Talk:Louise Brooks

older comments

Wikipedia is not a repository for links. Wikipedia is a place for articles to be written about various subjects. Please, rather than simply post many links (which are useful, but not primarily), try to write the article yourself. You can use those links as references to build your article. But please, focus on writing, rather than building a large list of external links.

We can keep the links in here, so we can refer to them, and maybe add them to the article later. Kingturtle 06:20 Apr 18, 2003 (UTC)

Wrong date?

"In Europe" states Pandora's Box is from 1928, "Filmography" states it's from 1929. Which one is correct?

The authoritative Louise Brooks Society lists it as 1929. The movie was still be filmed when Brooks turned 22; there's a picture of cast & crew celebrating it on the London attic set. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.192.5.55 (talk) 13:57, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

External Links

• Louise Brooks Society
• Louise Brooks blog
• Internet Movie Database - entry on Louise Brooks
• All Movie Guide - entry on actress
• News of Lulu
• Louise Brooks Studies
• RadioLulu - Louise Brooks themed radio station

---

For advice on how to write an article, take a look here: Wikipedia:How to start a page . Keep up the tremendous effort! Kingturtle 06:23 Apr 18, 2003 (UTC)

---

I'm moving the links back to the newly-expanded article. -- Zoe

Zoe, if you're the one who did the Louise Brooks editing, kudos to you! It's quite good.--EKBK 15:16, 2 September 2005 (UTC)

EKBK - that was me, back when I wasn't registered. Thanks! Vanwall 21:50, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

Verne Equinox - excellent revisions, and headers well selected. When I first wrote the major edit that exists today, I was unregistered and un-used to editing; thanks for the great work! -- Vanwall Feb. 4 2006

My pleasure. Verne Equinox 21:53, 5 February 2006 (UTC)

Philosophy

I remember reading in one news article about this individual, it was brief and cryptic, concerning pessimistic aesthetics philosopher Arthur Schopenhauer. There seems an unnerving concentration on the film persona (particularly with the one from "Box", which I do not think is the best image to dwell on, given that it is one of dehumanization and objectification for varyous fetishistic obsessive types). I have a strong intuition that there was infact ALLOT more to this person then what is being focused on by what appears to be a majority of her fans. Is there any further detail in any of the Seven Seals concerning her philosophy, ideology, and maybe even politics (and at best, religion)? Given her scholarly nature, I strongly doubt any real resemblance to the character of that film. Seek the Forms --IdeArchos 08:13, 5 February 2006 (UTC)

Tone?

Hi all, glad to read this article, & I think Louise Brooks is way cool, but I have a quibble: Here & there, it tends to read like a fansite (i.e., a bit gushy) instead of an encyclopedia article. Does anyone else have this impression? I think a few word changes might help. I can take a shot at it. Z Wylld 23:00, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

Oh yeh I have. That and the fact that there is a marked lack of any of her philosophies. I see her, first and foremost, a scholar, who wrote film reviews and seven esseys (their subject is not given in this artical), or even any philisophical works (though, they may have been very, very diluted, given that Shopenhauer was a major influence on her, he held a nihilistic perversion of Neo-Platonism that would lead to social anarchy, followed by dictatorship by the Nietzscheans). I have bumped into this recently and was somewhat impressed, though, not satisfied with a lack of insight into her potentially more important contributions (if any). The secret here is, I suspect most of these people are just obsessed perverts (fans, like you said). Thanks -- IdeArchos 00:55, 11 March 2006 (UTC)

IdeArchos: Given that most Wikipedia entries are by those interested in the subject, ie: "fans", then you are implying a form of perversion that is offensive on the face of it. In Ms. Brooks case, she is almost exclusively associated with film and acting, with its attendant followers and critics, most of whom would take issue with un-informed statements regarding this entry on Ms. Brooks.

Z Wylld: As for "gushy", all the descriptive word selections have been used elsewhere in much more scholarly articles regarding Ms. Brooks and her life. If one wishes to correct anything, feel free, but everyone edits, remember.

IdeArchos: Had one read more on Louise Brook's career, one would have been apprised of her overriding "philosophy" for much of her life - an un-abashed sexual hedonism, which resembled the character of "Lulu" in "Pandora's Box" to an uncanny degree, with the exception that Louise, contrary to Wedekind's Erdgeist, was well aware of her sexual influence on men, and women, for that matter. That she survived a self-destructive, alcoholic youth and middle-age is nothing short of miraculous. Her deus-ex-machina for her entire life were wealthy men who were using her or had used her at some point in her existence, and even Louise was well aware how much her looks meant in the scheme of things. Even late in life, she was not above using the memory of what was to influence the present.

As for Schopenhauer's "major" influence on Ms. Brooks, it is an unknown factor, and as Louise never gave a concrete explanation of her philosophies, you are projecting your interpretations without foundation, especially the use of the words "major influence". Louise was highly intelligent and very well read, Schopenhauer's writings being only one of many philisophical works she undoubtedly read. Lotte Eisner's profile of Louise with a book of Schopenhauer, to which you must be referring, was in no way cryptic - unless you're trying to read more into it than just a film actress profile. She was an irreligious person for most of her life, although for a number of years late in life she attempted to become a practicing Roman Catholic; this was eventually ended by Louise of her own accord, so God rarely came into the discussions she had before and after this period, which can only be viewed as an abberation in her otherwise wide-open lifestyle.

She thought of herself first and foremost as a dancer, and as such her artistic expressions were primarily influenced by movement; as a writer, her primary influence was Proust, whom she strived to emulate in her writing. Ms. Brooks never wrote a film review per se, altho she claimed to have ghost-written one once for an inebriated Herman Mankiewicz(!), and never really examined any films in the classic critical sense in print. As for her essays, where she wrote exclusively about film, Hollywood, its people and its influences, there are no real philisophical discussions at any point, as Louise believed in brevity of writing. Her contribution to arts and letters are her film performances, her fashion stills, and her film writing - nothing more, and certainly nothing less. You could look it up.Vanwall 15:00, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

Hi Vanwall. Well, OK, I didn't mean to insult anyone. I don't really understand IdeArchos' reference to "obsessed perverts"; I myself am a fan, which is neither here nor there. So please don't be offended if I change a few words. --On another note, in the section on European interlude, the reference to Pandora's Box was a bit jarring, because it gives away the ending. I just saw this movie recently (before reading this article), and maybe I was just thickheaded, but I didn't anticipate the ending. So maybe there should be a plot spoiler warning. Thoughts, anyone? Z Wylld 16:36, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

Hi, Z Wylld. No offense taken at anything you said - a well edited article will have some give and take, and evidently the word choice has seen general acceptance. I was offended somewhat by IdeArchos' choice of words, which isn't the first time this person has failed civil discussion on this page, and seems to be looking for something that isn't there. I'm not sure about the spoiler comment being necessary; to be honest, I've never seen that before in a reference work - one does come here to be informed in a reasonably full manner. Thanks for your input, and if you have something new and relevant regarding Louise, by all means - edit! ;-) Vanwall 20:00, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

One thing that annoyed me here & there was the use of her first name only, in various sections. This seems a bit "familiar" in an encyclopedia article, and generally seems to happen in references to women, but not to men. So I might change it to her last name here & there, although you can see this is more of a "quibble" thing than a major issue. --Re. the other question, I've only seen the plot spoiler warning on articles on specific films, in the "plot" section (appropriately enough). I think it's part of the Wiki film project format. I don't know if it would work logistically in an article on an actor, in sections re. her various films, but it seems fair to include a warning here because the Jack the Ripper scene is a "shock" ending for Pandora's Box. Maybe someone knowledgeable about the Wiki film project has an idea? Z Wylld 20:32, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

I'm guilty of perpetuating the "familiarity" aspect myself - I've run across it on other articles as well, and didn't give it another thought. Hmmm. "Ms. Brooks" would certainly lend it a more scholarly tone, but I like Louise - that's just me, tho. ;-) I wasn't aware the Wiki film project was going to format related articles, but I see the point about the surprise being vitiated by too much information. Throw in a spoiler warning, I say, and if someone feels it's superfluous, they'll edit it out - not that I think that'll happen, 'cause you have a good point! Go for it. Vanwall 21:40, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

OMD Song

The synth pop group OMD had a hit song 'Pandora's Box' about Louise Brooks

Good call - I added that and also a bit on Soul Coughing's "St Louise is Listening" Vanwall 22:20, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

American Gods by Neil Gaiman references Louise Brooks extensively in two chapters of the novel. It's what brought me to this article. I think he uses her as an example of a passing age (the Silent Film era), forgotten in modern times.

Prix de Beaute

The article lists "Prix de Beaute" as a silent movie, but I saw a film clip of the murder scene that included dialogue, ominous music, and even a song. Brooks' singing voice was obviously dubbed and I don't think she had any wpoken lines in the scene, but that scarcely qualfies as "silent". CharlesTheBold 10:59, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

Like many others films of the period, two versions of Prix de Beaute were shot: one sound and one silent. Both versions are available on video. --Franz 11:30, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

Disputed quote

"She had little breasts, like pears – Charles Chaplin. Information found in a documentary about Louise Brooks on Youtube" What a demeaning, nonrelevant item to add to such an accomplished artist's bio piece. I see some sort of quality control effort here but why did this little gem of sexism make the cut? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.200.157.177 (talk) 19:41, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

Although I'm not sure this was demeaning, it looks rather unencyclopedic to me so I've removed the quote. It was indirect anyway, a Mr. Diamond apparently quoting Chaplin. Avb 23:29, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

Eponymous

The article calls Brooks' haircut "eponymous," but doesn't actually say what her nickname was. The haircut was called a "bob," but I think it was better known by a two-word name, perhaps "bob cut" or "bobby cut." Can anybody contribute Louise Brooks' nickname? I think it may have been "Bobs," "Bobsy," or "Bobsie" -- and she may have been called the "Bobby Girl" or "Bobsy Girl" in the press. Unfree (talk) 05:38, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Picture

Certainly with such an old subject with a wealth of photo's taken of her, perhaps another, more closeup picture of her is called for?Philatio (talk) 22:23, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

Agreed. We had a much better picture in place not that long ago; I'll reinstate it (no idea why it was changed). Avb 23:23, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

Very nice Philatio (talk) 23:46, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

'Twas I who made the earlier change. The portrait used here now again doesn't do her justice. Where are the penetrating eyes, the trademark bob? The two-shot I posted -- still up on the more discriminating Português & Finnish language sites -- shows her at work lighting up W.C. Fields, which is illuminating. So ... how about a better closeup? 71.192.4.218 (talk) 18:37, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

If you can find a better close-up, go for it. Maybe the pic with WC Fields (& caption) can be used elsewhere in the article? Avb 09:00, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

I don't know how to post photos from other sites, but I took your second suggestion ... and put it under "American film career," a change from Hollywood because she didn't start making movies in California until 1927.71.192.4.218 (talk) 18:25, 16 May 2008 (UTC)