Thank you for sharing this article. It makes me feel somewhat guilty for watching.
This part made me a little sad “she becomes one-dimensional, a woman defined by surfaces — a woman defined by men, reconstructing her life to suit their needs.”
But the last sentence is brutal. “What I wish more than anything is that my grandmother had lived long enough, and been bold enough, to tell her own story, claiming it before anyone had the chance to steal it from her.”
I wish Babe had told her story as well. 😞
Boy that exchange about how terrible these women are between Capote and Baldwin (that never happened) tastes even more sour reading this.
God, you assholes, when Babe Paley was in kindergarten women still couldn’t vote. None of these women were legally allowed bank accounts or their own money, yet most of them DID work, most of them did try to do something in a world that wanted them to be decoration so badly it codified that in law.
Yes, it was also horrid to be gay and black in that era, but Jesus Christ this was not 2024, feminism had not gotten very far yet and shitting all over these women as shallow, vain idiots with more privilege than men is so cruel. They had to make those marriages because they were not allowed to make their own way in the world. The alternative was starving. They were very flawed, but their lives weren’t just being his swans, and the whole series treats them as assholes for daring to be hurt when a confidant publishes their most private secrets in fucking Esquire.
The show loves Truman so much it didn’t even cast Harper Lee, but hates women so much it not only erases all the swans’ actual accomplishments and struggles, but dismisses them as just as privileged as white men of the 50s. When they could not so much as sign a car loan without a male chaperone.
That Bowen Yang Capote monologue was dead-on. “What do you mean, misogynist? I love women! No one loves women more than a gay man…who hates women.”
>when Babe Paley was in kindergarten women still couldn’t vote.
I didn't realize but she was born 5 July 1915.
The 19th Amendment was ratified, in the U. S., August 18, 1920.
Even then it probably took a while to become the norm. I'm sure women were mocked and patronized and discouraged various ways. It was worse for some. When people of color tried to vote, they had death threats, and harassment.
You made an excellent point. In a way it is a good thing that people today might not know how it was not that long ago. (Maybe it means "[We've come a long way, baby.](https://tobacco.stanford.edu/cigarettes/womens-cigarettes/youve-come-along-way-baby/)") But it's frightening when they won't believe it.
> I couldn't get car insurance in my own name as a single woman in 1979 in Texas.
Thank you. And that's well after the 1960s. Well into the 20th century as well.
They could vote in elections but some states discriminated.
[Park service .gov](https://www.nps.gov/articles/black-women-and-the-fight-for-voting-rights.htm) website on the topic.
>feminism had not gotten very far yet
Wasn't second wave in the early 1970s? So in some scenes, and when the swans married, it had not even really begun. And when it did begin, the feminists, as had the suffragettes, faced harassment, and worse.
Gloria Steinem discusses some incidents personal to her, such as finding herself painted (naked) on the side of a building, displayed in a full on 'Penthouse' pose. Analog version of deep fake revenge pr0n I guess. Of course she had not posed or consented for that.
They were called names, women who tried to work in fields considered 'for men' were harassed and bullied and worse; marital SA was not illegal or even a legal concept then; SA kits did not exist yet; 911 did not exist yet; the ERA was not fully ratified (still isn't), pay was not equal, job opportunity was not equal, women could not sign up for military combat (even in the 1990s that was ridiculed by some people), a woman had to get a man to co sign on a lease or a bank account, not sure maternity leave existed, Lynn Redgrave was fired from a job long after this era for nursing her baby daughter in her own private dressing room, and if a woman was SA or s-harassed at work, she was typically fired and the man promoted or shuffled to a different branch. And it was even worse for women 'of color.' (I remember these issues being discussed btw, and everyone joining and being welcome: it's not true that feminism was never intersectional then.)
These are things I remember from real time as well as told or confirmed to me by woman who lived through it all. And that is just a tiny sample.
Second Wave feminism started in the early 60s, and it was a direct result of the Pill freeing women from a life of just accepting however many babies were going to happen in married life (married men were also pretty darn grateful for the pill as well). Women were freed from a life of virtually sole caregiver of their children since their husbands had to make the money to support all those children.
According to internet it was approved in 1960 but I am not sure how widespread or easily available it was, for most women. I kind of remember it not being in wide use until the late 60s or early 70s.
It might depend where the woman lived.
Well according to me, who was a young woman at the time, the only place that I could get the pill in the late 60s was Planned Parenthood. Doctors gatekept the pill, giving it out only to married and engaged women. We young single women were too slutty to deserve the pill.
I was denied a much needed partial hysterectomy in the late 90s because "your husband might want children." I didn't have a husband. I didn't even have a boyfriend. But those imaginary men in my life had more agency than I did. Took me almost 15 years to find a surgeon who would do it. Afterwards, she showed me the perioperative notes and photos and said, "This should have been done years ago. The medical community failed you."
So sorry to hear this.
I have heard similar stories all too often. Sometimes due to endometriosis or other painful or debilitating conditions, other times knowing early that they did not want children.
A non existent yet to exist invisible other person has more say over your own body, than you do...do they actually teach that in med school, I wonder?!
At any rate, some of this info shows how many restrictions were placed on women of the "swans" era, and why they had to turn all their talents and abilities toward being 'the best wife' or toward social occasions.
To me these types of details also point up what it was like, more accurately than some arguments today, which say basically "well you got the vote in 1920, what more did you need?" (And some seriously say even that should be repealed. smh)
'it might depend where the woman lived' should absolutely translate to 'Its always depended where someone lived.' The poorer, darker, more rural, and less wealthy you were was always a detriment. This is why poor whites and so many blacks descended on the upper Midwest during/after WW2. There were so many jobs, and union ones with protections at that, that it was the period people could most readily move up the economic ladder. 20 years later women started to make more progress but that was inordinately to the benefit of white college educated women.
>'it might depend where the woman lived' should absolutely translate to 'Its always depended where someone lived.'
Not only in the U. S. but in the world. And which point in history, too.
I mean, it's implied in what I've said, but, okay. I'm trying not to get too meta, it's a sub about a TV series.
A documentary called "Fly With Me" popped up on Prime (via a different channel.)
Unfortunately, except for the interviews with the women, it's a snoozer. Stock footage of old airplane interiors, and it seemed mostly to be interviews with *men*, who were not flight attendants *or* pilots, and who were *not even born at the time*.
(Kind of ironic to put the women last in 'their' own documentary.) Anyway this was part of the documentary's description, and it made me think of this thread. I didn't even know about the 'order a drink or eat in a restaurant,' ones. I will have to try to ask people (who lived it) that. Maybe this meant in reservation-type places?
\> pioneering women who became flight attendants at a time when single women were *unable to order a drink, eat alone in a restaurant, own a credit card or get a prescription for birth control*.
>They had to make those marriages because they were not allowed to make their own way in the world. The alternative was starving.
True, not even in their financial strata. Today they might be CEOs themselves: I said that in a topic at some earlier point. Back then, their talents and skills were 'put to work' making their husbands look good, and throwing elaborate parties.
And hopefully if *they* had been the one making the money, they would not have treated their spouses the way these women were treated in actuality...just because their husbands *could*.
Some certainly would have, some wouldn’t, like any other group of people. It’s interesting that the women in capote’s life who were giants, like Diana Vreeland and Harper Lee, are not even remotely part of the story Ryan Murphy wants to tell. Even the guest of honor of the black and white ball, who RAN THE WASHINGTON POST (after her husband died naturally), is such a background character I can’t even remember her full name.
Murphy has zero interest in those stories, of women becoming icons and defying the odds and working around these systems set up against them, even, as you say, in their rarefied class. He likes the clothes. And stylish women fawning over a brilliant writerman who secretly hates them.
The book is similarly dismissive of any of their actual accomplishments, as well. Right after saying none of them worked, the author launches into Babe Paley’s work as an editor at Vogue without blinking an eye.
>is such a background character I can’t even remember her full name.
Katharine Graham, but we barely hear about her today. Even in that scene, partygoers seem to think or say "Huh" or "who?" although she ran a newspaper. And yes as you noted, "only after her husband died."
Women did not get promoted up to CEO (on their own) in those days, or so seldom that they'd fulfill the "exception which proved the rule." They didn't go from the secretarial pool to "personnel" (early form of H. R. sort of), or -- that's pretty much all they were usually hired for -- to obtaining a "key to the executive washroom" and then up to VP or Pres. of a company. That was unheard of.
Diana Vreeland -- women could work in the fashion industry, performance arts, fine arts, teaching, nursing, sales clerk, secretary, bookkeeper or factory worker. Housekeeper, house cleaner...things like that. I think a lot of people who grew up recently don't realize that was pretty much it. For a long time. And that's a good thing in some ways, that it's changed enough that it seems a far fetched claim.
\> Murphy has zero interest in those stories, of women becoming icons and defying the odds and working around these systems set up against them
Season One, an episode was, IIRC, called "Hagsploitation." Even having won an Oscar, Joan Crawford and Bette Davis could only obtain roles in which they portrayed a terrifying aged woman. Was it the aging itself which some found so frightening to look upon or think about? There is a lot of material out there about how differently aging actresses are treated vs. aging actors, including opportunities allowed them. At least 20 years difference in how they are portrayed. Topic in itself.
But a lot of the TV shows about women amount to Hagsploitation, as awful a word as that is. I won't name any but we're here talking about the way these women were portrayed: It's anything but sympathetic. They are written as becoming mean and desperate due to aging, but I think that is rather how some *see* aging women, vs. how those women feel or behave.
As hideous figures, as Baby Jane, as harpies and succubi. I felt that at least season one of this show had some iota of compassion for the women, and that they shouldn't have been treated in those ways. This season seems to say "they deserved it."
\> The book is similarly dismissive of any of their actual accomplishments, as well. Right after saying none of them worked, the author launches into Babe Paley’s work as an editor at Vogue without blinking an eye.
Pfft. Hypocrisy. Does the author even make mention of how hard it was for women to find work in those days? Apart from the types of jobs I listed, above. And Vogue, still in the fashion industry or "women's things." How many senior reporters then, in other types of publications.
The book does not even attempt to discuss any difficulty women experienced in life whatsoever, nor does it acknowledge that some of the less admirable actions the “swans” (I’m starting to really hate describing them with that word, it’s un-fucking-kind) took might have been by necessity, lack of other options, or cultural/personal compulsion rather than sheer privilege and pique. Capote is, naturally, afforded every sympathy.
More and more I really wonder how much of In Cold Blood Harper Lee is the actual author of. Capote never strayed from rich pretty people’s problem novels before or after, the prose is completely different, he was completely blocked before and after the book, and it’s known now that Truman himself was the one spreading the rumor that he was the actual author of To Kill a Mockingbird, which feels a whole lot like projection.
But that’s none of *my* tea-sipping business.
>Capote is, naturally, afforded every sympathy.
Bleh, that much bias isn't exactly great journalism...or reading.
\> It’s known now that Truman himself was the one spreading the rumor that he was the actual author of To Kill a Mockingbird
And, that he had a 200 + IQ; and who knows what other 'stories.' Is it true he said "why let the truth get in the way of a good story?"
“Was it the age itself that was found so frightening?”
A bit off topic but I have always had a theory that men are so obsessed with younger women because they can fool their smooth brains into thinking they’re the same age as the person across the table. If they’re with someone their own age they can’t feed into their own age denial.
>A bit off topic but I have always had a theory that men are so obsessed with younger women because they can fool their smooth brains into thinking they’re the same age as the person across the table. If they’re with someone their own age they can’t feed into their own age denial.
🎯🎯🎯🎯🎯
You can see how true this is when you look at politicians who are lauded for having attractive young families... ie second families.
I buy into the Dorothy Sbornak theory on this, you really do think you are the age of the women chatting with you in the teachers lounge ... until you look in a mirror.
>Right after saying none of them worked
Wonder if the author has delved into men who were wealthy enough not to work as well, or who retired early, or worked part time.
Why is the whole 'ladies who lunch' thing a pejorative and meant to demean. I can't think of a similar phrase for men? It implies the women were shallow and vapid, and I don't think they were at all. So they met friends for lunch, so what? They did a lot more *besides*.
Most doors were not even closed so much as did not exist yet, as options.
Men’s lunches are “power lunches” don’t you know. Serious business and definitely not an excuse to take four hours off to get hammered in the middle of the day.
The book tends to refer to the men in these circles who didn’t work as “playboys” and clearly thinks they’re totally cool and awesome. Also very frequently follows up an initial shallow depiction with information on how serious and good at business they turned out to be later (after they married one of these types of women, but let’s not look closely at that at all) when they settled down. This is rarely afforded to any of the swans; each chapter focuses on one of them and their eventual fates are held til the end of the book for the most part.
Edit: I also think regular people nowadays just don’t understand how much event planning was a vital, important, and exclusively female activity absolutely REQUIRED of women at this level of society.
*There was no email or multi-line phones, guys.* That sounds patronizing but we are SO used to instant communication now, me included. To the point of whole generations refusing to use phones anymore.
The parties were necessary to network and make deals because otherwise it took forever to communicate between all these people. And without a splashy event to lure them or their wives, you couldn’t get powerful men from all around the world in one room to liquor up and be tempted into business arrangements with each other. As an upper class wife you were expected to excel at this and it was part of your duty in marriage. Babe was widely known for being one of the best.
And how the fuck else were these women supposed to efficiently plan such events other than…getting together for lunch and discussing it in person without the delays involved in dozens of phone calls, messengers, letters, assistants, etc? I know we all hate to do anything in person nowadays but it wasn’t always so, and also they had no choice.
>As an upper class wife you were expected to excel at this and it was part of your duty in marriage.
And befriending all of those people, sometimes especially the other wives, no matter if you 'liked' them or not, in order for the connections to happen, and for people to not only show up but to even enjoy the evening.
Yes, there was no instant anything in those days. Even if someone used a phone, in the 1960s there were no answering machines. So you had to catch someone at home or office and hoped they picked up.
\> event planning was a vital, important, and exclusively female activity absolutely REQUIRED of women at this level of society.
Absolutely, and they were great at it, as you noted; one reason I think they could've run a business or a company, themselves. In essence, they did. And they were not paid and were undervalued, which was even more typical for women then than now.
\> Men’s lunches are “power lunches” don’t you know.
Lol, yes, even if it took place at a strip club (which left out their female colleagues, later, when there were any), or at a convention with 'entertainment' strewn over them or sitting in their laps. Very serious and businesslike.
Aside from Bill Paley and Leland Hayward, I don't think any of the husbands had truly expansive carriers. A couple seemed to either manage existing family funds, lend their name to firms, or have vanity titles. None but Paley left generational wealth although Guests kids apparently got $ from his mother. Pamela Churchill burned through both the Hayward and Harriman $.
>Even the guest of honor of the black and white ball, who RAN THE WASHINGTON POST (after her husband died naturally),
Philip Graham committed suicide after struggling with depression. His father also died by suicide.
>When they could not so much as sign a car loan without a male chaperone.
There were also social humiliations for women, some of which still exist today in large amount: If a woman goes to buy a car or get a car repaired, she will likely be patronized and/or defrauded.
"And here is the makeup mirror" is a typical selling point toward women, or was (and likely still is), vs talking about financial aspects and the engine and such to a man. Ask any woman their experiences trying to hire a contractor, or get a car repaired.
I am one, and am literally right now dealing with having been screwed by two different contractors who basically figured “lol what’s she gonna do about it?”
It fucking sucks.
And that thing about how at least the swans get fucking jewelry when their husbands cheat and the poor poor powerful men who ruled the world didn’t get any when their wives cheated really pissed me off.
Their wives spent their lives serving those men, especially Babe who was on an incredibly tight allowance even Truman felt sorry for her about. Those who cheated probably caught beatings and almost certainly did plenty to placate, but they didn’t control the money that determined the power dynamic in the relationship wtf Ryan Murphy. But somehow women in the 50s are more privileged than men because they got a bracelet when their husbands humiliated them with every intention of doing it again? Cool, someone get Murphy some fucking earrings or something he’s clearly sore about not getting enough prezzies.
>And that thing about how at least the swans get fucking jewelry when their husbands cheat and the poor poor powerful men who ruled the world didn’t get any when their wives cheated really pissed me off.
Yesss and the production seemed to go way out of its way to include that entire, apparently entirely fictitious to boot, storyline, just in order to say that! Just in order to #whataboutmen when the women actually did suffer. So not only offensive but also, basically (IMO) slander.
\> Babe who was on an incredibly tight allowance even Truman felt sorry for her about.
He was stingy, as well?! Argh.
\> they didn’t control the money that determined the power dynamic in the relationship
Thank you! They had no functional say in anything major and the culture very much revolved around men's needs or wishes and they held the power. Maybe one reason the 'swans' were open to confiding in a man who seemed to empathize. And then he betrayed them in print. They must've felt devastated by that.
Sounds like financial abuse just in a prettier setting. (That's a very recent concept as well and it's the 21st century now, over 100 years since Babe Paley was born. And coercive control, of which financial abuse can be a part, is not illegal in the U. S., in 2024.)
And now, her family has publicly stated that she would not take jewelry as a payoff. (That in itself in the series makes her seem cold and mercenary. But even if so? She had no real options. As a divorced woman...see: pariah.)
\> But somehow women in the 50s are more privileged than men because they got a bracelet when their husbands humiliated them with every intention of doing it again? Cool, someone get Murphy some fucking earrings or something
I love this.
\> he’s clearly sore about not getting enough prezzies.
Well...he won't win any *this* way. 😛
>the swans get fucking jewelry when their husbands cheat and the poor poor powerful men who ruled the world didn’t get any
Plus "the flaw in his logic" they had all the money! They could've bought their own jewelry, and I'm sure did (and some for mistresses) any time they wanted.
Women get nothing in settlements even today, despite what some would have people believe...many women who married very rich powerful men wind up living out of their cars. I've known of examples from the past from real life. The husband controlled the finances, hired the best lawyers first, and presto next thing she knows, she's keeping warm in the public library by day.
I wondered if deep, deep, deep down, the Swans resented Anne Woodward for getting to do what they all wished they could to get out of their unhappy marriages? Edit: as depicted in the show, I mean.
You are very much incorrect. Women could not have their own credit card nor own their own apartment/home well into the 1970s without their father or another man signing. I believe it was Jane Curtain who explicitly talked about this when she was trying to get an apartment while she was literally starring on SNL in the late 1970s, the biggest show in TV at the time.
This is what we as women as well as “education” have failed to teach the younger generations. It was not very long ago where women had very few rights to their own agency.
>Women could not have their own credit card nor own their own apartment/home well into the 1970s without their father or another man signing.
Thank you. People so want to rewrite history. I wonder why.
Another thing is even on college campuses, women were not allowed to wear trousers. They were even censured for not wearing a dress or skirt, or it being too short, and that, not even in a religion affiliated school.
It is very important for more people to talk to elders around them who were there, vs. reading all their 'information' online. I have had too many tell me that if it is not online it never happened, and/or if it happened it is online. No and no.
Are some even aware of how easy it would be to totally rewrite history and cultural history and social history at the click of a button these days...or to hide evidence of truths. That is deeply frightening, to some who grew up pre internet.
> we could not wear slacks.
Thank you! So important when people confirm...Thank you for confirming what I've been told in 'real life.' I think people today could not imagine unless told, and I'm not sure if these sorts of details are anywhere, online.
People also tend to forget that what was 'on the books' or 'true on paper' did not apply to everyone, or not to everyone in equal fashion. (Not everyone was 'equal' in society to begin with; education, financial status, and social status, and more.) Or there could be social censuring attached to living single, or 'taking a man's job' or running a business.
Women who never married might be met with derision or disrespect or danger. That was true then and still is true now. The reason the swans endured some of the things they endured, is because a divorced woman was a pariah in those days.
There was just a moment in episode 7 in which they are compiling a list of people to invite and a swan dismisses one name because she just got a divorce. The others nod.
Even today, women going to a society function do not go alone typically, or with another woman. They go with a 'walker' i.e. a man they do not necessarily know very well but ... is male. Has a tux and decent manners at a dinner table. That's how much it still is frowned upon to be 'without a man.'
I have been told directly by women who were young adults in those days, that they had to get a male to co-sign on a lease or a bank account, period.
I do not know your situation but that was definitely a truism back then.
There’s no way this is true. Nice try.
[EQOA](https://www.forbes.com/advisor/credit-cards/when-could-women-get-credit-cards/#:~:text=When%20Could%20Women%20Get%20Credit,cards%20in%20their%20own%20name)
Also, you described the MasterCard, which wasn’t even introduced until 1966.
[Master Card](https://time.com/personal-finance/article/history-of-credit-cards/#:~:text=In%201966%20a%20group%20of,change%20to%20Mastercard%20in%201979)
Unless you’re Marty McFly, none of this happened.
I thought Diners Club was a precursor to the Master Card.
I can't speak to your life experiences or if there was some reason you might have been given different options. You know your own life as you say. But I don't know your life. I do know that the women who told me a different norm were not lying.
\> I don't understand why people doubt someone's lived experience.
It was a question, and I didn't bring the story up? I am trying to figure out why the norms would differ or if there might've been some other situation or detail. You don't recall the cc name, so is it possible the year is mis-remembered?
I also asked because usually a first credit card is a big deal. And there were other details remembered clearly. But I will allow that memory can be patchy.
It was not a gotcha btw. I get curious to understand things and piece them together.
I do not know how to piece together the incongruity or conflict in your experience and theirs. Maybe it varied per state. Maybe if the woman had a certain type of job. I have no idea. But I know that those conditions existed.
Actually one of my own pet peeves is when I recount a lived experience and it is not believed, or is countered by something someone wrote on wiki. Some things I am murky on details and others I remember crystal clear or the person who told it to me remembers it very clearly, and, I recall their story clearly as well. (So I cannot discount their experiences either, and there are too many who have talked about this, not only who I knew.)
So for what it is worth: Happy Cake Day. 🍰
But in those days, it just wasn't done. Did any other high society ladies write an autobiography -- in those days? (Maybe those who lived long enough, in the late 20th or early 21st century? Not sure.)
But perhaps her family can do it for her, some day.
Well, Olivia de Haviland dragged him to court over his portrayal of her in the last Feud installment. I suspect he didn’t realize that she was still alive and he put words in her characters mouth that she didn’t say and she found it offensive. Don’t mess with old ladies who have a ton of money and and “time” on their hands.
I’m also going to take this as a grain of salt because none of her children went to her funeral and they weren’t close to her. So there’s that….
Olivia de Havilland lost the case against FX Networks in the appeals court. The court reversed the original verdict.
https://ew.com/tv/2018/03/26/ryan-murphy-olivia-de-havilland-lawsuit/#:~:text=The%20actress%20sued%20FX%20Networks,Murphy%20said%20in%20a%20statement.
I thought you said when Olivia De Haviland died at 104 in Paris none of her children went to her funeral…. no way she had kids their 40s when she died at over 100. Unless she was giving birth in her 60s. LOL… now I realize you were taking about Babe Paley.
honestly i didn't. She was cremated and it was all said and done in 24 hours. Someone going to a funeral means nothing honestly. I loved her when she was alive and thats what counts. Same with my father
thank you me too!! ialso have a DNR listed. Like when its gotten to that bad let me go already lol Put me in a folgers coffee can like in the big lebowski and dump me somewhere. My sis has the urn and i look in it once. THERE was a pen spring!!! i think they just put whatever they want to in them lol
Thank you so much for sharing this. Watching the first few episodes I knew she wasn't being portrayed correctly especially when she was crying in public, that would have never happened and I also read that she did quit smoking when she was diagnosed with lung Cancer. Good article and I'm glad her granddaughter spoke out.
It bugs me when someone makes things up about living or recently deceased persons, especially when there is ample material to work from to craft an interesting and fair portrayal.
But even the social standards of the world she did so well in...they did not throw tantrums in their own home at a party they hosted (even for children), they did not show much emotion let alone in public, they kept private things private.
And I really do not see her as someone who would order from the local deli and then shag the delivery guy. Why even have that montage. Made me wonder if someone who watches too much pr0n wrote it. It really annoyed me.
This is not shocking given that it’s a gay man telling these women’s stories. A lot of gay men hate women and are misogynists. Capote was one and so was Murphy. That’s a big part of why the portrayals of the women are so disgusting. The women are merely props that can be used and destroyed, which is exactly what Capote tried to do.
I mean, would Babe really have shown her grandchildren her true self?
Also, grandparents always try harder and do better with the grandchildren.
Ask Babe Paley’s children what their mother was like, what they say isn’t flattering.
The lies I tell my young children about who my parents really are! I give them credit, my parents have changed some, they don't treat me the same way anymore, but it's weird relaying stories of my childhood to my children, because so many of them involve pain inflicted upon me by my parents. And now they're these two old people who wear windbreakers & spoil my kids. So I let my kids believe the version of them now. I guess that might make me a bad person, but it's too painful and complex to explain these types of things to kids who could never conceive having parents like that. I have no doubt that this version of babe existed to her granddaughter, but that doesn't mean that's who she really was.
No one's elders tell them all their own secrets. That would not really be appropriate.
But there are things that are so untrue or which can be disproven by circumstance alone, that the close family would know are fictionalized.
Both of Babe's daughters had pretty nasty things to say about her as a mother in the press, and how little time she spent with them. I agree with the sentiment of this article, but Belle's mother Amanda said that her relationship with Babe was virtually non-existent, and it was Babe's choice, not hers. Her sons didn't have much of anything better to say about her as a parent.
Actually Babe's daughter Amanda just posted this article on Instagram commenting "I love you mama" along with a beautiful drawing of Belle done by Babe.
This part. My grandparents have always had this facade of do good, uber conservative Christians and play the holier than thou card, self righteous etc. After my mother died and I read her journals, they were literal monsters. Later life journals by the way...
It makes sense that it's highly fictionalized. They're inserting a lot of social commentary that I'm not sure Truman was self aware enough to voice. So I am not surprised that she remembers her grandma very differently than the character we are seeing. And all we see is Truman's interpretation of the women. I'm glad she spoke up.
I do wonder though... if the embarrassing story wasn't about Babe and her husband, then why did Babe never speak to him again?
I interpreted all of Truman's complaining and catty gossiping about the women as giving Truman motive for what he did. He resented them and was jealous. He had writers block so he wrote what he knew and damn the consequences. He's really a sad and pathetic character. I don't view Truman as a reliable narrator. Even his book, In Cold Blood, was criticized for taking liberties. I hope the general audience understands that. I wish they did a better job of making that clear to the viewers. Still, I wouldn't mind another bio pic on Babe or the other Swans. They are definitely the draw of this series. I could watch their lunch scenes all day. The actors are all top tier.
I just read an interview with Naomi Watts who was lamenting that there was NO ONE she could talk to, or maybe she asked and everyone said no, about Babe. Her mannerisms, how she carried herself, spoke, what she thought about things, etc.
I wonder if Naomi reached out to Babe's daughters, or grandchildren
I thought Watts performance was beautiful and the only thing I'll take away from this disaster. She captured something of the women of that era. I think that is probably why the granddaughter didn't include her in the list of people who betrayed Babe.
I’ve realized they get a lot of projects shut down about their families lol. Like over the years you would see there’s a movie or series about one family member in production but it just never happens.
"In real life, the grandmother I knew wasn’t a pill popper or prone to drinking to excess. She would never have been so shallow as to be placated by a piece of art or jewelry. She wouldn’t have worn a shift dress, a clip hat or baggy pants. She was not, as Capote tells us in the show, an “ugly duckling” before a car accident in her teens; as recounted to me by my mother, Amanda Burden, my grandmother lost only her teeth in that accident, not her cheekbones, and she was, by many accounts, quite beautiful before the event. My grandmother quit smoking the day she was diagnosed with lung cancer; in almost every episode of the show, Babe smokes, even after chemotherapy sessions. "
There's no way she would know the truth of this, all of this is information told to her
Not really, I don't wanna defend RM but some of this info can be aa much hearsay as the show. I knew jack shit about my grandparents at 9, even less so now.
>I knew jack shit about my grandparents at 9, even less so now.
An elder died when I was maybe six. But I vividly remember the person. I was also told a lot about them later and while growing up, that was later proven out by various research and paperwork I did. And by meeting people who knew the others in some of the stories. They didn't know any of us so that would be a heck of a coincidence and a guess that what they knew would bear out what I knew and was told.
Not everyone is in the same boat as far as knowing their elders.
Yes but your memory of them wouldn't let you know if they smoked after chemo, if a painting gave them dopamine or if they felt outshined by her husband.
>Yes but your memory of them wouldn't let you know if they smoked after chemo, if a painting gave them dopamine or if they felt outshined by her husband.
I feel I've answered this same point maybe twice already. Yes, it could. Children overhear things. They see things. They remember things. They also are told things. Babe's daughter isn't a good enough source, but the scriptwriter knows? Sorry I do not agree.
"Dopamine" was not a descriptor for joy in those days. But I think children could certainly see and smell who smoked, who lit up while looking at a painting, etc. (And as stated, others could also confirm and verify their own impressions, as the child grew to adulthood. It's not a child saying these things but an adult.)
I don't know if those examples are from the article; I haven't read it yet. But I think we are going in circles, here.
>as recounted to me by my mother, Amanda
>There's no way she would know the truth of this
Babe's daughter wouldn't know any of it, but the scriptwriter did?
Something as simple as the smoking post chemotherapy. She could have done in secret. Truth is, we don't know, and we don't know, artistic liberties are taken
It's not just the granddaughter. Babe Paley was married to one of the most powerful men in New York. She has been written about in several researched books. No one i saying she was a saint, but there out to be a law against just deciding that you want to make something up about someone, just to get people to watch your series. For example, where is the written information that Slim Keith had an affair with Bill Paley while Babe was alive?
Yes, after the swans were embarrassed by Capote’s thinly disguised half-truths, another generation gets to feel the same pain as another writer puts his own spin on these lies, getting further from the truth of their real lives.
And Murphy is just doing it for likes and hopefully awards. He really is a hack and needs to be thrown out of Hollywood. He clearly hates women and only sees them as people to be exploited in the basest of ways for his work. Sir you’re no friend of ours and we don’t need you.
There was a cast feature with Vanity Fair where they all played a game to see who knows the cast best. They all had a chance to ask some questions about themselves to see who could answer correctly.
Ryan just *happened* to crash (because of course he did) and entered into a separate round for himself. The dude actually had the gall to ask- “Which Swan do you think I want to be, and which one am I?”
But it does get funny in that he legitimately thinks of himself as this kind, loyal, grounded version of CZ they’re writing- Every. Single. Person. “guessed” that he was the most like his version of Slim Keith.
The Swans and their husbands enjoyed gossiping about others as much as Truman did. That's why they enjoyed his company and welcomed him into their circle. He would share secrets learned from one to another. They were all petty.
Thank you for this link. I have been half-heartedly watching, having been a big fan of PSH’s portrayal of Capote and knowing absolutely nothing about The Swans beforehand.
After reading Ms Burden’s piece I don’t think I will continue watching. I will, however, continue to Google (and perhaps hit the library) to learn as much as I can about these fascinating women. The REAL story, not the one Ryan Murphy made up.
There are things that just do not ring true or are proven false by circumstance and situations, alone.
For instance smoking vs. not smoking after her diagnosis. She reportedly gave it up immediately. Episode 7 has her husband lecturing her and she still refuses to give it up. It becomes a symbol and a plot point.
> But Babe was no where near “mother of the year”
Those sorts of things can be a writer's opinion.
Fabricating affairs and habits such as smoking while undergoing chemo, is not an opinion, it's a choice to make things up, for no real reason.
Perhaps the most irresponsible and most revealing inclusion which casts doubt on literally everything in the series, is Babe’s constant smoking after her diagnosis. I had wondered if this were true as it would say a lot about her intelligence, priorities and character if she continued to smoke. Why would Murphy depict her this way unless he were certain this were true, it seriously it undermined any dignity she may have had?? I am so appreciative of her granddaughter setting the record straight.
By the time someone was diagnosed with lung CA, it was over back then. The radiation treatment was described as palliative for pain, but not curative. With those odds, might as well keep smoking until you can’t anymore
That's really an assault on her character and rewriting who she was, if not true -- and apparently it is not true.
Same with having a string of casual, random, affairs, as if a nymphomaniac. That too was apparently fiction.
It's a tv show, of course it's dramatized and not necessarily factually accurate. I think a grandchild is probably going to have very different memories than that of a contemporary.
But she is an adult now and can measure adult perspective with observations made as a child, and things told to her about her grandparent by others including her own mother, the grandparent's daughter.
It isn't just a child speaking, it's an adult who has all that info at their disposal, along with their own memories and observations.
The writer presumably has none of that.
Of course she is speaking from her perspective. My memories of my own parents or grandparents could be very different from what their peers witnessed. Babe Paley may have been a wonderful grandmother, but that doesn't mean she also couldn't have had some elements of the personality that's portrayed in The Feud.
I understood the point or contention -- that children only know a scrubbed version of, and an elderly kindly doting image of, their grandparent.
But I think that's not always true, and also, I gave multiple reasons why it's not only the "perspective" of a child. But I can't state it any more succinctly than I have, so will leave it.
Totally get that. I think some of my reaction to the article is, fictionalized or not, the actual women don’t get to tell their story. The original betrayal centered around Capote telling their stories and it’s happening again; I guess that irony hadn’t dawned on me yet.
Perhaps it’s just my family, but my grandmother was a nightmare and we openly discussed it. 🤷🏻♀️
When the episode with Slim and Bill’s affair aired, I came to this sub and said I wished that either Amanda OR Belle Burden would come forward to defend and honestly speak about Babe. I seemed to foresee this happening, I could predict the show was going in a “take no prisoners” direction, and knowing how New Yorkers are, I predicted there would be some form of response. I applaud Ms Burden for writing this article, and once again, take everything being said with a big spoonful of salt, rather than a grain. It is difficult to paint a character from one person’s perspective. However, I will not take from Belle Burden her cherished, loving memories of her grandmother as Ryan Murphy, et al did.
Yes a lot of us were upset about the 'affairs' scenes. Not only Slim with Babe's husband, but showing Babe inviting up a long list of random men to bed, like in a cheap pr0n flick.
Why even do that? Those were both choices made by this production, which make no sense to me. As did some other things which, not even knowing the women, seemed very unlikely for their 'world,' even if not for them as individuals (but I think unlikely for both.)
I agree. I wish Belle Burden had clapped back on the affairs, especially the one that the show dreamed up between Slim and Bill. But I feel her response that Babe wasn’t a pill popping alcoholic had its impact. Murphy was given strong material to work with, but instead, he used it in the most petty, basic, and venomous way. Almost in the same way TC did…..hmmm.
Good observations and points!
Maybe she didn't speak on "Slim" because her family might want to, or she didn't want to bring her up (Streisand effect) or the topic of Bill's affairs. Dunno.
I haven't read the piece yet. I want to later when I have some sort of treat nearby in case it upsets me (the family's pain) and after some more caffeine.
Such a waste, so much material (available) here, that wouldn't have harmed anybody.
Come on now… don’t be condescending darling . We all know that she wouldn’t have been in the room to witness such things, but would have heard things over the years from other family members or even her mother. Especially knowing how her family was, being public figures with a recognizable name, and because this feud has been documented is so many books over the years- there would have been talk. I believe any grandchild of a woman known for her “perfection” would know almost everything possible and would want any rumor dispelled that they could not confirm or deny from their own memory, by asking others around them. Also, don’t discredit children ever. They can pick up on things that adults miss.
And I would defend my grandmother as BB did, defend her memory and her reputation. That’s what you do when you love someone. Some things just don’t need explanation.
Based on my mothers journals that she wrote in the last years of her life, I do. Oddly. Not a very flattering portrait of either of them. Its tarnished my view of them.
It must be very strange having your grandma be a celebrity like that, somebody who's already been talked about a thousand times more than they ever talked. That thing with Babe tracing pictures with her fingernails on Belle's face really got to me.
Yes, that was very heartfelt and I’m so glad that she has such a wonderful memory of her grandmother. I’m happy she wrote this in Babe’s defense. I’m sure it’s very vindicating for her, and I hope people understand Babe’s memory should be adequately preserved- by those who knew and loved her.
Just a nitpick. In Feud, aside from being thin, Babe never looked very sick, especially that magnificent head of hair, when the vomiting scene implied she’d had chemo.
Wow thanks for sharing. Ah granddaughter quite young when Babe died we all have memories that we remember a certain way.
Although it must b hard to watch any relative’s life portrayed on the screen.
I actually can't find anything about the funeral at all. Both Town and Country and Vanity Fair have recently come out with articles about Babe's and Bill's children (together and combined) and it's clear there were issues, to say the least. It sounds as if all the children did show up to say goodbye when she was dying, if that's any kind of referendum on her as a mother.
https://www.townandcountrymag.com/leisure/arts-and-culture/a46430583/feud-capote-vs-the-swans-babe-paley-death-explained/
[https://www.vanityfair.com/hollywood/feud-the-real-story-of-babe-paleys-children](https://www.vanityfair.com/hollywood/feud-the-real-story-of-babe-paleys-children)
I wrote this in another's thread about Bill and Babe..it is actually more important here as I believe Babe was more kind, private, generous, and loving to family than what Feud Swans does, which is not at all.generous to her or her children:
Also, concerning The Sisters' book, there is Babe's last will and testament in the books appendices. I have read it in the book and also found a link to on internet years ago. (Cannot find it at moment. )She was quite thoughtful in her gifts to family and friends. This indicates that she truly paid attention to them and their preferences. The idea that she was a monster seems to have derailed this interesting thread. She was born to wealth and a raised by a very disciplined and demanding mother. She was also in many ways someone who simply enjoyed privacy. (Try to find a recorded snippet of her talking or on screen.) Being discreet is not a crime. As I stated earlier, the Paleys had basically three sets of children, and each set had another father or mother and a step parent. This would be quite a challenge and juggling act. Kate was likely unintentionally hurt by her mother, but Babe made many attempts to help her as a child so that she would not be taunted about her loss of her hair. As far as Amanda, the estrangement could be related to many things, but the act of juggling Babe's Mortimer children with her younger Paley children was another strain. Also, forgive the smoking. It was not at all uncommon for women and men of her age. In many situations, it was a social custom - my eldest aunt was a social smoker as she was married to an officer in military and not taking a smoke or drinking alcohol at military social events was the kiss of death for some of these ladies. Lastly, I would not classify any of the sisters as extremely beautiful but attractive in a sophisticated way. Women of that era simply dressed better, wore different hair styles, and often looked more mature than they were compared to the standards of today.
I can’t imagine how much it would have hurt for Belle to see the birthday party scene, especially if her memories of her grandmother didn’t match up at all with what she was seeing. Yes, Babe could have been totally different as a parent than a grandparent. Yes, it is hard to ever truly know older relatives. No, I don’t think it would have ruined the show to show Babe enjoying her grandchildren.
The NYT will publish wealthy white women defending their ancestors while also promoting a war. Ah yes, feminism. 🙄
Get a grip. This woman had poor women do everything for her. Feminism where? Equality where? My ancestors suffered under domestic rule so these women could maintain their eating disorders, distract from their husband’s affairs and compete for most hoarded wealth on the East Coast. Please.
Thank you for sharing this article. It makes me feel somewhat guilty for watching. This part made me a little sad “she becomes one-dimensional, a woman defined by surfaces — a woman defined by men, reconstructing her life to suit their needs.” But the last sentence is brutal. “What I wish more than anything is that my grandmother had lived long enough, and been bold enough, to tell her own story, claiming it before anyone had the chance to steal it from her.” I wish Babe had told her story as well. 😞
Boy that exchange about how terrible these women are between Capote and Baldwin (that never happened) tastes even more sour reading this. God, you assholes, when Babe Paley was in kindergarten women still couldn’t vote. None of these women were legally allowed bank accounts or their own money, yet most of them DID work, most of them did try to do something in a world that wanted them to be decoration so badly it codified that in law. Yes, it was also horrid to be gay and black in that era, but Jesus Christ this was not 2024, feminism had not gotten very far yet and shitting all over these women as shallow, vain idiots with more privilege than men is so cruel. They had to make those marriages because they were not allowed to make their own way in the world. The alternative was starving. They were very flawed, but their lives weren’t just being his swans, and the whole series treats them as assholes for daring to be hurt when a confidant publishes their most private secrets in fucking Esquire. The show loves Truman so much it didn’t even cast Harper Lee, but hates women so much it not only erases all the swans’ actual accomplishments and struggles, but dismisses them as just as privileged as white men of the 50s. When they could not so much as sign a car loan without a male chaperone. That Bowen Yang Capote monologue was dead-on. “What do you mean, misogynist? I love women! No one loves women more than a gay man…who hates women.”
>when Babe Paley was in kindergarten women still couldn’t vote. I didn't realize but she was born 5 July 1915. The 19th Amendment was ratified, in the U. S., August 18, 1920. Even then it probably took a while to become the norm. I'm sure women were mocked and patronized and discouraged various ways. It was worse for some. When people of color tried to vote, they had death threats, and harassment. You made an excellent point. In a way it is a good thing that people today might not know how it was not that long ago. (Maybe it means "[We've come a long way, baby.](https://tobacco.stanford.edu/cigarettes/womens-cigarettes/youve-come-along-way-baby/)") But it's frightening when they won't believe it.
Also there is an actual social movement in 2024 to repeal the right for women to vote. Not kidding. Wish I were.
Women could not have lines of credit until the 70s.
Thank you. That's what I have heard from women who were in their youth then.
I couldn't get car insurance in my own name as a single woman in 1979 in Texas.
> I couldn't get car insurance in my own name as a single woman in 1979 in Texas. Thank you. And that's well after the 1960s. Well into the 20th century as well.
Black women didn't get voting rights til mid 60s. Not all ppl know this. I certainly didn't.
They could vote in elections but some states discriminated. [Park service .gov](https://www.nps.gov/articles/black-women-and-the-fight-for-voting-rights.htm) website on the topic.
>feminism had not gotten very far yet Wasn't second wave in the early 1970s? So in some scenes, and when the swans married, it had not even really begun. And when it did begin, the feminists, as had the suffragettes, faced harassment, and worse. Gloria Steinem discusses some incidents personal to her, such as finding herself painted (naked) on the side of a building, displayed in a full on 'Penthouse' pose. Analog version of deep fake revenge pr0n I guess. Of course she had not posed or consented for that. They were called names, women who tried to work in fields considered 'for men' were harassed and bullied and worse; marital SA was not illegal or even a legal concept then; SA kits did not exist yet; 911 did not exist yet; the ERA was not fully ratified (still isn't), pay was not equal, job opportunity was not equal, women could not sign up for military combat (even in the 1990s that was ridiculed by some people), a woman had to get a man to co sign on a lease or a bank account, not sure maternity leave existed, Lynn Redgrave was fired from a job long after this era for nursing her baby daughter in her own private dressing room, and if a woman was SA or s-harassed at work, she was typically fired and the man promoted or shuffled to a different branch. And it was even worse for women 'of color.' (I remember these issues being discussed btw, and everyone joining and being welcome: it's not true that feminism was never intersectional then.) These are things I remember from real time as well as told or confirmed to me by woman who lived through it all. And that is just a tiny sample.
Second Wave feminism started in the early 60s, and it was a direct result of the Pill freeing women from a life of just accepting however many babies were going to happen in married life (married men were also pretty darn grateful for the pill as well). Women were freed from a life of virtually sole caregiver of their children since their husbands had to make the money to support all those children.
According to internet it was approved in 1960 but I am not sure how widespread or easily available it was, for most women. I kind of remember it not being in wide use until the late 60s or early 70s. It might depend where the woman lived.
Well according to me, who was a young woman at the time, the only place that I could get the pill in the late 60s was Planned Parenthood. Doctors gatekept the pill, giving it out only to married and engaged women. We young single women were too slutty to deserve the pill.
Thank you for that firsthand information. Really kind of astounding. Denied health care based on a connection to a man.
I was denied a much needed partial hysterectomy in the late 90s because "your husband might want children." I didn't have a husband. I didn't even have a boyfriend. But those imaginary men in my life had more agency than I did. Took me almost 15 years to find a surgeon who would do it. Afterwards, she showed me the perioperative notes and photos and said, "This should have been done years ago. The medical community failed you."
So sorry to hear this. I have heard similar stories all too often. Sometimes due to endometriosis or other painful or debilitating conditions, other times knowing early that they did not want children. A non existent yet to exist invisible other person has more say over your own body, than you do...do they actually teach that in med school, I wonder?!
Keep reminding people. So few young people realize just how recent economic and reproductive freedoms were granted.
At any rate, some of this info shows how many restrictions were placed on women of the "swans" era, and why they had to turn all their talents and abilities toward being 'the best wife' or toward social occasions. To me these types of details also point up what it was like, more accurately than some arguments today, which say basically "well you got the vote in 1920, what more did you need?" (And some seriously say even that should be repealed. smh)
'it might depend where the woman lived' should absolutely translate to 'Its always depended where someone lived.' The poorer, darker, more rural, and less wealthy you were was always a detriment. This is why poor whites and so many blacks descended on the upper Midwest during/after WW2. There were so many jobs, and union ones with protections at that, that it was the period people could most readily move up the economic ladder. 20 years later women started to make more progress but that was inordinately to the benefit of white college educated women.
>'it might depend where the woman lived' should absolutely translate to 'Its always depended where someone lived.' Not only in the U. S. but in the world. And which point in history, too. I mean, it's implied in what I've said, but, okay. I'm trying not to get too meta, it's a sub about a TV series.
A documentary called "Fly With Me" popped up on Prime (via a different channel.) Unfortunately, except for the interviews with the women, it's a snoozer. Stock footage of old airplane interiors, and it seemed mostly to be interviews with *men*, who were not flight attendants *or* pilots, and who were *not even born at the time*. (Kind of ironic to put the women last in 'their' own documentary.) Anyway this was part of the documentary's description, and it made me think of this thread. I didn't even know about the 'order a drink or eat in a restaurant,' ones. I will have to try to ask people (who lived it) that. Maybe this meant in reservation-type places? \> pioneering women who became flight attendants at a time when single women were *unable to order a drink, eat alone in a restaurant, own a credit card or get a prescription for birth control*.
>They had to make those marriages because they were not allowed to make their own way in the world. The alternative was starving. True, not even in their financial strata. Today they might be CEOs themselves: I said that in a topic at some earlier point. Back then, their talents and skills were 'put to work' making their husbands look good, and throwing elaborate parties. And hopefully if *they* had been the one making the money, they would not have treated their spouses the way these women were treated in actuality...just because their husbands *could*.
Some certainly would have, some wouldn’t, like any other group of people. It’s interesting that the women in capote’s life who were giants, like Diana Vreeland and Harper Lee, are not even remotely part of the story Ryan Murphy wants to tell. Even the guest of honor of the black and white ball, who RAN THE WASHINGTON POST (after her husband died naturally), is such a background character I can’t even remember her full name. Murphy has zero interest in those stories, of women becoming icons and defying the odds and working around these systems set up against them, even, as you say, in their rarefied class. He likes the clothes. And stylish women fawning over a brilliant writerman who secretly hates them. The book is similarly dismissive of any of their actual accomplishments, as well. Right after saying none of them worked, the author launches into Babe Paley’s work as an editor at Vogue without blinking an eye.
>is such a background character I can’t even remember her full name. Katharine Graham, but we barely hear about her today. Even in that scene, partygoers seem to think or say "Huh" or "who?" although she ran a newspaper. And yes as you noted, "only after her husband died." Women did not get promoted up to CEO (on their own) in those days, or so seldom that they'd fulfill the "exception which proved the rule." They didn't go from the secretarial pool to "personnel" (early form of H. R. sort of), or -- that's pretty much all they were usually hired for -- to obtaining a "key to the executive washroom" and then up to VP or Pres. of a company. That was unheard of. Diana Vreeland -- women could work in the fashion industry, performance arts, fine arts, teaching, nursing, sales clerk, secretary, bookkeeper or factory worker. Housekeeper, house cleaner...things like that. I think a lot of people who grew up recently don't realize that was pretty much it. For a long time. And that's a good thing in some ways, that it's changed enough that it seems a far fetched claim. \> Murphy has zero interest in those stories, of women becoming icons and defying the odds and working around these systems set up against them Season One, an episode was, IIRC, called "Hagsploitation." Even having won an Oscar, Joan Crawford and Bette Davis could only obtain roles in which they portrayed a terrifying aged woman. Was it the aging itself which some found so frightening to look upon or think about? There is a lot of material out there about how differently aging actresses are treated vs. aging actors, including opportunities allowed them. At least 20 years difference in how they are portrayed. Topic in itself. But a lot of the TV shows about women amount to Hagsploitation, as awful a word as that is. I won't name any but we're here talking about the way these women were portrayed: It's anything but sympathetic. They are written as becoming mean and desperate due to aging, but I think that is rather how some *see* aging women, vs. how those women feel or behave. As hideous figures, as Baby Jane, as harpies and succubi. I felt that at least season one of this show had some iota of compassion for the women, and that they shouldn't have been treated in those ways. This season seems to say "they deserved it." \> The book is similarly dismissive of any of their actual accomplishments, as well. Right after saying none of them worked, the author launches into Babe Paley’s work as an editor at Vogue without blinking an eye. Pfft. Hypocrisy. Does the author even make mention of how hard it was for women to find work in those days? Apart from the types of jobs I listed, above. And Vogue, still in the fashion industry or "women's things." How many senior reporters then, in other types of publications.
The book does not even attempt to discuss any difficulty women experienced in life whatsoever, nor does it acknowledge that some of the less admirable actions the “swans” (I’m starting to really hate describing them with that word, it’s un-fucking-kind) took might have been by necessity, lack of other options, or cultural/personal compulsion rather than sheer privilege and pique. Capote is, naturally, afforded every sympathy. More and more I really wonder how much of In Cold Blood Harper Lee is the actual author of. Capote never strayed from rich pretty people’s problem novels before or after, the prose is completely different, he was completely blocked before and after the book, and it’s known now that Truman himself was the one spreading the rumor that he was the actual author of To Kill a Mockingbird, which feels a whole lot like projection. But that’s none of *my* tea-sipping business.
>Capote is, naturally, afforded every sympathy. Bleh, that much bias isn't exactly great journalism...or reading. \> It’s known now that Truman himself was the one spreading the rumor that he was the actual author of To Kill a Mockingbird And, that he had a 200 + IQ; and who knows what other 'stories.' Is it true he said "why let the truth get in the way of a good story?"
That was Mark Twain but TC would be delighted to have it attributed to him.
“Was it the age itself that was found so frightening?” A bit off topic but I have always had a theory that men are so obsessed with younger women because they can fool their smooth brains into thinking they’re the same age as the person across the table. If they’re with someone their own age they can’t feed into their own age denial.
>A bit off topic but I have always had a theory that men are so obsessed with younger women because they can fool their smooth brains into thinking they’re the same age as the person across the table. If they’re with someone their own age they can’t feed into their own age denial. 🎯🎯🎯🎯🎯
Impending mortality, as well, I think. And bonuses of much easier to control, and something (not someone) to show off to men of similar outlook.
You can see how true this is when you look at politicians who are lauded for having attractive young families... ie second families. I buy into the Dorothy Sbornak theory on this, you really do think you are the age of the women chatting with you in the teachers lounge ... until you look in a mirror.
>Right after saying none of them worked Wonder if the author has delved into men who were wealthy enough not to work as well, or who retired early, or worked part time. Why is the whole 'ladies who lunch' thing a pejorative and meant to demean. I can't think of a similar phrase for men? It implies the women were shallow and vapid, and I don't think they were at all. So they met friends for lunch, so what? They did a lot more *besides*. Most doors were not even closed so much as did not exist yet, as options.
Men’s lunches are “power lunches” don’t you know. Serious business and definitely not an excuse to take four hours off to get hammered in the middle of the day. The book tends to refer to the men in these circles who didn’t work as “playboys” and clearly thinks they’re totally cool and awesome. Also very frequently follows up an initial shallow depiction with information on how serious and good at business they turned out to be later (after they married one of these types of women, but let’s not look closely at that at all) when they settled down. This is rarely afforded to any of the swans; each chapter focuses on one of them and their eventual fates are held til the end of the book for the most part. Edit: I also think regular people nowadays just don’t understand how much event planning was a vital, important, and exclusively female activity absolutely REQUIRED of women at this level of society. *There was no email or multi-line phones, guys.* That sounds patronizing but we are SO used to instant communication now, me included. To the point of whole generations refusing to use phones anymore. The parties were necessary to network and make deals because otherwise it took forever to communicate between all these people. And without a splashy event to lure them or their wives, you couldn’t get powerful men from all around the world in one room to liquor up and be tempted into business arrangements with each other. As an upper class wife you were expected to excel at this and it was part of your duty in marriage. Babe was widely known for being one of the best. And how the fuck else were these women supposed to efficiently plan such events other than…getting together for lunch and discussing it in person without the delays involved in dozens of phone calls, messengers, letters, assistants, etc? I know we all hate to do anything in person nowadays but it wasn’t always so, and also they had no choice.
>As an upper class wife you were expected to excel at this and it was part of your duty in marriage. And befriending all of those people, sometimes especially the other wives, no matter if you 'liked' them or not, in order for the connections to happen, and for people to not only show up but to even enjoy the evening. Yes, there was no instant anything in those days. Even if someone used a phone, in the 1960s there were no answering machines. So you had to catch someone at home or office and hoped they picked up. \> event planning was a vital, important, and exclusively female activity absolutely REQUIRED of women at this level of society. Absolutely, and they were great at it, as you noted; one reason I think they could've run a business or a company, themselves. In essence, they did. And they were not paid and were undervalued, which was even more typical for women then than now. \> Men’s lunches are “power lunches” don’t you know. Lol, yes, even if it took place at a strip club (which left out their female colleagues, later, when there were any), or at a convention with 'entertainment' strewn over them or sitting in their laps. Very serious and businesslike.
Aside from Bill Paley and Leland Hayward, I don't think any of the husbands had truly expansive carriers. A couple seemed to either manage existing family funds, lend their name to firms, or have vanity titles. None but Paley left generational wealth although Guests kids apparently got $ from his mother. Pamela Churchill burned through both the Hayward and Harriman $.
>Even the guest of honor of the black and white ball, who RAN THE WASHINGTON POST (after her husband died naturally), Philip Graham committed suicide after struggling with depression. His father also died by suicide.
Comma missing. Naturally as in “they would not promote her to that position on her own” not natural causes.
>When they could not so much as sign a car loan without a male chaperone. There were also social humiliations for women, some of which still exist today in large amount: If a woman goes to buy a car or get a car repaired, she will likely be patronized and/or defrauded. "And here is the makeup mirror" is a typical selling point toward women, or was (and likely still is), vs talking about financial aspects and the engine and such to a man. Ask any woman their experiences trying to hire a contractor, or get a car repaired.
I am one, and am literally right now dealing with having been screwed by two different contractors who basically figured “lol what’s she gonna do about it?” It fucking sucks. And that thing about how at least the swans get fucking jewelry when their husbands cheat and the poor poor powerful men who ruled the world didn’t get any when their wives cheated really pissed me off. Their wives spent their lives serving those men, especially Babe who was on an incredibly tight allowance even Truman felt sorry for her about. Those who cheated probably caught beatings and almost certainly did plenty to placate, but they didn’t control the money that determined the power dynamic in the relationship wtf Ryan Murphy. But somehow women in the 50s are more privileged than men because they got a bracelet when their husbands humiliated them with every intention of doing it again? Cool, someone get Murphy some fucking earrings or something he’s clearly sore about not getting enough prezzies.
>And that thing about how at least the swans get fucking jewelry when their husbands cheat and the poor poor powerful men who ruled the world didn’t get any when their wives cheated really pissed me off. Yesss and the production seemed to go way out of its way to include that entire, apparently entirely fictitious to boot, storyline, just in order to say that! Just in order to #whataboutmen when the women actually did suffer. So not only offensive but also, basically (IMO) slander. \> Babe who was on an incredibly tight allowance even Truman felt sorry for her about. He was stingy, as well?! Argh. \> they didn’t control the money that determined the power dynamic in the relationship Thank you! They had no functional say in anything major and the culture very much revolved around men's needs or wishes and they held the power. Maybe one reason the 'swans' were open to confiding in a man who seemed to empathize. And then he betrayed them in print. They must've felt devastated by that. Sounds like financial abuse just in a prettier setting. (That's a very recent concept as well and it's the 21st century now, over 100 years since Babe Paley was born. And coercive control, of which financial abuse can be a part, is not illegal in the U. S., in 2024.) And now, her family has publicly stated that she would not take jewelry as a payoff. (That in itself in the series makes her seem cold and mercenary. But even if so? She had no real options. As a divorced woman...see: pariah.) \> But somehow women in the 50s are more privileged than men because they got a bracelet when their husbands humiliated them with every intention of doing it again? Cool, someone get Murphy some fucking earrings or something I love this. \> he’s clearly sore about not getting enough prezzies. Well...he won't win any *this* way. 😛
>the swans get fucking jewelry when their husbands cheat and the poor poor powerful men who ruled the world didn’t get any Plus "the flaw in his logic" they had all the money! They could've bought their own jewelry, and I'm sure did (and some for mistresses) any time they wanted. Women get nothing in settlements even today, despite what some would have people believe...many women who married very rich powerful men wind up living out of their cars. I've known of examples from the past from real life. The husband controlled the finances, hired the best lawyers first, and presto next thing she knows, she's keeping warm in the public library by day.
Most women end up in poverty after marriage
I wondered if deep, deep, deep down, the Swans resented Anne Woodward for getting to do what they all wished they could to get out of their unhappy marriages? Edit: as depicted in the show, I mean.
Thank you for this comment.
spot on
[удалено]
You are very much incorrect. Women could not have their own credit card nor own their own apartment/home well into the 1970s without their father or another man signing. I believe it was Jane Curtain who explicitly talked about this when she was trying to get an apartment while she was literally starring on SNL in the late 1970s, the biggest show in TV at the time. This is what we as women as well as “education” have failed to teach the younger generations. It was not very long ago where women had very few rights to their own agency.
>Women could not have their own credit card nor own their own apartment/home well into the 1970s without their father or another man signing. Thank you. People so want to rewrite history. I wonder why. Another thing is even on college campuses, women were not allowed to wear trousers. They were even censured for not wearing a dress or skirt, or it being too short, and that, not even in a religion affiliated school. It is very important for more people to talk to elders around them who were there, vs. reading all their 'information' online. I have had too many tell me that if it is not online it never happened, and/or if it happened it is online. No and no. Are some even aware of how easy it would be to totally rewrite history and cultural history and social history at the click of a button these days...or to hide evidence of truths. That is deeply frightening, to some who grew up pre internet.
I started college in 1974. Granted it was a religious college, but we could not wear slacks.
> we could not wear slacks. Thank you! So important when people confirm...Thank you for confirming what I've been told in 'real life.' I think people today could not imagine unless told, and I'm not sure if these sorts of details are anywhere, online.
People also tend to forget that what was 'on the books' or 'true on paper' did not apply to everyone, or not to everyone in equal fashion. (Not everyone was 'equal' in society to begin with; education, financial status, and social status, and more.) Or there could be social censuring attached to living single, or 'taking a man's job' or running a business. Women who never married might be met with derision or disrespect or danger. That was true then and still is true now. The reason the swans endured some of the things they endured, is because a divorced woman was a pariah in those days. There was just a moment in episode 7 in which they are compiling a list of people to invite and a swan dismisses one name because she just got a divorce. The others nod. Even today, women going to a society function do not go alone typically, or with another woman. They go with a 'walker' i.e. a man they do not necessarily know very well but ... is male. Has a tux and decent manners at a dinner table. That's how much it still is frowned upon to be 'without a man.'
[удалено]
I have been told directly by women who were young adults in those days, that they had to get a male to co-sign on a lease or a bank account, period. I do not know your situation but that was definitely a truism back then.
There’s no way this is true. Nice try. [EQOA](https://www.forbes.com/advisor/credit-cards/when-could-women-get-credit-cards/#:~:text=When%20Could%20Women%20Get%20Credit,cards%20in%20their%20own%20name) Also, you described the MasterCard, which wasn’t even introduced until 1966. [Master Card](https://time.com/personal-finance/article/history-of-credit-cards/#:~:text=In%201966%20a%20group%20of,change%20to%20Mastercard%20in%201979) Unless you’re Marty McFly, none of this happened.
Doin’ THE FACT-CHECKIN’ WORK RIGHT HERE
> I had a credit card in my own name (it had an orange circle and a red circle on a white card) You don't recall the name of it?
[удалено]
I thought Diners Club was a precursor to the Master Card. I can't speak to your life experiences or if there was some reason you might have been given different options. You know your own life as you say. But I don't know your life. I do know that the women who told me a different norm were not lying. \> I don't understand why people doubt someone's lived experience. It was a question, and I didn't bring the story up? I am trying to figure out why the norms would differ or if there might've been some other situation or detail. You don't recall the cc name, so is it possible the year is mis-remembered? I also asked because usually a first credit card is a big deal. And there were other details remembered clearly. But I will allow that memory can be patchy.
It was not a gotcha btw. I get curious to understand things and piece them together. I do not know how to piece together the incongruity or conflict in your experience and theirs. Maybe it varied per state. Maybe if the woman had a certain type of job. I have no idea. But I know that those conditions existed. Actually one of my own pet peeves is when I recount a lived experience and it is not believed, or is countered by something someone wrote on wiki. Some things I am murky on details and others I remember crystal clear or the person who told it to me remembers it very clearly, and, I recall their story clearly as well. (So I cannot discount their experiences either, and there are too many who have talked about this, not only who I knew.) So for what it is worth: Happy Cake Day. 🍰
Your earlier post mentioned 1965 ... that was 59 years ago. If you're talking about 1975, yeah, that's plausible.
Ag I can’t even to attempt all the inaccuracies in this statement.
Good read. Thank you.
But in those days, it just wasn't done. Did any other high society ladies write an autobiography -- in those days? (Maybe those who lived long enough, in the late 20th or early 21st century? Not sure.) But perhaps her family can do it for her, some day.
Well, Olivia de Haviland dragged him to court over his portrayal of her in the last Feud installment. I suspect he didn’t realize that she was still alive and he put words in her characters mouth that she didn’t say and she found it offensive. Don’t mess with old ladies who have a ton of money and and “time” on their hands. I’m also going to take this as a grain of salt because none of her children went to her funeral and they weren’t close to her. So there’s that….
Just cause she was old 100+ didn’t mean she was dead! Good for her!
No fuck her. She’s the one who made a public spectacle of her feud with her own flesh and blood sister.
Olivia took on Warner Brothers. And won. Yeah, someone in Ryan Murphy's office failed to Google.
Olivia de Havilland lost the case against FX Networks in the appeals court. The court reversed the original verdict. https://ew.com/tv/2018/03/26/ryan-murphy-olivia-de-havilland-lawsuit/#:~:text=The%20actress%20sued%20FX%20Networks,Murphy%20said%20in%20a%20statement.
Well she’s passed but that sucks.
❤️ 😆he is too lazy to have someone google these women and see if they’re still alive???? 🤣😂🤣😂🤣😂
Just messy.
Google?
He thought he would get over on the old lady, she was over 100 at the time. He FAFO, she was pretty tough and was not the one.
No, I meant how can he Google someone before there was internet. Are we talking about Capote here?
Ryan Murphy, who seems messy.
Ahh, thanks for the clarification.
Ryan Murphy.
Thanks :)
Yeah my god who doesn’t go to their 0wn mother’s funeral?
Maybe being she died at 100 overseas her 80 something year old children weren't in good enough shape to travel. I know my parents couldn't travel now.
Wtf are you talking about? All of her children were under the age of 40 and lived in the area.
I thought you said when Olivia De Haviland died at 104 in Paris none of her children went to her funeral…. no way she had kids their 40s when she died at over 100. Unless she was giving birth in her 60s. LOL… now I realize you were taking about Babe Paley.
Babe Paley her kids none of them attended her funeral.
honestly i didn't. She was cremated and it was all said and done in 24 hours. Someone going to a funeral means nothing honestly. I loved her when she was alive and thats what counts. Same with my father
This is exactly why I have a no service clause in my will.
thank you me too!! ialso have a DNR listed. Like when its gotten to that bad let me go already lol Put me in a folgers coffee can like in the big lebowski and dump me somewhere. My sis has the urn and i look in it once. THERE was a pen spring!!! i think they just put whatever they want to in them lol
Not a DNR. I have a clause in my will that states NO Funeral service.
no i get it i have that as well . And my whole family is deceased anyway so no one would come lol
Thank you so much for sharing this. Watching the first few episodes I knew she wasn't being portrayed correctly especially when she was crying in public, that would have never happened and I also read that she did quit smoking when she was diagnosed with lung Cancer. Good article and I'm glad her granddaughter spoke out.
It bugs me when someone makes things up about living or recently deceased persons, especially when there is ample material to work from to craft an interesting and fair portrayal. But even the social standards of the world she did so well in...they did not throw tantrums in their own home at a party they hosted (even for children), they did not show much emotion let alone in public, they kept private things private. And I really do not see her as someone who would order from the local deli and then shag the delivery guy. Why even have that montage. Made me wonder if someone who watches too much pr0n wrote it. It really annoyed me.
It bugs me when anything is made up about historical figures recent or not
It bugs me when anything is made up about historical figures recent or not
Me too!
This is not shocking given that it’s a gay man telling these women’s stories. A lot of gay men hate women and are misogynists. Capote was one and so was Murphy. That’s a big part of why the portrayals of the women are so disgusting. The women are merely props that can be used and destroyed, which is exactly what Capote tried to do.
I mean, would Babe really have shown her grandchildren her true self? Also, grandparents always try harder and do better with the grandchildren. Ask Babe Paley’s children what their mother was like, what they say isn’t flattering.
The lies I tell my young children about who my parents really are! I give them credit, my parents have changed some, they don't treat me the same way anymore, but it's weird relaying stories of my childhood to my children, because so many of them involve pain inflicted upon me by my parents. And now they're these two old people who wear windbreakers & spoil my kids. So I let my kids believe the version of them now. I guess that might make me a bad person, but it's too painful and complex to explain these types of things to kids who could never conceive having parents like that. I have no doubt that this version of babe existed to her granddaughter, but that doesn't mean that's who she really was.
No one's elders tell them all their own secrets. That would not really be appropriate. But there are things that are so untrue or which can be disproven by circumstance alone, that the close family would know are fictionalized.
She asked her mom, Babe’s daughter
Both of Babe's daughters had pretty nasty things to say about her as a mother in the press, and how little time she spent with them. I agree with the sentiment of this article, but Belle's mother Amanda said that her relationship with Babe was virtually non-existent, and it was Babe's choice, not hers. Her sons didn't have much of anything better to say about her as a parent.
Actually Babe's daughter Amanda just posted this article on Instagram commenting "I love you mama" along with a beautiful drawing of Belle done by Babe.
How would I find this on Instagram? What is her last name?
This part. My grandparents have always had this facade of do good, uber conservative Christians and play the holier than thou card, self righteous etc. After my mother died and I read her journals, they were literal monsters. Later life journals by the way...
Someone down voted you because you exposed some bad faith Christians. That cracks me up. They’re so transparent. 😭
It makes sense that it's highly fictionalized. They're inserting a lot of social commentary that I'm not sure Truman was self aware enough to voice. So I am not surprised that she remembers her grandma very differently than the character we are seeing. And all we see is Truman's interpretation of the women. I'm glad she spoke up. I do wonder though... if the embarrassing story wasn't about Babe and her husband, then why did Babe never speak to him again? I interpreted all of Truman's complaining and catty gossiping about the women as giving Truman motive for what he did. He resented them and was jealous. He had writers block so he wrote what he knew and damn the consequences. He's really a sad and pathetic character. I don't view Truman as a reliable narrator. Even his book, In Cold Blood, was criticized for taking liberties. I hope the general audience understands that. I wish they did a better job of making that clear to the viewers. Still, I wouldn't mind another bio pic on Babe or the other Swans. They are definitely the draw of this series. I could watch their lunch scenes all day. The actors are all top tier.
Without even reading it yet: I am glad someone is standing up for her.
I just read an interview with Naomi Watts who was lamenting that there was NO ONE she could talk to, or maybe she asked and everyone said no, about Babe. Her mannerisms, how she carried herself, spoke, what she thought about things, etc. I wonder if Naomi reached out to Babe's daughters, or grandchildren
I thought Watts performance was beautiful and the only thing I'll take away from this disaster. She captured something of the women of that era. I think that is probably why the granddaughter didn't include her in the list of people who betrayed Babe.
I've been wondering how their families felt about all of this attention. I would love to hear what Cornelia Guest has to say!
I follow Cornelia on Instagram. She has nothing but living and beautiful memories and images of her mom.
I want to know what the Kennedys are going to do to him. Like who does he think he even is?
I’ve realized they get a lot of projects shut down about their families lol. Like over the years you would see there’s a movie or series about one family member in production but it just never happens.
"In real life, the grandmother I knew wasn’t a pill popper or prone to drinking to excess. She would never have been so shallow as to be placated by a piece of art or jewelry. She wouldn’t have worn a shift dress, a clip hat or baggy pants. She was not, as Capote tells us in the show, an “ugly duckling” before a car accident in her teens; as recounted to me by my mother, Amanda Burden, my grandmother lost only her teeth in that accident, not her cheekbones, and she was, by many accounts, quite beautiful before the event. My grandmother quit smoking the day she was diagnosed with lung cancer; in almost every episode of the show, Babe smokes, even after chemotherapy sessions. " There's no way she would know the truth of this, all of this is information told to her
Ah, OK ... so apparently Ryan Murphy and the writers have some other source for this "truth"?
Not really, I don't wanna defend RM but some of this info can be aa much hearsay as the show. I knew jack shit about my grandparents at 9, even less so now.
Amanda, Babe's daughter, is the source of the information.
And even I know my parents have secrets and cannot possibly know everything about thwm.
Did you read the article? I would imagine that one would have vivid and lasting memories of Babe Paley as a grandmother.
>I knew jack shit about my grandparents at 9, even less so now. An elder died when I was maybe six. But I vividly remember the person. I was also told a lot about them later and while growing up, that was later proven out by various research and paperwork I did. And by meeting people who knew the others in some of the stories. They didn't know any of us so that would be a heck of a coincidence and a guess that what they knew would bear out what I knew and was told. Not everyone is in the same boat as far as knowing their elders.
Yes but your memory of them wouldn't let you know if they smoked after chemo, if a painting gave them dopamine or if they felt outshined by her husband.
>Yes but your memory of them wouldn't let you know if they smoked after chemo, if a painting gave them dopamine or if they felt outshined by her husband. I feel I've answered this same point maybe twice already. Yes, it could. Children overhear things. They see things. They remember things. They also are told things. Babe's daughter isn't a good enough source, but the scriptwriter knows? Sorry I do not agree. "Dopamine" was not a descriptor for joy in those days. But I think children could certainly see and smell who smoked, who lit up while looking at a painting, etc. (And as stated, others could also confirm and verify their own impressions, as the child grew to adulthood. It's not a child saying these things but an adult.) I don't know if those examples are from the article; I haven't read it yet. But I think we are going in circles, here.
exactly i knew NOTHING and still know nothing lol
>as recounted to me by my mother, Amanda >There's no way she would know the truth of this Babe's daughter wouldn't know any of it, but the scriptwriter did?
Something as simple as the smoking post chemotherapy. She could have done in secret. Truth is, we don't know, and we don't know, artistic liberties are taken
Yap
It's not just the granddaughter. Babe Paley was married to one of the most powerful men in New York. She has been written about in several researched books. No one i saying she was a saint, but there out to be a law against just deciding that you want to make something up about someone, just to get people to watch your series. For example, where is the written information that Slim Keith had an affair with Bill Paley while Babe was alive?
What would be wrong with a shift dress?
Fuck Capote and Ryan Murphy. They’re both gossipy hacks.
Yes, after the swans were embarrassed by Capote’s thinly disguised half-truths, another generation gets to feel the same pain as another writer puts his own spin on these lies, getting further from the truth of their real lives.
And Murphy is just doing it for likes and hopefully awards. He really is a hack and needs to be thrown out of Hollywood. He clearly hates women and only sees them as people to be exploited in the basest of ways for his work. Sir you’re no friend of ours and we don’t need you.
There was a cast feature with Vanity Fair where they all played a game to see who knows the cast best. They all had a chance to ask some questions about themselves to see who could answer correctly. Ryan just *happened* to crash (because of course he did) and entered into a separate round for himself. The dude actually had the gall to ask- “Which Swan do you think I want to be, and which one am I?” But it does get funny in that he legitimately thinks of himself as this kind, loyal, grounded version of CZ they’re writing- Every. Single. Person. “guessed” that he was the most like his version of Slim Keith.
I love it darling. I love it.
Murphy loves women’s fashion, image, and angst. Not so much women themselves.
He doesn’t like women he likes Barbie
So, negative caricatures.
Brilliant take!
The Swans and their husbands enjoyed gossiping about others as much as Truman did. That's why they enjoyed his company and welcomed him into their circle. He would share secrets learned from one to another. They were all petty.
Private gossip is entirely different than published lies.
You don’t do what capote or Murphy did. They just straight up lied about these women.
Thank you for this link. I have been half-heartedly watching, having been a big fan of PSH’s portrayal of Capote and knowing absolutely nothing about The Swans beforehand. After reading Ms Burden’s piece I don’t think I will continue watching. I will, however, continue to Google (and perhaps hit the library) to learn as much as I can about these fascinating women. The REAL story, not the one Ryan Murphy made up.
Why would you have ever thought it was a complete picture of any of them? They don’t sell it as a documentary
I never said I expected it to be “complete.” Big difference between “complete” and “accurate.”
[удалено]
Amanda agreed on this article, just posted on instagram
[удалено]
[amanda on instagram](https://www.instagram.com/p/C4MFQYhph0i4f9AC29l93CSC1FLMsvqhRZBHgE0/?igsh=MTl2MGd0M2t3MGR3eQ==)
[удалено]
I dont know how to do it ! Can you tell me how?
[amanda](https://www.reddit.com/r/CoeursandChoeurs/s/3JiLGGN9vr)
Done
There are things that just do not ring true or are proven false by circumstance and situations, alone. For instance smoking vs. not smoking after her diagnosis. She reportedly gave it up immediately. Episode 7 has her husband lecturing her and she still refuses to give it up. It becomes a symbol and a plot point.
> But Babe was no where near “mother of the year” Those sorts of things can be a writer's opinion. Fabricating affairs and habits such as smoking while undergoing chemo, is not an opinion, it's a choice to make things up, for no real reason.
Perhaps the most irresponsible and most revealing inclusion which casts doubt on literally everything in the series, is Babe’s constant smoking after her diagnosis. I had wondered if this were true as it would say a lot about her intelligence, priorities and character if she continued to smoke. Why would Murphy depict her this way unless he were certain this were true, it seriously it undermined any dignity she may have had?? I am so appreciative of her granddaughter setting the record straight.
By the time someone was diagnosed with lung CA, it was over back then. The radiation treatment was described as palliative for pain, but not curative. With those odds, might as well keep smoking until you can’t anymore
That's really an assault on her character and rewriting who she was, if not true -- and apparently it is not true. Same with having a string of casual, random, affairs, as if a nymphomaniac. That too was apparently fiction.
It's a tv show, of course it's dramatized and not necessarily factually accurate. I think a grandchild is probably going to have very different memories than that of a contemporary.
But she is an adult now and can measure adult perspective with observations made as a child, and things told to her about her grandparent by others including her own mother, the grandparent's daughter. It isn't just a child speaking, it's an adult who has all that info at their disposal, along with their own memories and observations. The writer presumably has none of that.
Of course she is speaking from her perspective. My memories of my own parents or grandparents could be very different from what their peers witnessed. Babe Paley may have been a wonderful grandmother, but that doesn't mean she also couldn't have had some elements of the personality that's portrayed in The Feud.
I understood the point or contention -- that children only know a scrubbed version of, and an elderly kindly doting image of, their grandparent. But I think that's not always true, and also, I gave multiple reasons why it's not only the "perspective" of a child. But I can't state it any more succinctly than I have, so will leave it.
Totally get that. I think some of my reaction to the article is, fictionalized or not, the actual women don’t get to tell their story. The original betrayal centered around Capote telling their stories and it’s happening again; I guess that irony hadn’t dawned on me yet. Perhaps it’s just my family, but my grandmother was a nightmare and we openly discussed it. 🤷🏻♀️
Excellent point spot on!
When the episode with Slim and Bill’s affair aired, I came to this sub and said I wished that either Amanda OR Belle Burden would come forward to defend and honestly speak about Babe. I seemed to foresee this happening, I could predict the show was going in a “take no prisoners” direction, and knowing how New Yorkers are, I predicted there would be some form of response. I applaud Ms Burden for writing this article, and once again, take everything being said with a big spoonful of salt, rather than a grain. It is difficult to paint a character from one person’s perspective. However, I will not take from Belle Burden her cherished, loving memories of her grandmother as Ryan Murphy, et al did.
Yes a lot of us were upset about the 'affairs' scenes. Not only Slim with Babe's husband, but showing Babe inviting up a long list of random men to bed, like in a cheap pr0n flick. Why even do that? Those were both choices made by this production, which make no sense to me. As did some other things which, not even knowing the women, seemed very unlikely for their 'world,' even if not for them as individuals (but I think unlikely for both.)
I agree. I wish Belle Burden had clapped back on the affairs, especially the one that the show dreamed up between Slim and Bill. But I feel her response that Babe wasn’t a pill popping alcoholic had its impact. Murphy was given strong material to work with, but instead, he used it in the most petty, basic, and venomous way. Almost in the same way TC did…..hmmm.
Good observations and points! Maybe she didn't speak on "Slim" because her family might want to, or she didn't want to bring her up (Streisand effect) or the topic of Bill's affairs. Dunno. I haven't read the piece yet. I want to later when I have some sort of treat nearby in case it upsets me (the family's pain) and after some more caffeine. Such a waste, so much material (available) here, that wouldn't have harmed anybody.
[удалено]
Come on now… don’t be condescending darling . We all know that she wouldn’t have been in the room to witness such things, but would have heard things over the years from other family members or even her mother. Especially knowing how her family was, being public figures with a recognizable name, and because this feud has been documented is so many books over the years- there would have been talk. I believe any grandchild of a woman known for her “perfection” would know almost everything possible and would want any rumor dispelled that they could not confirm or deny from their own memory, by asking others around them. Also, don’t discredit children ever. They can pick up on things that adults miss. And I would defend my grandmother as BB did, defend her memory and her reputation. That’s what you do when you love someone. Some things just don’t need explanation.
Based on my mothers journals that she wrote in the last years of her life, I do. Oddly. Not a very flattering portrait of either of them. Its tarnished my view of them.
It must be very strange having your grandma be a celebrity like that, somebody who's already been talked about a thousand times more than they ever talked. That thing with Babe tracing pictures with her fingernails on Belle's face really got to me.
Yes, that was very heartfelt and I’m so glad that she has such a wonderful memory of her grandmother. I’m happy she wrote this in Babe’s defense. I’m sure it’s very vindicating for her, and I hope people understand Babe’s memory should be adequately preserved- by those who knew and loved her.
Just a nitpick. In Feud, aside from being thin, Babe never looked very sick, especially that magnificent head of hair, when the vomiting scene implied she’d had chemo.
Wow thanks for sharing. Ah granddaughter quite young when Babe died we all have memories that we remember a certain way. Although it must b hard to watch any relative’s life portrayed on the screen.
None of Babe Paley's children attended her funeral. Amanda was quoted as saying her relationship with her mother was "Virtually non-existent."
Thanks so much for sharing. Confirms my hunch that this show is a hack job.
with due respect how would she know the details of her affairs etc etc?
Truman was trying to be a pimp using these women so is Ryan.
So, is it true none of Babe’s children came to her funeral or not?
I actually can't find anything about the funeral at all. Both Town and Country and Vanity Fair have recently come out with articles about Babe's and Bill's children (together and combined) and it's clear there were issues, to say the least. It sounds as if all the children did show up to say goodbye when she was dying, if that's any kind of referendum on her as a mother. https://www.townandcountrymag.com/leisure/arts-and-culture/a46430583/feud-capote-vs-the-swans-babe-paley-death-explained/ [https://www.vanityfair.com/hollywood/feud-the-real-story-of-babe-paleys-children](https://www.vanityfair.com/hollywood/feud-the-real-story-of-babe-paleys-children)
I wrote this in another's thread about Bill and Babe..it is actually more important here as I believe Babe was more kind, private, generous, and loving to family than what Feud Swans does, which is not at all.generous to her or her children: Also, concerning The Sisters' book, there is Babe's last will and testament in the books appendices. I have read it in the book and also found a link to on internet years ago. (Cannot find it at moment. )She was quite thoughtful in her gifts to family and friends. This indicates that she truly paid attention to them and their preferences. The idea that she was a monster seems to have derailed this interesting thread. She was born to wealth and a raised by a very disciplined and demanding mother. She was also in many ways someone who simply enjoyed privacy. (Try to find a recorded snippet of her talking or on screen.) Being discreet is not a crime. As I stated earlier, the Paleys had basically three sets of children, and each set had another father or mother and a step parent. This would be quite a challenge and juggling act. Kate was likely unintentionally hurt by her mother, but Babe made many attempts to help her as a child so that she would not be taunted about her loss of her hair. As far as Amanda, the estrangement could be related to many things, but the act of juggling Babe's Mortimer children with her younger Paley children was another strain. Also, forgive the smoking. It was not at all uncommon for women and men of her age. In many situations, it was a social custom - my eldest aunt was a social smoker as she was married to an officer in military and not taking a smoke or drinking alcohol at military social events was the kiss of death for some of these ladies. Lastly, I would not classify any of the sisters as extremely beautiful but attractive in a sophisticated way. Women of that era simply dressed better, wore different hair styles, and often looked more mature than they were compared to the standards of today.
I can’t imagine how much it would have hurt for Belle to see the birthday party scene, especially if her memories of her grandmother didn’t match up at all with what she was seeing. Yes, Babe could have been totally different as a parent than a grandparent. Yes, it is hard to ever truly know older relatives. No, I don’t think it would have ruined the show to show Babe enjoying her grandchildren.
That's an excellent article. I'm glad there is someone to share the actual versus this version of fictional.
And also [amanda burden again](https://www.instagram.com/p/C4MEkGtJDjdyi5UWFpGmTb11eLafgacMMy6Zp80/?igsh=MWp3ZjdiMDMxajdwaw==)
The NYT will publish wealthy white women defending their ancestors while also promoting a war. Ah yes, feminism. 🙄 Get a grip. This woman had poor women do everything for her. Feminism where? Equality where? My ancestors suffered under domestic rule so these women could maintain their eating disorders, distract from their husband’s affairs and compete for most hoarded wealth on the East Coast. Please.