Talk:Marilyn Monroe

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Joe1p1p (talk | contribs) at 19:10, 5 July 2008. The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Template:WP1.0

WikiProject iconBiography: Actors and Filmmakers B‑class
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.
BThis article has been rated as B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by WikiProject Actors and Filmmakers (assessed as Top-importance).
WikiProject iconCalifornia B‑class
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject California, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of California on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
BThis article has been rated as B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
???This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject iconPornography B‑class Top‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Pornography, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of pornography-related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
BThis article has been rated as B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
TopThis article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.

Body Type

I remember hearing somewhere that Marilyn Monroe was a size 12. Today, that's a plus size model. She is such an icon for beauty that I'd love to see a reference to how much the idealized body type has changed since her time. Today, she would be laughed out of the casting director's office for being too fat. I don't want to add anything because I can't verify this, but perhaps there is someone more familiar with Marilyn trivia who can substantiate this fact? Vanessa 65.38.40.224 (talk) 15:12, 24 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I think that there are a few things that need to be taken into consideration: A. Sizes have changed DRASTICALLY in the past 50-60 years and B. Women's lives & lifestyles have changed as well to where their bodies have changed. On the first theme I mention, a size 12 back in the 40's & 50's is closer to a size 8 or a size 6 of today. Sometimes even a 4 of today will be close to a 12 of back then! On the average, a size 12 dress from the 40's & 50's has a 25 inch waist. One just has to look at Marilyn Monroe's measurements throughout the years which were anywhere from (depending on the sourse) 35 to 38 bust, 22 to 25 waist & 34 to 37 hips. If you go to a vintage shop searching for a 40's dress and you wear a 6 of today, you may find yourself fitting into a 12 of then. So at the vintage shop a young woman who is a 6 of today and trys on the 12 of the 1940's and it may fit ok, but the shoulders may be a bit snug. Why? Now, on to the lives of women. A woman of today who grew up in the 70's & 80's also grew up being much more athletic than a girl in the 30's & 40's. Women of now may have been in soccer teams as girls, where encouraged to be play sports, they may have done aerobics in the 80's and they go to the gym now. Women during the time Norma Jeane was growing up were not as active. This makes the young women of today to have slimmer hips & thighs, but they also may have broader shoulders. I hope this makes sense. Crcam (talk) —Preceding comment was added at 02:51, 25 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Their is a rumor on Snopes.com that Marilyn wore a size 16 dress. The rumor comes up as mutiple truth vales, and the article lists her weighing between 118-140 pounds.The article says the same things about the type of dress sizes changing over time. Boop-oop-a-doop.

Quotes about Monroe section

The section which contains quotes about Monroe has a final entry with the song "Candle in the Wind". Should the song be in a different and possibly new section, perhaps a trivia or pop culture section? Or has a trivia section been tried on this article already and been removed? The song appears out of place with the quotes about Monroe, but should be included somewhere because of its impact on her posthumous popularity. --Monnai (talk) 05:43, 5 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Albert Einstine

I heard that MM read and was fascinated by "Theory of Relativity", and wrote Albert a letter or two. She also read a lot of books. I would opinion those facts (with reference) should be added to indicate she was no "Dumb Blond", of course her actual intelligence may not be known exactly. She was also rather adept (not great) piano player (neither items are in the article I could find, but are in documentaries about her)--Flightsoffancy (talk) 05:59, 15 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Marilyn's Death

There are different voices that said that her death was caused by various identity such as Suicide and Murder, personally, in my opinion, I think that Eunice (Marilyn's housekeeper) was in a plot with the Mafia, or else, why would Eunice be cleaning the laundry when the police arrive, she should be waiting but not doing the chores (for who? Since Marilyn's dead), and on the other hand, Marilyn was engaged in a project, how could she possible die before ending the project? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Adrianwagstaff (talkcontribs) 01:26, 17 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Too many quotes

I'd recommend thinning out the "Quotes" section, preferably removing it altogether. This information is already well-covered at Wikiquote. Here on Wikipedia, what would be better would be picking a couple of the really famous quotes, and putting them in context as to how they became famous, and what impact that they had on society. --Elonka 03:34, 22 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Major concerns about the lead section

I have some concerns about the way the lead section has been set out, and I have rewritten it in the spirit of being bold. I realize that my changes are far from perfect and far from complete. I also realize that this article means a lot to many people, and I expect that some people will disagree with me, but I hope that this might encourage some discussion. The changes I have made are based on the following:

1. The lead sentence seems to be trying to list Monroe's every achievement, and by trying to put everything in one place, becomes difficult to read. Try reading it out loud. She was an actress, singer etc but she became (mainly after her death) a cultural icon etc. It would be easier to read, plus it could be given a clearer explanation if these points were seperated. The way it reads, it could be assumed that she rose to mythical proportions even during her lifetime, which is not exactly the case.

2. "Hollywood icon, cultural icon, fashion icon, pop icon" - there may be truth in these labels, but they are difficult to quantify. They sell Monroe short, in my opinion, simply because there is no attempt to explain what is meant, and as such her impact is reduced to a series of repetitive labels. They link to articles that don't necessarily add to our understanding of how Monroe fits into these categories. Also, despite the fact that some are sourced, it doesn't avoid the NPOV issue. For example, just because Anne Shulock writes for The Student Life that Monroe was a fashion icon, does not make it so, and using this as a cite does not mean that it complies with NPOV. She has been acknowledged or referred to or described as a fashion icon, and writing it this way would be far more accurate. Wikipedia should not be bestowing titles such as "fashion icon" on anyone, unless it is absolute fact. It's not absolute fact - it's someone's opinion, so we should be careful to write it this way.

3. Some of the wording is too strong and seems to oversell Monroe. There is a tone of desperation in our efforts to have readers take her seriously. Looking at featured articles for other actors, there is no such attempt to enlarge their status. For example saying that she is "critically acclaimed" is an oversell - all successful actors receive critical acclaim at some point in their careers, and all, including Monroe, receive negative comments. We seem to be pushing so hard for readers to respect Monroe as an actor, that we've added "critically acclaimed", along with 3 sources. We haven't mentioned any of the critics who thought she couldn't act or who commented negatively on her performances. All actors with any kind of career credibility have positive and negative things said about them. It's redundant to push either point too strongly. In the article there is plenty of room for critical commentary, which should in the interests of NPOV allow the negative comments to be also made. It's not appropriate in the lead. "Golden Globe winning" - same thing. It's not the most important thing about Monroe, and yet it is the very first thing mentioned. It can be still be included in the lead as part of her career chronology, and given the respect it is due. Simply, Monroe's achievements speak for themselves and we should allow them to do so.

4. Monroe was first and foremost an actress and a film star, and a very successful one at that. Very little is said about her acting career.

5. The lead is not written chronologically. For example, she achieved much of her stature after her death, but this is discussed in the early and mid sections of the lead, and then her death is the last thing mentioned. In Monroe's case, her story definitely does not end with her death, so the sequence could be changed. eg. Starts career, establishes career, achieves results, has problems, dies, becomes iconic figure.

6. The most important aspects of her death, for coverage in the lead, should be the known circumstances and the controversy/conspiracy theories. The lead is too specific. It is written in such a way, that murder is suggested more strongly as a possibility and there is no mention at all of the possibility that it could have been accidental. This should be simpified and made more neutral. The details, controversy and theories are very important, but could be better covered in the article, and the individual opinions could be given there also. In the lead it's not appropriate to mention the opinions of Tony Curtis or Shelley Winters. The fact that they knew Monroe gives them no greater insight into the circumstances of her death. They are not even the people who knew her best. It seems opportunistic - finding two people who knew Monroe at some point in her career, and use them to support the view she was murdered. It pushes the murder point too strongly. Other people believe just as strongly that she took an accidental overdose, and others believe she committed suicide. Their opinion is not given - and rightly so. The lead does not allow for a review of all opinions, and therefore should not express any. The body of the article is the best place for this. Furthermore, the lead is meant to be a summary of the article that follows. Shelley Winters is not mentioned again in the article, but her opinion is so important it belongs in the lead? Tony Curtis, same question. The only other mention of Curtis is his co-starring role in Some Like it Hot.

7. Cites are not really needed in the lead. Assuming that the lead is a summary of the article, and assuming that the article is well referenced, to add the references to the lead can be considered redundant. However, this is a question of taste.

I will be bold and change the lead to reflect the changes that I think are required, but of course with the understanding that this is not a done deal. I'd welcome any opinions. Rossrs (talk) 03:11, 2 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This is an enormous improvement, presented with a deserved but unusual depth of explanation and an undeserved degree of humility.
I think it's too long. Time permitting, I'd shorten it; it doesn't, so I won't.
In at least one way, I'd differ with Rossrs, who writes above: For example, just because Anne Shulock writes for The Student Life that Monroe was a fashion icon, does not make it so. So far so good, but I'd go further: that people say that this or that person was or is a "fashion icon", "cultural icon" or similar, does not give meaning to such terms, which I find almost empty. (If it means somebody whose look was imitated by others, then my limited knowledge of fashion suggests that the claim is implausible.)
We don't disagree on this point, and in fact, it's the emptiness of the wording as you mentioned in a previous comment that got me thinking in the first place. "Fashion icon" is an empty label, and it can be easily used, but that does not prove that any thought or understanding has gone into its use. (I'm not referring to Wikipedia here, but to the magazines and websites that use the term without any meaning, and which we therefore follow without question. ) To me it seems like a lazy way of saying that she had some impact on fashion and that people copied her or emulated her, but without offering anything to back up the claim. Rossrs (talk) 11:25, 2 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Perhaps it's not unreasonable to say that, decades after her death, Monroe is a celeb; her name, face, voice and various other stylized attributes being well known by great numbers of people who have never seen her movies. Further, there are grounds for saying that a concentration on what she actually did shows a studied ignorance of the actual workings of the entertainment industry: that what she did is less important than the "mystique" (or hoopla, or hogwash) that now surrounds her. A problem, however, is that concentration on the latter far too easily settles for mindless recycling of awestruck but vacuous hyperbole (sometimes "balanced" by bucketloads of meticulously footnoted gossip and innuendo about "sexcapades" and the like). Writers must show that they are discussing this knowledgably and dispassionately, and are not merely exemplars of "icon" worship.
But I don't know if she is actually known by lots of people who haven't seen her movies. I saw her movies in the pre-DVD era but already long after her death. It's a lot easier to see her work now. Perhaps the popular interest in her now is still based on her work as an actress. The new introduction seems good. -- Hoary (talk) 10:44, 2 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your thoughtful response, Hoary. I'm glad that you approve. I agree that it's too long, and perhaps the career aspects need to be trimmed and the post-death cultural impact expanded, but I was hoping this could be a starting point. Rossrs (talk) 11:25, 2 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Definitely an improvement. Well written and objective. Also, thank you for taking the time for explaining your editions. Do you mind if I shorten it a little? All the same, you sure improved the thing, and I thank you.--Downtownstar (talk) 16:50, 2 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. By all means shorten it - it needed trimming, and I think you've tightened it up considerably. The only content change that I would make is in relation to Bus Stop. I agree that it was too wordy, but I would like to put back "dramatic" just to distinguish that it wasn't another comedy. Back then, nobody really disputed that she could do comedy, but people were surprised that she was as good as she was in a drama. I think there are now too many paragraphs. I think some can be joined. I'll have a stab at it and see what you think, but paragraphing is not my strong suit. Rossrs (talk) 01:12, 3 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Your editing was fine again, and I agree with your point about Bus Stop. We're definitely getting somewhere with this!--Downtownstar (talk) 03:49, 3 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The lead is so much better without all of those "qualifying" terms, and I think that it, now, reflects more fully Monroe as an actress. Thanks for all of the hard work. Icarus of old (talk) 05:05, 3 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. I think this article has a lot of potential, and I'm glad that the lead is being met with a positive response. Rossrs (talk) 05:13, 4 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • With all due respect, I do not think the new introduction is better. It makes her appear as some "sick" crazy woman who killed herself. Just not the case. Look at the facts and it will be very clear that she was very happy and healthy at the end of her life. I believe the last intro was filled with more accurate information. It has taken people many years to build it up the way it is, and I don't believe such a drastic change makes it better. Just my 2 cents.--Joe1p1p (talk) 19:05, 5 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Timeline

I'm finding the article a bit confusing as I try to edit it, so I am going to add a timeline of notable events to refer back to. Please feel free to add, and hope this may be helpful to anyone contributing to the article. It may not be entirely accurate, and some events may need to be added. Rossrs (talk) 05:13, 4 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • 1926: June 1 born. June 13. Placed in foster care.
  • 1933: mid year - returns to her mother.
  • 1934: Mother institutionalized
  • 1935: June, made ward of state. Sep, enters orphanage
  • 1937: June, taken from orphanage by Grace McKee
  • 1938: Nov, goes to live with Ana Lower
  • 1941: June, graduates high school
  • 1942: June 19, marries Jim Dougherty
  • 1944: Apr, starts working for Radio Plane Co
  • 1945: Spring, photographed for Yank magazine, Summer, second photo shoot, Aug-signs Blue Book Agency
  • 1946: April - first mag cover (Family Circle), June - files for divorce, July 19 - 1st screentest 20th Cent Fox, July 23 - sign 6 month contract as Marilyn Monroe, Sep - divorce finalized
  • 1947: Jan - Fox contract renewed 6 months, Feb - Debut (Scudda-Hoo! Scudda-Hey!), Aug - contract not renewed, Dec - Dangerous Years is first release, though filmed after Scudda-Hoo
  • 1948: Mar 9 - contract Columbia Pictures, Sep - contract not renewed, Dec - meets Johnny Hyde
  • 1949: May - poses for nude calendar, Oct - signs with MGM for Asphalt Jungle
  • 1950: Apr - All About Eve, Dec - death of Johnny Hyde
  • 1951: Mar - presents Oscar, Sep - first national feature in Colliers magazine
  • 1952: Mar - starts dating Joe Di Maggio, Mar - nude calendar scandal, Arp - cover of Life, Jun - Gentlemen Prefer Blondes, Sep - Grand Marshall at Miss America
  • 1953 : Jan - Niagara released, becomes a "star", Jun - handprints outside Grauman's with Jane Russell, Sep- TV debut Jack Benny Show, Sep - meets Milton Greene, Nov - How to Be a Millionaire, Dec - fails to arrive on-set to start Girl in Pink Tights
  • 1954: Jan 4- suspended by 20th Cent Fox, Jan 14 - marries Di Maggio, Feb 2- arrive Tokyo honeymoon, Feb 16 - 10 day tour of Korea, Sep 15 - shoots skirt scene for Seven Year Itch, Oct 5 - confirms seperation from Di Maggio, Nov - goes into a self-imposed "exile" (Milton Greene)
  • 1955: Jan 7 - MM Productions launched, Jan 15 - suspended by 20th Cent Fox, Feb - meets Lee Strasberg, Apr 8 - Edward Murrow interview for Person to Person, Jun 1 - Seven Year Itch premiere, Oct 31 - divorce finalized Di Maggio
  • 1956: Jan 4: Fox/MM Prod agreement, Feb 9 - MM & Olivier announce Prince and the Showgirl, Jun 29 - marries Arthur Miller, July 14 - travels to London to film Showgirl, Aug - miscarriage(?), Oct 29 - Royal Command Performance, meets QEII
  • 1957: June 13 - premiere Showgirl, Aug - miscarriage (?)
  • 1958 : Aug 4 (until Nov) - shooting Some Like it Hot, Dec - miscarriage (?)
  • 1959: Mar 29 - Some Like it Hot premiere
  • 1960: Mar 8 - Golden Globe Award for SLIH, Jul 18 - start filming The Misfits, Aug 26- suffers breakdown, halting filming, Nov 11- announce divorce Miller, Nov 16 - death of Clark Gable
  • 1961: Jan 20 - divorces Miller, Jan 31 - premiere The Misfits, Feb 7 - enters psychiatric clinic New York, Feb 11 - transferred following intervention by Joe Di Maggio, Oct - meets Robert Kennedy, Nov - meets JFK
  • 1962: Feb - moves into Brentwood home, Mar 5 - Golden Globe "World's Film Favorite", Apr 23 - starts Something's Got to Give, May 19- sings Happy Birthday Mr President, Jun 1- last working day at Fox, Jun 7 - fired for breach of contract, Jun 23 - Bert Stern "Last Sitting" photo session, Jun 28 - Fox rehires, Jul 20 - enters hospital, Aug 3, Life magazine cover, Aug 5 - body discovered, Aug 8 - funeral.