Subverting the Cinderella Story and Assumptions About the 1950s in "The Solid Gold Cadillac"

 

The Solid Gold Cadillac is a 1956 comedy film starring Judy Holliday (pictured in the center of the photo above) as the irrepressible small stockholder, Laura Partridge. The car in the title alludes to the gift bestowed on the heroine by the other stockholders in the company for upholding their interests. The brief view of the gold Cadillac is filmed in Technicolor, though the rest of the film is in black-and-white. 

Holliday's character is somewhat similar to the one she played in her most famous role, that of Billie Dawn in the 1950 comedy Born Yesterday. In fact, there's a subtle allusion to that film in this one when she claims that the picture of the leading man in The Solid Gold Cadillac played by Paul Douglas resembles William Holden, her love in interest in the 1950 film. (There is no real physical resemblance between the two).   

In both films, the plot of marrying the love interest is secondary. The primary narrative is about the heroine's discovery of corruption and her determination to push back. It's not the traditional fairy tale in which all the princess needs to do is be discovered by the prince in order to live happily ever.  And that is something that is particularly underscored in The Solid Gold Cadillac.

LIke some other 1950s films, this one has a narrator -- voiced by George Burns in this case. He lets us know who are the bad guys and the good guys and draws parallels to the Cinderella story in describing the heroine's experiences.  

But this is not a princess who leaves behind a glass slipper for the prince to use to find her. The shoes she loses are sturdy boots. Twice in the film, Partridge finds a single boot of her own in the office she's trying to clear out. The second time, she thinks she'll find the mate in a file drawer, though as you see from the picture below, it turns out to be a boot from a different pair. 

I was wondering why so much emphasis on this sight gag until I connected it with the Cinderella narrative. It's an obvious subversion of the symbol of the fairy tale in which the drudge got to don a beautiful dress and ride in a carriage conjured by magic to  get swept off her feet by the prince who would save her from any future work.

In contrast, our heroine gets her man, her career, and a solid car rather than just a title and a carriage that turns back into a pumpkin

She's not the only woman in the film who continues working after marriage. Her secretary does, too. And the happily ever after of all the worthy characters is not just due to their marriages but to their careers, as well. This is the modern deviation from the traditional marriage plots that dominated fairy tales, plays, and  novels for a few hundred years.  Sturdy boots > glass slippers.

Related: Feminine Feet

Pride, Prejudice and Persuasion: Obstacles to Happiness in Jane Austen's Novels

Available at Totally_Jane_Austen

It is a truth --universally acknowledged  or not --that the traits of pride and prejudice are what threaten the happiness of Jane Austen's hero and heroine in the novel that names those traits in the title. It also appears pretty obvious that the Lady Russell's persuasion is what prompted Anne Elliot to break her own heart, as well as that of Frederick Wentworth. Pride is also to blame in the story of Persuasion, though.

Ostensibly it is the dreaded Elliot pride that is to blame. After all, Lady Russell's influence over Anne's decision stems from the status of the Elliot family. Certainly, we see several examples of the Elliot pride on display in the snobbishness of Anne's father and both her sisters.  Anne admits to having a form of pride, as well, though it is one that feels embarrassment for her family for falling all over Lady Dalrymple and her daughter, relatives who had ignored them for years to an apparent snub going back to the time before Anne's mother's death.

Relative risk for social aspirations

In chapter 16, Anne reflects on her disappointment in her father and eldest sister: "She had hoped better things from their high ideas of their own situation in life, and was reduced to form a wish which she had never foreseen; a wish that they had more pride; for 'our cousins Lady Dalrymple and Miss Carteret;' 'our cousins, the Dalrymples,' sounded in her ears all day long."

This is the idea of proper pride, of knowing one's essential worth well enough not to seek out reflected glory in others who bear a higher rank in society. The Elliot's fawning over their aristocratic relatives are no better than Mr. Collins who insists on referring to  his patroness, Lady Catherine de Bourgh, into every conversation.

Lingering resentment

While the Elliot pride is what accounted for the initial division between Anne and  Frederick Wentworth, it is the captain's pride that maintains it. He observes that point near the end of the book.  In chapter 23, Anne argues that she was not to blame in following the guidance of trusted friend and that she hopes that  resentment against Lady Russell will not linger.

Wentworth responds with some reflection that leads to self-recrimination:

"Not yet. But there are hopes of her being forgiven in time. I trust to being in charity with her soon. But I too have been thinking over the past, and a question has suggested itself, whether there may not have been one person more my enemy even than that lady? My own self. Tell me if, when I returned to England in the year eight, with a few thousand pounds, and was posted into the Laconia, if I had then written to you, would you have answered my letter? Would you, in short, have renewed the engagement then?"

"Would I!" was all her answer; but the accent was decisive enough.

"Good God!" he cried, "you would! It is not that I did not think of it, or desire it, as what could alone crown all my other success; but I was proud, too proud to ask again. I did not understand you. I shut my eyes, and would not understand you, or do you justice. This is a recollection which ought to make me forgive every one sooner than myself. Six years of separation and suffering might have been spared. It is a sort of pain, too, which is new to me. I have been used to the gratification of believing myself to earn every blessing that I enjoyed. I have valued myself on honourable toils and just rewards. Like other great men under reverses," he added, with a smile. "I must endeavour to subdue my mind to my fortune. I must learn to brook being happier than I deserve."

 Here Jane Austen makes it clear that she exonerates Anne completely and has Wentworth recognize that he is more to blame than she is. Had he reached out to her after only two years of separation, they could have been reconciled and settled six years earlier than they are. Thus pride proves to be an even greater obstacle to happiness than the persuasion that Anne learned to shake off once she got out of her teens.

The role of Helpful antagonists

The pride of not subjecting oneself to a second rejection could have kept them apart forever if not for the involvement of another person, however unwittingly. Like Darcy, Wentworth waits for a signal from his beloved to renew his proposal -- what gives each man hope that he will be accepted this round. In Darcy's case it was Elizabeth's refusal to promise not to accept Darcy when pushed to do so by Lady Catherine. 

This was such an important factor in his deciding to go ahead that the 1940 film version of the book presented Lady Catherine as in on the plot to sound out Elizabeth's feelings. Of course, that is a blatant deviation from the book, though the film aimed to be even more "light, and bright, and sparkling" and redeem even Lady Catherine. 

For Wentworth, the deciding factor was hearing Anne declare that women are more constant than men in love (in general) in talking about Captain Benwick with Captain Harville when he complains about having to get his miniature -- that had been intended for his sister --set for Louisa instead.  It is hearing Anne's view that motivates Wentworth to propose again, though this time via letter to spare himself any direct answer that may be a rejection.  

The power of the pen

We may as well look at the whole letter, as the opening line is among the most romantic declarations to be found in English literature. It appears in Chapter 23.

Persuasion line on Jane Austen portrait 
by Totally_Jane_Austen

"I can listen no longer in silence. I must speak to you by such means as are within my reach. You pierce my soul. I am half agony, half hope. Tell me not that I am too late, that such precious feelings are gone for ever. I offer myself to you again with a heart even more your own than when you almost broke it, eight years and a half ago. Dare not say that man forgets sooner than woman, that his love has an earlier death. I have loved none but you. Unjust I may have been, weak and resentful I have been, but never inconstant. You alone have brought me to Bath. For you alone, I think and plan. Have you not seen this? Can you fail to have understood my wishes? I had not waited even these ten days, could I have read your feelings, as I think you must have penetrated mine. I can hardly write. I am every instant hearing something which overpowers me. You sink your voice, but I can distinguish the tones of that voice when they would be lost on others. Too good, too excellent creature! You do us justice, indeed. You do believe that there is true attachment and constancy among men. Believe it to be most fervent, most undeviating, in F. W.

"I must go, uncertain of my fate; but I shall return hither, or follow your party, as soon as possible. A word, a look, will be enough to decide whether I enter your father's house this evening or never."

Wentworth and Darcy  get their second chance at love because they are willing to overcome the inclination to resent the refusal forever. This is very rare in real life. As a matchmaker, I see men all the time reject suggestion out of hands simply because the woman in question had said no to a date with them in the past. They don't allow for people to have changed and being open to things they would not have considered in the past and would rather have the loss than risk a second rejection. 

Jane Austen mug vy Totally_Jane_Austen

 Related:

Jane Austen: Love and Money

Love and Limerence in Jane Austen

Jane Austen at the Morgan
Three Janes, Two Governesses,
Observations on Jane Austen's Emma
Jane Austen and Autism

Jane Austen's Heroines

Pride, Prejudice and Persuasion: Obstacles to Happiness in Jane Austen's Novels

Pride and Prejudice in Job Applications
The Big Bow-wow & Bit of Ivory

Jane Austen and Capability Brown

True love meets marketing

In email from Modcloth

from Banana Republic

When a holiday invented on a TV program becomes a real thing, we can only marvel at how right Oscar Wilde was in declaring, "Life imitates art far more than art imitates life."



Galentine's Day was born in a script for the 22nd episode of Parks and Recreation that first aired on NBC on February 11, 2010. In the episode named for the newly invented holiday, the holiday is presented not to supplant Valentine's Day but to offer a supplement to it. It sets aside February 13th as the day to celebrate women's friendship,with gifts and gatherings.





As someone who has never watched the program, I had not heard of Galentine's Day until a couple of years ago when businesses started to latch on to the day as cause for marketing clothes, cosmetics, brunches, etc. In fact, this year, I already received emails from the likes of Target, ModCloth, Gap brands and Olay with messages like the ones I copied here.

Clearly, marketers know an opportunity when they see it (even if some publications on marketing have failed to take note) and by 2019 Galentine's Day is a marketing holiday in its own right. Granted, Galentine's Day has not yet made it to the status of being counted among the holidays covered by National Retail Foundation (NRF). However, the force behind the Galentine's Day movement is a factor in the revision of Valentine's Day itself.

 The Evolution of Valentine's Day 

A 2013 article entitled "The Reconceptualization of Valentine’s Day in the United States: Valentine’s Day as a Phenomenon of Popular Culture"argues that the holiday was reborn in the US in 1840s, largely due to the rise of marketing, which extended the celebration through the promotion of gifts and cards: " Even though the holiday historically involved primarily young men and women, the range of individuals included in the celebration of Valentine’s Day was expanded in the United States to any and all ages through aggressive marketing techniques directed at both the young and old, consequently increasing the amount of Valentine’s Day consumers."

Certainly, there is no let up of marketing around such a lucrative holiday. This year, the NRF estimates a record-breaking  $20.7 billion will be spent on Valentine's Day, and that's even in the case of just 51 percent of people saying this will be celebrating it. That's because those who are spending are spending more, and not just on the red roses and romantic dinners. Cards and gifts for friends and indulgences one buys for oneself are propping up those spending amounts. As the NRF itself observes, the spending patterns for Valentine's Day have changed over the past decade.

The Galentine's Day Factor and Modern Princesses

The change noted by NRF fits well with the timing of the rising influence of the Galentin'se Day Phenomenon over that same period of time. Even for those who do not set aside February 13th as the day to mark the value of female friendships, the attention it -- among other key relationships outside romantic ones -- deserve has taken over a greater share of Valentine's Day itself. For an easily accessible barometer of pop culture, we'll look at the evolution of  Disney movie plots.

The cultural shift in celebrating various loves in life can even be seen in Disney movies of this period. While the classic princess stories, starting with the 1937 Snow White,  had always culminated in finding her prince, that has also evolved. Let's look at 2010: in Tangled, Rapunzel does meet a man she falls for her, he is not a prince, and they do not even commit to marry by the end of the film. So there is some deviation from the classic romantic plot there. By 2012, there is no romantic interest interest offered at all for the heroine of Brave who is motivated by her love for her family. But the really big change arrives the following year in Frozen in which the trappings of romantic love are presented only to be rejected, and the transformative power of true love is shown to be the bond of sisters.

True love, no longer the province of a  princess bride now can be taken to apply to friends and family, and so Valentine's Day itself is being redefined as a holiday of love that is not bounded by romantic tropes. Of course, marketing will take advantage, and we even have sellers who can take advantage of those whose spending is devoted to "anti-Valentine's Day" gifts.

Retreating from Fake News: The Example of Dunkirk

If you're interested in history, (and a family that made film history) or if you're interested in how events get reported during and after a war, then you really should read  Alone: Britain, Churchill, and Dunkirk: Defeat Into Victory by Michael Korda. For me, tt crystallized certain aspect of British history, the country's view of itself in relation to the rest of Europe, and what was highlighted in films of the WW II. Then, of course, there is the issue of how you truth can be more effective at boosting morale than false propaganda.

.
Class divisions was not altogether absent from British consciousness, Korda notes, despite the attempts to put differences aside to work together:

The spirit of wartime unity between the rich and the poor was not altogether a fiction, but it was nothing like as strong as it became portrayed later on in British propaganda, let alone in films and eventually television. ... British class warfare was ever so slightly suspended during the war, but by no means eliminated. (451)

That particular issue is at the center of the book that was quickly adapted into a film, both with the title  This Above All.

As for the position the Brits saw for themselves within Europe, it is in the book's title. Though the country started its involvement as an ally to others, the big shift it found at Dunkirk was that it was free to focus on its own needs in the war, a feeling that Korada finds repeated in the Brexit vote: 

King George VI spoke for the whole nation when he wrote to his mother Queen Mary after the fall of France, 'Personally, I feel happier now that we have no allies to be polite to and to pamper.' Dunkirk is not unrelated to the emotions of those who demanded 'Brexit,' the British exit from the European Union in 2016. There was a national sense of relief in 1940 at leaving the Continent and withdrawing behind the White Cliffs of Dover. (p. 461)

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Keep-calm-and-carry-on.svg

To return to another film of the time, They Met in the Dark features the song, "Toddle Along" at least three times. The lyrics stress exactly what the British felt got them through the war, carrying on, even when the going gets tough.  This is what Korda finds in the experience of Dunkirk and why the truth worked better than any lie could: "Churchill did not need a propaganda minister like Joseph Goebbels -- he was his own best propagandist, and his instinct that the British would rally when their backs were to the wall was proved correct." (432)

The British press embraced that approach, too, and that is why even a retreat could be seen not as a loss of honor but a symbol of the nation's resolution:

By now the British press was finally reporting on the Dunkirk evacuation with relative frankness." He cites the description of the withdrawal with a description of the "difficulties" involved. Then he say, "The piece marks a significant change from the Ministry of Information previous policy of manufacturing good news for home consumption and downplaying disasters, and also the first step in in the transformation of Dunkirk form a humiliating military defeat into a proud national epic even as it was taking place. 'Grin and bear it' might have been the new motto fro Britain, in which the ability 'to take it' rather than any significant victory, became a source of national pride, and even optimism." (439)

To Boldly Go Beyond Barriers

In the 1964 picture below, the computer is on the right, and her name is Melba Roy She went on to become Program Production Section Chief at Goddard Space Flight Center. The machine next to her was referred to as an IBM then.

pic from 

commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Melba_Roy_-_Female_Computer_-_GPN-2000-001647.jpg

Melba Roy does not appear in the film Hidden Figures, which concentrates its attention on just three of the African-American women who worked as computers in the space program, though she is mentioned in Margot Lee Shetterly's book on which the movie is based. The book covers a much longer span of time and more characters than the main three: Katherine Johnson, Dorothy Vaughan, and Mary Jackson.

One female of color who doesn't make it into either the film or the book is Janez Lawson. In fact, it's hard to find anything about her at all beyond what has already been unearthed by Nathalia Holt in her book The Rise of the Rocket Girls.  In truth, I found Shetterly's book a faster read, but there is more information in Holt's about women in the industry and how the role of computer became a sort of pink collar career.

In fact, though, you need to go even further back in time to see women employed as computers. And they were also focused on the stars. That's the topic of  Dava Sobel's book The Glass Universe: How the Ladies of the Harvard Observatory Took the Measure of the Sky.Working painstakingly through photographs of telescopic view of the heavens, these computers observed differences in spectra and worked out the classification system that shifts the alphabet around. The mnemonic device became "Oh be a fine girl, kiss me." New discoveries have contributed to new letter placement, leaving some question as to how to complete that famous mnemonic. I have to admit this book can be slow going, though it does have some nice photographs to illustrate the history, something that is also in Holt's book but missing in Shetterly's.

Another thing in those two books that Shetterly doesn't detail are some details about what the women were paid. One of the key women in the Observatory notes that she was only paid $1500 when men in comparable positions were paid $2500. Other women employed as computers were paid hourly, at the rate of 25 - 30 cents. This hourly rate must have remained the standard, as Holt says that's how the women working at NASA got paid. As a result, some of the women earned more than their husband because of the long hours they had to work.

 In contrast, Shetterly's book always states their earnings in yearly amounts, and the film indicates that Katherine would not have been paid any more for staying later at work. It is possible that her pay grade was changed even though she was still called a "computer."

As the Hidden Figures  book picks up the history of the computers in the 40s, it includes Miriam Mann, a contemporary of Vaughan who is described as a woman as petite and fearless. Mann repeatedly ripped down the paper sign designating a section of the cafeteria for the "colored" women. It would go back up, and she'd rip it down again until it stayed down.

Katherine Johnson with celestial Training Device
Pic from https://www.nasa.gov/image-feature/katherine-johnson-at-nasa-langley-research-center

 If you've seen the film, you'd realize how her defiance was translated into a somewhat different context with a great deal of dramatic license. For instance, Katherine Johnson achieved major recognition as the first female computer to get her name on a report as early as 1959 (published in 1960) that predates the movie. But as the center of the film, her character is subjected to Jim Crow practices in ways that didn't happen in real life. In the book, she is the "unflappable" Katherine who was never driven to an outburst about the bathrooms because she acted on the assumption that she had the  right to use the restroom in the building in which she worked. There's no indication that she was prevented from doing so in the book. I

In point of fact, it was Jackson who experienced that kind of humiliation. But she only put up with it once (Shetterly 108). Once was enough to get her to rant about her situation (not in a room full of people) in front of one man who offered that she work for him. She accepted. 

Another cool thing about Jackson's achievement as an engineer was not  breaking the color barrier at the school for her classes, but serving as an inspiration for her children. It's a pity the movie didn't include this episode in the book. When Jackson's son won the Virginia Peninsula Soap Box Derby, he declared, "'I want to be an engineer like my mother'" (200).

Dorothy Vaughan gets a lot more coverage in the book than in the film, as she began her computer career about two decades before the the movie opens. She actually did earn official recognition as head of the West Ara Computers unit" but lost it at the end of the decade when the unit was disbanded.  It's ironic to note that near the end of the book (264) Shetterly notes that Vaughan never learned to drive, making the carpooling scenes thrown in to show the closeness of the characters to have been historically impossible.  The library book event is not in the book either. FORTRAN was actually taught to the employees, and the on-site classes were open to all races (139). But again, that's dramatic license for you.

Dramatic license isn't necessarily bad, one just has to realize that events were a bit different in fact. On the plus side, the film is very engaging and actually presents the story in a way that works well as an introduction of the subject that can work even for young children. They would not be subjected to hearing racial epithets and they won't even see a single character smoke, though the sixties was a time when most people held a cigarette at some point during the work day.

BTW the title's Star Trek reference is deliberately placed because Shetterly refers to the popularity of the show with the NASA set as well as with Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. She refers to his encouraging Nichelle Nichols to stick with her role as Lt. Uhura  when she wanted to quite the show because he saw her as such a positive role model. That's something the actress recounted in her autobiography and even gets quoted the Wikipedia entry about her. Fictional characters can be inspiring, but sometimes real people prove equally impressive.

Additional online resource: http://omeka.macalester.edu/humancomputerproject/ 

 Interesting link about other women's roles in space: http://www.neatorama.com/2013/04/15/Women-in-Space-The-Mercury-13/

On the Hidden Figures Exhibit https://www.nasa.gov/feature/langley/museum-exhibit-highlights-nasa-langleys-human-computers-from-hidden-figures

Fom $7 to priceless: masterpiece marketing

The crowd waiting to get in to the Frick on Sunday, November 17th

Today I visited the Frick Collection to see the special exhibit on view through January 19, 2014,  Vermeer, Rembrandt, and Hals: Masterpieces of Dutch Painting from the Mauritshuis. (Of course, I also went into the rest of the museum, but as I've there several times before, the real draw for me, as it was for the many people waiting around the whole stretch between 70th and 71st and even round back onto 71st -- in the rain as pictured here.)

The visiting  painting that is the unquestioned star of the special exhibit is  "Girl with a Pearl Earring." Not only does it illustrate all the promotions for the exhibit, but it  given pride of place -- the equivalent of a solo performance -- in the museum. It is the only painting hanging in the oval room. Its special position allows visitors enough room to cluster around it without blocking people's view.



The exhibition details tell a rags to riches story about the painting, both in terms of its restoration and in terms of its valuation. The audio guide, relayed that the star painting was sold for the equivalent of just $7, as relayed here:

The history of the acquisition of the Vermeer has by now become legendary. Des Tombe purchased Vermeer’s Girl with a Pearl Earring in 1881 at a sale at the Venduhuis der Notarissen in the Nobelstraat in The Hague for 2 guilders with a 30 cent premium.  ...After Des Tombe’s death on 16 December 1902 (his wife had died the year before and their marriage had remained childless) it turned out that he had secretly bequeathed 12 paintings to the Mauritshuis, including Vermeer’s famous Girl with a Pearl Earring."⁴(from Quentin Buvelot, "COLLECTING HISTORY: ON DES TOMBE, DONOR OF VERMEER'S GIRL WITH A PEARL EARRING" in the Mauritshuis Bulletin, Vol. 17, no. 1, March 2004)

 Why should a painting that originally sold for just $7 become such an attraction? The answer is simple.   It is now Vermeer's  best known painting,  thanks to Tracey Chevalier's 1999 novel, which was the basis of a very successful 2003 movie. Now that's an interesting point in terms of marketing value. The Frick is well aware of the film's role in the painting's popularity and so is offering a showing of it on Monday evening, November 18th, with an exhibition viewing to begin at 5:30 and the film at 6.  

 Not to say that the painting is not worth of attention, but I'm not certain it would have drawn such a crowd if not for the attention cast on it by a bestselling book and well-received movie. It's certainly not the only painting by Vermeer to feature a woman in pearl earrings. One of the three Vermeers that the Frick owns is a later work of his, "Mistress and Maid" pictured here.  But no one wrote a book to popularize the story that the painting seems to tell and then went on to dramatize the same in a film, despite the suggestiveness of the woman's expression at being handed a letter by her maid.

It's something to consider: commissioning a book that could turn into a popular film to cast the spotlight on a particular work of art.

Any other plain Janes?

Among Charlotte Bronte's claim to fame is her success in going against the grain of beautiful heroines. While her juvenilia did feature the standard beautiful type, in her two most popular novels, Jane Eyre and Villette, (The Professor also features a small and plain heroine, though she is not the central character of the book and is not as well delineated as her later heroines) her heroines fascinate based on what's inside rather than what's outside. They proved her capable of what she promised her sisters, " I will show you a heroine as plain and as small as myself, who shall be as interesting as any of yours." 


I was thinking about this now because it seems to me that literature (and films or television adaptions) are still peopled by beautiful heroines. If the girl was born plain, all she has to do is get the right dress, hair style, and makeup (perhaps also eyebrow shaping) to appear as the beauty she was meant to be.  Typically the one who appears mousy just sheds her glasses, shakes out her hair and gets the right dress to get noticed. 


In contrast, Jane Eyre resists that convention of the ugly duckling blossoming into a swan. When Rochester attempts to buy her gorgeous gowns and jewels, she does not feel the elation that girls typically exhibit when donning such lovely things. Instead, she feels her cheeks burn.  


There is also an interesting take on dressing up in  for Lucy Snowe, the heroine of Villette.  Normally, she dresses in shadowy colors and stays in the background, but on one night she dares to wear pink and spots herself in the mirror as if she had come upon a stranger. But the dress (italicized for the central role it plays in so many Cinderella type stories) does not win her the attention of the man she adores who is smitten by a superficial beauty until he turns his attention to another whose beauty is less showy but is still distinguished from the plainness of the heroine. 


I'm wondering: do any other novel achieve a heroine who does manage to captivate someone in a romantic sense even though she remains  plain?