Camille Paglia considers the "volcanic" Elizabeth Taylor

[katty]

more: http://www.salon.com/entertainment/movies/feature/2011/03/23/camille_paglia_on_elizabeth_taylor


When news broke that Elizabeth Taylor had died at 79, we immediately reached out to founding Salon contributor and lifelong Taylor obsessive Camille Paglia for her thoughts. We found her in a Philadelphia research library researching her new visual arts book for Pantheon, but she diligently trekked outside in the rain to speak to Salon editor-in-chief Kerry Lauerman by telephone under a portico, as the wind howled around her.

I remember reading your essay on Elizabeth Taylor from Penthouse in 1992 (it appeared in the collection "Sex, Art, and American Culture"), where you called her "a pre-feminist woman." You said: "She wields the sexual power that feminism cannot explain and has tried to destroy. Through stars like Taylor, we sense the world-disordering impact of legendary women like Delilah, Salome, and Helen of Troy. Feminism has tried to dismiss the femme fatale as a misogynist libel, a hoary cliche. But the femme fatale expresses women's ancient and eternal control of the sexual realm."

Exactly. At that time, you have to realize, Elizabeth Taylor was still being underestimated as an actress. No one took her seriously -- she would even make jokes about it in public. And when I wrote that piece, Meryl Streep was constantly being touted as the greatest actress who ever lived. I was in total revolt against that and launched this protest because I think that Elizabeth Taylor is actually a greater actress than Meryl Streep, despite Streep's command of a certain kind of technical skill

[joeybee12]

1. Paglia is nuts, but I'm reccing because she has one very truthful thing in here...

Meryl Streep only has technical skill...she is not a great actress...she cannot inhabit a role like great actresses can.

[truebrit71]

3. I totally disagree with that. Meryl Streep is without doubt one of the greatest ever..

'can't inhabit a role'? May I suggest you see Silkwood and Julia & Julia to see her inhabit her roles..

[joeybee12]

11. Saw Silkwood...she was unbearably bad...haven't seen any of her

recent movies...can't see wasting 2 hours of my life.

[truebrit71]

16. Really? Wow..I thought Cher was dreadful but Streep was glorious..

..i don't think I have ever come across anyone that thnks the same way as you..interesting..

[joeybee12]

18. Cher was great in that...

obbviously we're 180 apart.

[truebrit71]

19. Must be!!

Cheers! :hi:

[BonnieJW]

13. I agree completely.

I saw "The Devil Wears Prada" followed by "Doubt." Amazing! I had to keep thinking that these two characters were played by the same actress.

[FLPanhandle]

10. I have to agree with you about Streep

Never thought her a great actress.

[joeybee12]

12. I think we're in the minority...

however I doubt anyone will be watching any of her movies in 50 years...she really is bad and she's got Hollywood and critics believing she's not terrible, so, being the sheep they are, no one faults her.

[monmouth]

2. Taylor was a beauty, her acting was on a par with Monroe,vapid,

breathy and depending far too much on looks. Neither one could shine Streep's shoes when it came to acting chops.

[truebrit71]

4. Liz was streets ahead of Monroe...'Who's afraid of Virgina Woolfe' for example..

..I don't rate Marilyn at all as an actress, anymore than I do for someone like Megan Fox...she was just there to look hot and not much else..

[monmouth]

5. I dispute myself, you are right about her role in VW. She was wonderful in that...n/t

[October]

8. Liz in Virginia Woolfe; Marilyn in comedy; Meryl in anything

Just my humble opinion.

[joeybee12]

21. She did have great comic timing though...

I wonder if she ever would have gotten past the sex goddess roles had she lived and grown old.

[lapislzi]

7. Disagree.

While Monroe played on her vulnerability (which in itself can be appealing in certain roles and situations), Taylor was a potent icon. I urge you to watch "Cat on a Hot Tin Roof" and "Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf" again. Taylor radiates power.

I think the two women could not be more opposite.

Monroe spoke to the protective urges of men, and the infantalizaton of sexuality. I find that dangerous and disingenuous (pun intended). A sexually powerful woman is way more threatening.

[speltwon]

9. Acting is art and arguing about art is kind of pointless since we never get anywhere

but imo Taylor was a great actor. Her beauty naturally caused people to take her less seriously. That's doubly true of female actors, but even male actors get saddled with that. I'm not going to say one is better than the other, I just think Taylor is underappreciated and Streep is overappreciated and leave it at that.

[UTUSN]

6. If TAYLOR was ""A luscious, opulent, ripe fruit," PAGLIA is a dessicated,

salivating NeoCon Ayn RAND. She's one of those like Pat CADDELL and Evan BAYH, who hate, and trade off of bashing, their own supposed home groups (feminism in her case, the Dem party in theirs).

[Johonny]

14. I unrec this because it's full of strawman BS

such as Taylor was underestimated as an actress. She won three Oscars. In the late 50s-60s she was constantly nominated for awards. Yeah she's the most underestimated, under appreciated 3 time Oscar winner ever!

Fav part: At that time, you have to realize, Elizabeth Taylor was still being underestimated as an actress.

At the time Taylor was down to roles such as voice over for Captain Planet and strings of extremely forgettable TV movies. Wow really you mean no one was taking those part seriously. Even still the next year they GAVE HER A * OSCAR!!!!!


I dislike the idea you must tear down someone say Meryl Streep, to build someone up. It is even uglier win the whole idea is wrong.

[Bunny]

15. Camille Paglia is a tool, and I've always despised her.

Imagine my growing horror as I read this, when I realized that I was actually agreeing with her on some points. :scared: Luckily, her inherent 'toolness' started to shine through, so once again I can despise her with confidence.

The offending paragraph, I've bolded the worst of it:

"But Elizabeth Taylor's maternal quality is central to her heterosexual power. Elizabeth Taylor could control men. She liked men. And men liked her. There was a chemistry between her and men, coming from her own maternal instincts. I've been writing about this for years, and it was partly inspired by watching Taylor operate on-screen and off. The happy and successful heterosexual woman feels tender and maternal toward men -- but this has been completely lost in our feminist era. Now women tell men, you have to be my companion and be just like a woman; be my best friend, and listen to me chatter. In other words, women don't really like men anymore -- they want men to be like women. But Elizabeth Taylor liked men, and men loved to be around her because they sensed that."

Such a crock of shit. No feminist that I know, including myself, wants a man to sit around and listen to her chatter (an offensive comment in itself - I don't 'chatter'). No feminist wants a man to be a woman, that's patently ridiculous. And I don't know any feminist women that don't like men - we're quite capable of liking and yes, even loving, men while still having concerns about the negative effects of the patriarchy - a topic that Paglia actually touched on in her own twisted way, and then promptly contradicted herself. :eyes:

So, sorry Camille - I'm not buying today's big steaming pile.

[seabeyond]

20. it seems really what the woman says and admires is women using sex as a power, control, weapon

against men. that, is a true feminist

[cali]

17. Everything I've ever read by Paglia says far more about Paglia than her subject.

[katty]

22. indeed, concur it does, she is always controversial, and

I don't agree with her Taylor Streep comparisons, it is over the top-and Taylor was a major star during a different era. In general, I enjoy her pagan women offerings - sometimes.