Saturday, May 23, 2020

Has Tracy Terhune Read Dark Lover?

In regards to Terhune stating as fact that the Jeanne De Recqueville book is not cited in any Valentino biographies, I state this is false and respond with the following.

First and foremost we have to ask; how many books were published on Valentino after De Recqueville's book was published in 1978, in which the author could cite De Recqueville? The Scagnetti book was published three years earlier in 1975 and the next book of consequence was Michael Morris', Madam Valentino in 1991.

Contrary to what Terhune states, Micheal Morris did cite Jeanne De Recqueville's book on page #266 in his Madam Valentino under his section “Sources – Books”. It was Michael Morris who first recommended the book to me as he felt it was an important work.

The next publication was Dark Lover in 2003 by Emily Leider which Terhune mentions and in this regard I share a message we received from a Gabriel Oak about this today. I cite this verbatim and add that it is preserved on servers:

I have seen Terhune’s sickening “review” of the De Recqueville book and I IMPLORE YOU to consider publishing the following on your blog!
So, that poisonous cow Terhune is on the attack yet again. He says of the De Recqueville book, It's no wonder this book is not quoted nor sourced in ANY book about Rudolph Valentino.” 
Hmmm. How very odd that he would have missed the sourcing of De Recqueville’s book in his sacred copy of Emily Leider’s “Dark Lover.”
Terhune rhapsodizes endlessly about the virtues of Leider’s work, and pronounces it, together with Irving Shulman’s “Valentino” as all one needs to read on the subject of the Great Lover.
In fact, according to Terhune, Leider’s work is superior to Rambova and Ullman’s books about Valentino, because unlike Valentino’s wife and manager, Leider had no agenda. This is perverse.
Leider drew so heavily upon Rambova and Ullman’s books that she virtually incorporated them wholesale! Perhaps Terhune hasn’t actually read the book he so sanctifies.
No surprise then that Terhune is ignorant of the fact that Leider sources De Recqueville on the very page that she declares that the relationship between Valentino and Andre Daven ”seems to have been a genuine love affair.” 
Astonishing that the rabidly agenda driven Terhune would miss this. So - have a gander at pages 300 and 475 of “Dark Lover” Terhune, and eat your rancid words.
And one more observation. Only a person with partial command of his mother tongue would excoriate a polyglot. You are no match for Renato Floris, Terhune!”

*Of course I cited the De Recqueville book in Affairs Valentino in 2011 and in subsequent editions. Terhune is wrong on all accounts about the DeRecqueville book's not being cited. It sure has been and in every publication since her book came out.