Posted by daitchen on Wed 16 Aug 06, 5:10 PM to daitchen's blog.
We went last weekend to see this film, having first watched a few clips from the original short Bettie Page movies for comparison.
Gretchen Moll in the title role is convincingly cute, and the story of how she became the best-known bondage model of her day (though it's tame stuff compared to what's available to us now) is entertainingly told.
I was left with the question of why she chose to do it. She came from a sexually repressed conservative religious background, firmly believing in a God who punished "sin". In one scene, her boyfriend discovers what kind of modelling she's been doing and calls it "disgusting". Yet still she carried on.
"It makes people happy, so where's the harm in that?" she asks. Disingenuous to say the least, given the climate of repressive censorship that prevailed, and in the end brought Irving Klaw, the photographer and film-maker who she worked for, to trial for distributing "obscene" material through the US mail, and caused him to destroy most of his negatives. It is also clear that her fetish notoriety scared off producers from giving her acting talents a break.
So, again the question, why? We are told that it paid about twice the average secretarial salary, but surely that could hardly have been enough reason. Watching this movie, and also viewing the original films, the gusto with which she entered into her roles is obvious. She clearly enjoyed what she did - but was she actually turned on by it? The film gives no grounds for us to think so, but, given the fact that she is still with us, perhaps it did not dare to.
On the other hand, why, unless it is to hint at the all-too-frequent psychological "explanation" for BDSM - childhood trauma - does the film imply that she suffered paternal sexual abuse? Why show her sexual assault by a gang of young thugs? These were just about the only episodes from her childhood that were included, so we must be meant to find some sort of significance in them.
Probably the most disturbing scene, for me, was the one at the US Senate hearing, where the father of a young man who'd been found dead in bondage (probably an auto-erotic asphyxiation, from what I could gather) blamed his son's death on the availability of pornographic images such as those of Bettie Page. Unable to face the idea that his "normal" all-American wholesome boy could have actually enjoyed such "filth", he spits out hatred at those who "murdered" him.
Depressingly similar to the current government campaign against so-called "violent" pornography, really.
Still, I was slightly cheered up when an expert witness at the Senate hearing remarked that "this sort of interest" (ie. bondage) was "quite common", followed by an outbreak of knowing chuckles in the cinema audience around us. "Common?!" demanded the Chairman. "Well, errm, common among those who share this perversion" backpeddled the witness hastily. To even more complicit audience chuckles.
Edited Thu 17 Aug 06, 12:04 AM by daitchen
| 17 Aug 06, 8:05 PM la_statuesque 11 yrs  |
Hi - i've not seen the film, but have met the relative of Irving Klaw, who inherited his estate. She lives in New York, and has a very healthy business selling modern copies of his photographs, taken off the original negs - she inherited thousands and thousands of negatives. Which is why you need to be very careful when buying Betty Page / Klaw material. The vast majority is not of the period. When she first inherited she was selling original photographs by the handful, AND selling negatives. A friend of mine in Paris has boxes of them, that he bought from her at that time. Now she is more careful, and won't sell negs or original pieces. The bondage material was a very minor part of the work Klaw did with Page, but it was the most contentious which is probably why the film concentrated on it. And also explains why there are many thousands of his original negs in existance - possibly only the bondage ones were destroyed.
We all have our strengths and we should recognise and use them, casting aside our weaknesses. Sadly, my strength is "daft". |
| 18 Aug 06, 6:30 PM Slavebinder UK(PE), 6 yrs |
I haven't seen the film either but hope to at some point. From what I understand - Irving Klaw was convinced by a customer that pictures of girls tied up in various poses would sell really well and so he tried it and, as Bettie was one of his models at the time, she ended up being the most famous but we know from the pictures that Bettie wasn't the only bondage model he had. I also understand that, at first, Irving wasn't entirely sure why such pictures would sell. You're very lucky to have met that relative. It would be great to hear the full story of all this. Does the film show how she met Irving as they seem to have spent a lot of time together. It would be great if the relative of Irving Klaw could produce an autobiography so we can hear the story from his point of view. Hand in hand with the story of Bettie would make great reading. |
| 24 Sep 06, 9:38 PM RubberPrincess UK(TW), 5 yrs  |
I have seen the film, and I have to say I was rather dissapointed. Although it clearly depicts Bettie in a beautiful, modest and vallant way, it fails to depict the years of abuse she suffered at home, and how she came to find joy in exposing herself in a way that made her feel beautiful. She clearly enjoyed her work, but the contradiction between her beliefs and her modelling were clear, she struggled enormously; between the morality her religion required and how it made her feel. I therefore feel this should have been shown in a clearer light. However I did enjoy the film, and though that it showed just how harmless some of the stuff we get up to is, and how sexy and forfilling it can be, a release for some. Maybe Bettie felt release from her binding of monotony of everyday life in her work. xXx DD xXx P.S. Has anyone seen Preaching to the Perverted, staring people from the Torture Garden, 1997 release. If they haven't then they should!!!! It covers a lot of issues that are currently being raised by the government in attempt to prevent us from the Safe, Sane and Consensual that we so enjoy in an adult, and well carried out fashion. |
