From what I have learned, Christina Crawford has grown to be a bitter, nasty woman who couldn't cut it as an actress or a wife (married and divorced several times).
I don't believe half of what she wrote in that book of hers.
Even if you only believe half of whats in the book that should be enough to see there was a problem. Read the wiki entry on Mommy Dearest the book. Some of her closest friends, with nothing to gain, agree there was bad things going on.
Accept all paths to Godshare
[deleted]
I have no trouble believing that Crawford was rigid, obsessed with order and cleanliness and at least at times physically as well as emotionally abusive (also, in the 1940's and 50's there was a pervasive attitude that parents had free rein to "discipline" their children).
That doesn't mean Christina Crawford isn't a liar, and some of her more recent claims are just plain fatuous. She told Larry King that Crawford murdered Alfred Steele (Christina hadn't seen him in a year, and was 3,000 miles away in England when he died). Her only support for this assertion is that Crawford "profited" from his death (actually, she didn't- he was heavily in debt when he died, and her salary as a Pepsi board member did not begin to match his potential earnings as CEO). She also claims that when she was one year old her mother drove cross country from Los Angeles to Miami to sleep with mobster Meyer Lansky, whom Crawford allegedly contacted in her quest to adopt children. I have no problem believing that Joan Crawford loved sex and that she had known Mafia members (many of whom, like Johnny Stompanato, existed on the fringes of Hollywood). The idea that Crawford would drive in a car (before interstates, disposable diapers or reputable chain hotels) 3,000 miles for a one night stand is ludicrous.
Christina needs to get a life. If her mother was half the monster she claims she was, she should have severed all contact with her at age 18. Instead, she is a 72 year old who rails against a mother who has been dead for 35 years, and poses with Crawfordesque drag queens wielding wire hangers.
Oh, it's all true. And Christina said QUEEN BEE was the only film her mother made that she couldn't watch.... because Mommie Dearest was playing herself!
--
Well, I agree with you.
I recently read a bio of Joan which was written by someone who was her friend for thirty-plus years. He writes a handful of great arguments for why the book was (more than half) bunk.
For one thing, her youngest two children (yes, she had four total - the second two Christine just conveniently omitted) adamantly disowned the book. They were quoted as saying "What house did she grow up in?". I've also heard that Christopher denied events in the book as well. People in the same household would know better than anyone, wouldn't they?
Secondly, several of her friends, including long-time friend Myrna Loy defend Joan whole-heartedly. They also go on to say that whenever they met Christina she was a rude unpleasant girl and teen. It's quite possible that she had problems of her own, and wouldn't have been happy with any mother.
As she got older, and less famous, as her Mommie Dearest fame waned, her claims became more outrageous to get publicity. She even claimed that Joan murdered her last husband Alfred Steele for money!! (Although in reality he left her with huge debts).
Finally, she wrote the book when Joan was not alive to defend herself. That alone is suspicious.
There were probably more but they escape me at the moment.
I have no problem believing that Joan could be difficult and wanted things a certain way - she was a goal-driven woman who had to battle Hollywood for years to shape her career. But a complete monster? I doubt it.
That is very true, that that horrible little snip made up all of those lies about poor Joan, who wasn't there to defend herself.
But Joan's other daughters and many noteworthy celebrities and all reputable Hollywood reporters dismiss Christina's lies as pure bunk, as she made them up for the tainted money and ill-reputed reputation.
Joan has been known to be a little difficult, true. Louis B, Bette and Lucy got the better of her on occasion, but Bette and Lucy are usually very nice, and Joan has been known to nip the vodka a tad.
But poor Joan was no monster, if nothing but a sweet, petite and lovely Classic actress and sparking movie star, who brings joy to millions in great films as ... what were we talking about now? ... oh, Queen Bee.
Yes, Joan may be more famous than her films, but that's part of what greatness is all about, to outshine those lousy scripts and evil adoptive talentless daughters for those culpable deeds gone wrong.
And if they don't believe that, then they ought to listen to those worthwhile stars who have been around the wonderful Joan for many years on end, yes?
To rebut your assertions:
First, many parents play favorites; the more spiteful ones severely so. A mother of four is four different mothers, to each child's eyes.
Second, Myrna Loy and Joan's male author friend weren't Joan's children, and didn't know what it was like to live in that house, subject to Joan's whims and abuses of power. It is natural for a child to be "rude and unpleasant" when she is being mistreated. Moreover, I would wager that Christina learned such behavior straight from Joan.
The third point, the claim that Joan killed Alfred for his money, I can't address as I hadn't heard that before.
Fourth, Christina wrote the tell-all after she and her brother were cruelly disinherited "for reasons which are well-known to them." The reasons were not, in fact, well-known to them. The only reasonable explanation they could draw from that was that their adoptive mother was a vindictive bitch.
When Christina had a "20th Anniversary Edition" of "Mommie Dearest" published in 1998 by a vanity press, she contradicted some stories told in the original, and embellished many others. She stated this edition was faithful to her original manuscript. If that's true, then it is appalling that USC allowed this woman to receive a Master's Degree in Communications- the book was riddled with misspellings and errors in punctuation and capitalization. She also included statements from people whom she grew up with (none of them well known) which in one way or another supported her point of view. Most of these people only met Joan Crawford once or twice. More than anything else, their testimonials suggest Christina Crawford is defensive about her own credibility. The irony is that when I read the 1978 edition I was mostly inclined to believe Christina. After reading the 1998 edition I saw someone who was sullen, embittered and nasty. I have no difficulty seeing her (50 years earlier) as a spoiled, insufferable Hollywood brat.
One of the new revelations of the 1998 edition (aside from her assertions about Meyer Lansky and JC, JC's "murder" of Alfred Steele) was a letter Christina wrote to her mother in 1973, 4 years before her death. In the letter she referred to her mother as a "has-been" (coming from a never was) and a bitch. That letter would be sufficient reason alone to disinherit Christina. Bette Davis disinherited her daughter (and had good reason to, given the nasty book that sanctimonious cow wrote).
My mother did a lot of the same things to my sister that Joan did to Christina - and that was BEFORE anyone had ever heard of "Mommie Dearest."
So - "yes" - those kinds of things can happen and mother/daughter relationships are filled with all sorts of confusion.
I can believe that many of things Christina Crawford claimed were true - but they are told from her vantage point and not from Joan's. I'm sure Joan would have defended her physical assaults as being "discipline."
"Don't call me 'honey', mac."
"Don't call me 'mac'... HONEY!"