Tuesday, September 20, 2022

So Here It Goes

For the past twenty years I have been beaten over the head by a book, the book? Dark Lover by Emily Leider. It is a unique and rather ugly story for me concerning Ms. Leider's Valentino biography. It is nothing personal and does not have much to do with what is inside the book, good or bad, false or accurate... it is that Dark Lover has been weaponized against me from day one; Dark Lover was published in 2003 and Affairs Valentino in 2011.

I have stated some opinions here and there and made my comments on the book, but how could I possibly be objective when it is used to bully me?

I believe “they”/haters, embraced Dark Lover because Ms. Leider pandered to the ambiguity angle regarding Valentino's sexuality. Because I did not pander, and I came out exposing the situation and those culpable... Dark Lover, as their sacred tome, was hurled up side my head with years of insults... cruel comparisons and plenty of snide demeaning of Affairs Valentino. It was and still is god awful and abusive behavior and even in reading this, I am sure they are working up their balls of spit for me... how dare I criticize the sacred tome?

I have been asked a few times if I am planning to vet Dark Lover. I will probably never do a full review because I do not have the steam any more. I have Michael Morris' copy with his notes in the margins and that, for me, is the sacred tome.

Today I respond to Ms. Leider's page 271.

She writes about Rudy and Natacha's trip to Paris and the welcoming they received from the director of the Théâtre des Champs-Élysées, Jacques Hébertot. She states as fact that there has been “speculation” that Hébertot's hospitality was because he “happened to be” a homosexual and then poses the question, was he planning a play on Rudy?

First of all, I believe Jacques Hébertot did not “happen to be” homosexual. He was homosexual. She makes it sound like an accident happened or he won some prize. Imo you are or you are not homosexual.

Her source for that “speculation” about Hébertot was David Bret. After posing her question, she proceeds to laboriously repeat his hysterical claim that way back when, barely-known French actor, Roger Normand had a one night stand or some such thing with Jacques Hébertot. And it was then Hébertot told Roger Normand that Valentino was gay, etc etc. And then Roger Normand told David Bret. I am not sure why Normand was spending time in Bret's home town far from Paris and I have seen no proof Bret ever knew Normand. Bret has never produced a snippet of proof for that and I claim that his claim is not a source, it is fiction....porn fiction.

Bret gives a time frame of Normand and Hébertot's tell-all about Valentino night together as being 1940. As Roger Normand was born in May of 1926, he would have been fourteen. Is Bret advocating child abuse in Dream of Desire?

So the “speculation” Ms. Leider reports on and which I question...was by Bret and only Bret. It was a part of his great hoax.

Moving on, I address Ms. Leider's implication that Hébertot's motivation in hosting Rudy and Natacha Valentino was sexual gratification. Imo this belittles this great man to a high degree. But the "speculation" spawned by David Bret's cheesy hoax was enticing enough to devote a few more pages to his authoritative lies and the innuendo rolls on. 

Jacques Hébertot, Rudolph Valentino, Rolf de Maré , Natacha Rambova, René Clair, etc....these were exceptional artists and professionals at the pinnacle of their respective fields. I think they welcomed and enjoyed a great deal other motivations in life than just sex.

True or not, it appears that for those hoping against hope David Bret is not lying and Valentino was actually gay... this was a great launch of innuendo on that issue in Dark Lover. Even as Ms. Leider goes on disputing Bret's claims, to a degree, she includes them and for that... Bret worships Dark Lover. It is one of his favored weapons to use against me.

Jacques Hébertot deserves more than a wink, wink, nod, nod in the Valentino history... and is it not a bit like emptying a feather pillow in the room? Then saying... oh let me pick up a few of these feathers to look good. But fact is there will always be a feather there from now on.

I also find it a homophobic stereotype to always portray homosexuals as sexually motivated... I think art, creativity, and for Hébertot the connections were their inspirations. He made connections to form theater groups, ballet troupes, and in the adjacent Comédie des Champs-Élysées and Studio des Champs-Élysées, he made an important contribution to the renewal of the French cultural scene. He had so very much more to him than maneuvering people into superficial sexual situations.

Sourcing Bret guaranteed Ms. Leider, she would not face what I faced for calling the Porn Fiction Writer, a porn fiction writer.

Dark Lover, whether Ms. Leider knows it or not, is their weapon and has been for 19 years.

Let's see how many times they can send in comments and use the phrase, “Gold Standard” in what will assuredly be a wide array of insults. So here it goes.


29 comments:

  1. I think you falsely flatter yourself. The Valentino community doesn't even give a whit what you think or believe about Ms. Leider's book, Mr. Bret's book or any other works recognized as part of the mainstream canon of Valentino studies. Witness the fact that your books are never mentioned on the Facebook groups or other Valentino themed social media sites. Nobody pays attention because your stuff has always been considered fringe type of material. People have only so much time to give to pursuits like reading and most concur that it's best not to even go down the rabbit hole with your "discoveries".

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. 2:40: I realize your aim is to anger me but you fail. You seem to have completely forgotten that your "leader" or "you" have banned any mention of our books on those Facebook pages he runs for years. Any time anyone does mention us or our books in a curious way or a positive way, they are booted and the comment or post deleted asap. Banners have been posted warning people not to mention me. That is why our books are never mentioned and if you did not know that, wake up. Leader has been erasing us as fast as he can for a long time. No mystery. And no need for the quotation marks on discoveries. We are very proud and very confident in what we present.

      Delete
    2. 2:40: "falsely flatter myself"? I tell my truth. If you do not believe that basic premise why are you here? At all? Your actions speak a lot louder than your words.

      Delete
    3. Evelyn Zumaya has done meticulous research on discovering things about Valentino's life. Affairs Valentino is an excellent biography and the revised edition when it comes out will be just as good.



      Delete
    4. Hey, 2:40, as you already know, Ms. Zumaya's books do get mentioned on the forums that allow free speech. However, I have NEVER seen one book by you - David Bret - EVER mentioned on the forums without most members recoiling in horror and commenting on what trash it is. This is probably why you, under one of your various forum IDs, never bother to bring up your books at all, since you know what kind of reaction you will receive.

      Delete
    5. Yes, David Bret, why is is it that none of your books are ever brought up on the forums to discuss? Why?

      Delete
    6. To 2:40 Evelyn and Renato's books are mentioned just before they get deleted. Your books are never mentioned or discussed. Go stew in your jealousy.Bret.

      Delete
  2. Any book that uses David Bret as a source for material is automatically suspect. That is why social platforms that allow his demented ravings are never taken seriously by anyone with an ounce of intellect. Lieder's cute "is he or isn't he" word play is amateurish.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. David Bret is nothing but a liar, troublemaker and a troll.

      Delete
  3. He who flatters himself is the disgusting Bret, who, in the self promoting/self outing comment at 2:40 AM above, casually weaves in a reference to “Bret’s book” right after Leider’s (Madam “gold standard”). No, thou supreme jackass, your book portraying Valentino as a flatulent rutting pig is not part of the “mainstream canon of Valentino studies.” Bret believes if he throws out the jargon of pseudo-highbrow academia that he has everyone fooled. Au contraire you pathetic wannabe, it is your giveaway.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. 4:03: Well, well I am in receipt of a long curse from the gutter prose of David Bret today. In which he claims Roger Normand was his godfather. I will have to go back and check at some point but how many godfathers can one person have? And how did this Frenchman Normand become the godfather of a child adopted in another country by parents who the child claims abused him so badly? Bret can have his fantasies about knowing all these people, Dietrich, Garbo, Daven, Normand, Mank... on and on and on and being related to them all... but he has never presented the tiniest scrap of proof of any of it. When I said I was working with Ullman's children I came away from those meetings with a memoir, family photographs, documents and I did not say they were my godparents.

      Delete
    2. According to Normand's online presence which is scant he was born in May 1926.

      Delete
  4. I hereby nominate Dark Lover as the Brass Standard of Valentino studies. The author made the decision to pander to the elements of Valentino fandom that would have ripped her head off if she hadn’t asserted, without a shred of evidence, that Valentino schtupped Daven. It was a strategic choice, no matter that there is zero proof or corroboration (and in fact, plenty of evidence to the contrary). It is remarkable that Leider has been a member of Valentino lonely hearts forum Mad About the Boy for years, yet has said not ONE WORD about Daven and Valentino’s “affair” despite ample opportunity and context to do so. One wonders why she steers clear of the topic.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. 5:08: I would venture to say the Daven story changed pretty drastically with the discovery of those letters Valentino wrote to Hebertot about Daven. Thank you to a shrewd researcher for sharing those with us. Those letters more than supported what Ullman revealed in his memoir. But imo those pages in Dark Lover of convoluted innuendo secured safe passage for Ms. Leider. Find the Daven info here: https://andredaven.blogspot.com/

      Delete
    2. Safe passage indeed! The convoluted innuendo was her ticket on the “Please Don’t Stone Me in the Public Square” bus. She no doubt hitched the ride with enormous relief.

      Delete
  5. Evelyn: You are quite right about 'Dark Lover' being used for years to bash you. I have watched as it happened and I have never thought it right. 'Dark Lover' was a decent book, not a wonderful book, IMO. I do not consider it the 'Gold Standard.' While there are likely several reasons this happened to you, I think one is that 'Dark Lover' came out first, was beautifully presented, and was wildly popular. However, remember that Leider had some pretty great people helping her put that book together ... she certainly did not do it all on her own. I think, in essence, it was in the timing. She simply got there first, and every author presents their information in a different way. Anyway, my message to you is that I do agree that you were poorly served by the Valentino community in this instance, and I am sorry for that. I know you will not post this, but I am hoping you will read it.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I would beg to disagree Ms. Martin. Even if I put out Affairs Valentino with all that was included, Ullman's vindication, godfathers' help, etc... if I said Valentino was gay, maybe gay, bisexual, the book would have been embraced as solid gold. It all boils down to that and nothing more. The timing had nothing to do with. When Dark Lover came out I was interviewing the Ullmans and had just discovered the court records ( those documents you are so sure I forge?) Those... Imagine how I felt sitting on all of that? The timing for Ms. Leider was the awful timing not the timing for me. She missed out on a lot and the family kept it all from her. I will not apologize for any comments about you which may be forthcoming here because I posted your comment so I could respond. Based on your current affiliations and tremendously cruel actions against us, you have it coming.

      Delete
  6. IMO, it's not so much about what his sexuality was, but about accuracy. He wanted an accurate life story written and chose Ullman to do it. It's a shame Rudy passed away before he could see that happen. I also believe he was heterosexual given his passion for beautiful women and his many documented liasons with women. It can't be denied that he loved woman. Thank you Evelyn for not being a fence sitter and sharing your position on this matter. These days, having a difference of opinion with folks is inviting attacks. It's not about homophobia, it's about the truth, and Rudy wanted the truth.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Well said Maggie and thank you. Renato uses the phrase "intellectual honesty" and that is what this subject has always been about. I would not be Islamaphobic if I said the Pope is not Muslim. Just a fact. I had no opinion at all in 2003 and was pretty naive about the perils of saying someone is not gay. Rudy did want the truth, he was not gay as the history stands today and the only evidence presented to say the contrary exists only as personal fantasies. Who would want that to gum up your life's history?

      Delete
  7. Well said Maggie. I could not agree with you more.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. If Rudy was gay how could he have done the love scenes with women without difficulty? He seems to have relished the love scenes, the women sensed it.

      Delete
  8. Just a note here to say that all those "great people" who are attributed to helping Ms. Leider with Dark Lover? If I were her I would be furious with them all. They were hiding all the information I was uncovering because they had it all. Why did they not share the court records with her? The 1975 George Ullman memoir? And much more. I do not think they helped her at all. I think they sabotaged her book in many ways.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I did not post the comment from Ms. Martin to set her up. I responded to her comment attributing the success of Dark Lover to just the timing. She seems to think I posted her comment to set her up. So I am confused why she sends in comments? If I do not post them then I am living in a bubble, etc. and if I do then I am setting her up. No matter how hard she tries she can not make me think and act as she is. That did not occur to me and I warned her that in approving a comment from her might generate a response. She can not possibly think that would not happen naturally as that is the price to pay for being so needlessly wicked just to please her leader. I do not converse with the devil and will not open any more comments from her. Finito.

      Delete
  9. Once again I'll comment, if these people don't like you and don't approve of your work or what you post, etc., why on earth do they follow your blog with such interest? I think we all know the answer to that. SMH.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Maggie: Exactly why I never follow what they write or do elsewhere. Makes little sense at all why they troll this blog with such devotion.

      Delete
    2. Excellent question, Maggie. The only answer is these people are obsessed because there is nothing else in their lives to occupy their time. Also, they are eaten up with jealousy. Since they have never created anything of value, all they are able to do is try to tear someone else down.

      Delete
  10. As per usual, CM and her photo bomb post (did we really need to see her tough as nails mug? I think not!) are full of crap. Her faux-sugary tone cannot conceal the venom she has heaped on Ms. Zumaya for years. Leider’s book was not “wildly successful.” Despite her cultivation of Jean’s family members, the book never received “authorized” status, never went into a second printing, was not optioned as source material for a film or other project, and had its fair share of negative reviews. And I have yet to see a single commercial review of the book which did not place Leider’s discussion of Valentino’s sexuality at its center. The fact of the matter is, Leider’s equivocation about Valentino’s sexuality and her insinuation that he slept with Daven were THE reason the book was warmly welcomed by the crypt team and the forums. And bravo to Maggie for putting the matter so succinctly and incisively - this is about ACCURACY - not team homosexuality or team heterosexuality.

    ReplyDelete
  11. It appears Shady Ma can dish it out, but she can't take it. What a crashing bore.

    ReplyDelete