone Ranger" was
Gay by the way he treated them-embracing, kissing
them. It is From Brace Beemer that I was reinforced
in what I had learned from Sunday School, Church,
my parents about Agape Love, Brotherhood, Racial
Equality and Patriotism. Not to mention Kindness,
Strength, and Wisdom.
Well this would make the Lone Ranger a pedophile,
which of course has no connection whatever to being
gay. And I'm certain Mr. Hunt didn't mean to imply
that being gay might have disqualified his hero from
teaching lessons on brotherhood or equality, or even
teaching Sunday school.
It's one thing to be able to separate a performer's
private life from his public achievements. But it's
another thing altogether to willfully ignore true
history and, as Mr. Hunt wrote, "construct" your "own
belief system". I might want to "believe" that "The
Mel Blanc Fix-It Shop" was the most popular program
ever broadcast. That don't make it so.
It seems to me that for an accurate historical or
cultural study of a show or performer, you HAVE to
learn everything you can, not only about what made it
onto the air, but also about what was going on in the
outside world at the time. It even enhances simple
"enjoyment" of a program. Hearing a Fred Allen
broadcast from January, 1948--Allen's peak of ratings
success--takes on an extra edge when you know Allen
had plummeted down the chart, and was off the air (for
unrelated reasons) 18-months later. Marian Jordan's
1939 "comeback" seems all the more triumphant when you
know where she'd reportedly been, and why. (BTW,
anybody know where she was when she disappeared again
for several weeks in early 1953?)
Now those are smaller examples, that don't really
delve into the sorts of more sinister personality
quirks that we've been discussing. So take Lucille
[removed] was, by the 1970s and by most accounts now,
widely regarded in showbiz circles as a decidedly
not-very-nice woman; there were even unflattering
stories about her circulating among airline
stewardesses! Even Jack Benny, who apparently never
spoke an unkind word about anybody, allowed that
Lucille was "very tough"--this was about the same time
Ball had refused the elderly Benny a footstool while
rehearsing a piece of business, and he sure enough
went spilling onto the floor. She so terrorized
Richard Burton and Elizabeth Taylor during their 1971
guest appearance on "Here's Lucy" that Richard saw fit
to write about it in his autobiography.
Question is: does any of this dilute Lucy's earlier
comedy brilliance? Of course not, but it certainly
DOES help explain the deterioration and increasing
shrillness of her work into the 1970s. Why would you
NOT want to understand all the elements that went into
making something good, or not so good, or different
than what it had been?
Or take Garrison Keillor: brilliant he may be, but
when he showed up in New York as a highly-paid writer
just months after his departure from Minnesota and
"retirement to Denmark" in 1987, and then returned to
the air--from New York--not long afterward, it
suddenly was nearly impossible to take anything he
did afteward as anything other than cynical
manipulation. That whole business, even his
tear-jerking, seemingly inspired, truly unforgetable
"farewell show", suddenly reeked of being nothing but
a stunt intended to get him out of Minnesotta without
any adverse publicity. It made you wonder if he ever
believed ANYTHING he's ever said or did, before or
since. Why would you NOT want to understand the
underlying context of the entertainer's performances?
I loved the guy on this list the other day who
defended Red Skelton, then immediately launched an
assault on the author of a negative book about him.
What's the difference in insulting one, and insulting
the other? The guys we talk about (and in some happy
cases, talk TO) on this list daily are not
[removed] had flaws and faults and personal
setbacks and crises, and ALL that stuff went into
creating their legends and reputations and careers,
and if we're giong to pay tribute, it makes more sense
to pay tribute to the truth, rather than some
idealistic dream.
chris
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 12 Aug 2002 15:35:13 -0400
From: JackBenny@[removed]
To: [removed]@[removed]
Subject: Is X gay?
I have to segue from the Brace Beemer topic and note that I am still asked
with great regularity about Jack Benny's sexual persuasion. I always give
the same answer: "He loved women. There is no doubt about that. If he
loved men, you'd think that someone, somewhere after all these years would
have come forward and said, 'I was with him' or 'I know he was with so-n-so
[removed]' But I have never heard anyone give anything more that a theory
about such a liasion, nor anyone named as a partner. And no one other than
Jack can say what was going on in his head. Was Jack Benny gay? No. Was
Jack Benny bisexual? You'd have to ask him."
I liked a comment that Joan Benny made to me recently (quoting from memory),
"If everyone was gay that people say was gay, there would be no offspring in
Hollywood!"
I never cease to be amazed at the level of interest people have in this
topic. I suppose it may be tied to the other recent topic of Character vs.
Real Person. Funny how people seem to revel in the "dirt" on celebrities,
then are disappointed when the person is not the same as the characters they
portray on film.
--Laura Leff
President, IJBFC
[removed]
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 12 Aug 2002 15:59:45 -0400
From: "Garry Lewis" <glewis@[removed];
To: <[removed]@[removed];
Subject: Re: Brace Beemer Gay????
Who is next?.................Tom Mix? Batman
and Robin have already been accused by Frederick Wertham in his Seduction of
the Innocent of being the perfect gay couple. Sheesh.
Tom Mason
Yeh! Next they'll be picking on poor Lewis Carroll.
yours mad as the hatter,
Garry
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 12 Aug 2002 17:55:44 -0400
From: "Martin Grams, Jr." <mmargrajr@[removed];
To: [removed]@[removed]
Subject: Muskrat Love
Since we're on the topic of radio performers and announcers doing bad things
off the mike (keep in mind that we're all guilty of a dirty joke now and
then), there are many recordings floating about with OTR stars during
rehearsals and read-throughs being "bad". The notorious William Conrad on
those popular Gunsmoke rehearals that's been floating about it nothing.
There is an existing Gunsmoke recording when Kitty tells Matt that they
should upstairs and have a little "do" together, whereupon you hear the
squeeky spring symphony behind the door. Another has William Conrad
laughing cause he can't finish the teaser for next week's Gunsmoke episode
"next week you'll meet a man who's [removed]"
There are also recordings of Martin and Lewis calling each other ----
suckers during rehearsals for radio spots for the movie The Caddy. Orson
Welles told a director he wouldn't direct any living person in Shakespeare
and if he could prove to Orson that the verb forms are appropriate, he'd go
down on him. During the last day of recording the final episode of The
Hallmark Playhouse in 1954, Lionel Barrymore was telling how he ----ed a
bear for the FBI, and you can clearly hearing people in the sound studio
laughing. Whether Barrymore knew they were recording him or not is not
known.
All of these recordings out there in circulation and they are far worse than
the Arthur Godfrey recording that's being discussed.
The most interesting is Ted Pearson, announcer for THE CAVALCADE OF AMERICA.
A memo addressed to him, dated January 13, 1950 suggested his reason for
leaving the program. Producer Harold L. Blackburn wrote in the letter "I am
deeply concerned over the reports of the actions of Ted Pearson following
the rehearsal in Wilmington on Monday. I suppose we could pass this over by
feeling that as far as the broadcast was concerned, everything was in order
and OK. However, it goes beyond that. What any of the personnel of the
program do away from the theater of broadcasts in NY short of publicly
scandalizing themselves does not concern us."
The letter concluded "The boys who were exposed to the Wilmington situation
just feel they can not run the risk of a 'repeat performance' on out of town
shows."
You take a guess.
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 12 Aug 2002 17:56:46 -0400
From: Rick Keating <pkeating89@[removed];
To: [removed]@[removed]
Subject: Brace Beemer
James Hunt writes:
When I asked him about his impressions-if any-of Mr. Beemer, he told me
that he and his wife were childless but that he loved children,
especially little boys.
Given that I interviewed Brace Beemer's son for my
recent magazine article on the continuing appeal of
old time radio, I'd say this DJ you were talking to
was full of it.
Rick
--------------------------------
End of [removed] Digest V2002 Issue #314
*********************************************
Copyright [removed] Communications, York, PA; All Rights Reserved,
including republication in any form.
If you enjoy this list, please consider financially supporting it:
[removed]
For Help: [removed]@[removed]
To Unsubscribe: [removed]@[removed]
To Subscribe: [removed]@[removed]
or see [removed]
For Help with the Archive Server, send the command ARCHIVE HELP
in the SUBJECT of a message to [removed]@[removed]
To contact the listmaster, mail to listmaster@[removed]
To Send Mail to the list, simply send to [removed]@[removed]