Agnes De Mille

StevenB · Post by **StevenB** » Thu Nov 30, 2006 7:58 am

Nevber Mind, I found my answer, sorry...........

StevenB

RayS · Post by **RayS** » Sat Dec 02, 2006 3:36 pm

Agnes DeMille wrote a book about her "Dance of Death" which covers the Borden Murders. She rewrote history for this. Interesting how her "Fall River Tragedy" was translated as the "Autumn River Tragedy"!

She and Joseph Welch visited some of the houses and people who knew something. One was the two daughters of a man who was close to Dr. Bowen. "Most people don't know the real story, there is a secret that was never made public." That part of her book should interest people on this site.

Smudgeman · Post by **Smudgeman** » Sat Dec 02, 2006 6:54 pm

Please tell us the secret Rays, inquiring minds want to know. I don't think anyone here has heard it before.

Kat · Post by **Kat** » Sun Dec 03, 2006 2:11 am

I posted that passage about the 2 ladies on the Hill. I wish you would jot down notes so I wouldn't have to keep putting the same stuff up over and over. Do you remember where we discussed this?

Also, have not heard of *Autumn River Tragedy*- what is that?

Harry · Post by **Harry** » Sun Dec 03, 2006 8:23 am

Kat @ Sun Dec 03, 2006 2:11 am wrote:I posted that passage about the 2 ladies on the Hill. I wish you would jot down notes so I wouldn't have to keep putting the same stuff up over and over. Do you remember where we discussed this?

Here you go, Kat. saves you the trouble of looking it up.

viewtopic.php?t=2275&postdays=0&postord ... &&start=25

Kat · Post by **Kat** » Sun Dec 03, 2006 9:08 pm

Whew! My hero Har! Thanks!

Bob Gutowski · Post by **Bob Gutowski** » Mon Dec 04, 2006 5:12 pm

For its first production in Soviet Russia, the title of the ballet was translated as RayS notes. That is, if you directly translated the Russian back into English, you got "The Legend of the Autumn River." The joke here is that the "Fall" in "Fall River" doesn't refer to the season, but to the "fall" of the river.

FYI: Although her uncle Cecil (the director) went by DeMille, Agnes herself went by de Mille.

RayS · Post by **RayS** » Mon Dec 04, 2006 7:22 pm

Smudgeman @ Sat Dec 02, 2006 7:54 pm wrote:Please tell us the secret Rays, inquiring minds want to know. I don't think anyone here has heard it before.

You can try to read this book, only part refers to the story of the murder.
In any case, it remained a secret to the daughters whose names remained a secret as well. Unwritten secrets die with the people who keep them. If its written down, its no longer a secret.

Do I have to explain everything to you?

This question is a good example of the kind that I should ignore or avoid. It is not an honest question, is it?

Smudgeman · Post by **Smudgeman** » Mon Dec 04, 2006 7:41 pm

Of course I have read the book, the question is, have you? When? Years and years ago? What do you remember? They have medication for that problem.

Kat · Post by **Kat** » Tue Dec 05, 2006 12:46 am

Thanks Bob. It sounds lovely- that title.

I did think de Mille was spelled the same way by both?
Is that not so?

Harry · Post by **Harry** » Tue Dec 05, 2006 8:45 am

Speaking of de Mille's book I ran across the paragraph below (page 115) concerning the amount of blood. Ms. de Mille and Judge Welch had just been shown the hip-bath collection by the Warings.

"... There had been no more spots on the bedspread or pillow sham we had examined than a man would lose cutting himself shaving. The bedspread had not been laundered since Bridget Sullivan turned it out fresh and clean the day before the killing. In the photographs the bureau scarf and doilies directly beside Mrs. Borden's body were also spotless. The bulk of her blood lay under her in a great black pool. Likewise, with Mr. Borden, in the photographs we studied certain splatterings jetted on to the wall. But on a carpet in front of the sofa and on a small table nearby, there was no blood. The antimacassar under his right cheek, the side next the door, behind which the murderer probably waited, was white and unsoiled. If the murderer was not in the path of trajectory, the murderer would not be stained.
On the evidence of material objects and photographs, Lizzie then need not have been blood-drenched, and the cleaning of her person and dress, which the defense claimed could not possibly have been accomplished in the nine minutes available, could easily have been, as it turns out. ..."

Just thought it interesting that so many objects and areas in the rooms where the murders occurred were not touched by the blood.

1bigsteve · Post by **1bigsteve** » Tue Dec 05, 2006 12:17 pm

You know, I came across her book at a yard sale a few weeks ago and I didn't buy it. Quick, someone kick me!

A thought I've had about the killing is that perhaps the killer wiped the blade clean after each stroke to minimize the amount of blood dripping onto the killer as the weapon went through it's arc? I doubt it, but...

A meat cleaver, due to it's thin design, would produce less blood splatter than a hatchet. Perhaps the killer was wearing a full-length apron to protect from blood splatter. A man swinging the weapon probably would have produced more kinetic energy that would have produced more splatter than what they found at the scene.

-1bigsteve (o:

Bob Gutowski · Post by **Bob Gutowski** » Tue Dec 05, 2006 3:16 pm

Kat, dear - no, Cecil spelled his last name as "DeMille," while Agnes used "de Mille." Go figure. Something else I should have asked her about when I met her!

RayS · Post by **RayS** » Tue Dec 05, 2006 4:26 pm

Harry @ Tue Dec 05, 2006 9:45 am wrote:Speaking of de Mille's book I ran across the paragraph below (page 115) concerning the amount of blood. Ms. de Mille and Judge Welch had just been shown the hip-bath collection by the Warings.

"... There had been no more spots on the bedspread or pillow sham we had examined than a man would lose cutting himself shaving. The bedspread had not been laundered since Bridget Sullivan turned it out fresh and clean the day before the killing. In the photographs the bureau scarf and doilies directly beside Mrs. Borden's body were also spotless. The bulk of her blood lay under her in a great black pool. Likewise, with Mr. Borden, in the photographs we studied certain splatterings jetted on to the wall. But on a carpet in front of the sofa and on a small table nearby, there was no blood. The antimacassar under his right cheek, the side next the door, behind which the murderer probably waited, was white and unsoiled. If the murderer was not in the path of trajectory, the murderer would not be stained.
On the evidence of material objects and photographs, Lizzie then need not have been blood-drenched, and the cleaning of her person and dress, which the defense claimed could not possibly have been accomplished in the nine minutes available, could easily have been, as it turns out. ..."

Just thought it interesting that so many objects and areas in the rooms where the murders occurred were not touched by the blood.

Many have said the best source for all the details is the Trial Transcript with its official sworn testimony. I agree, but have only read what the secondary sources say. One doctor testified that the person who hacked Abby would be covered with blood spatter from the waist down. Hacking at Andy would create blood spatter from the waist up.

That story from the Warings was not that of an eyewitness who measured the details (Kieran?). I would not depend on it for any proof. Would you?

RayS · Post by **RayS** » Tue Dec 05, 2006 4:27 pm

I am very surprised that a member of this site would pass up a bargain. I'll assume they wanted $1 or less?
In any event, your county library system may have it, or a community college with its better resources. (Hint.)

1bigsteve · Post by **1bigsteve** » Tue Dec 05, 2006 6:13 pm

RayS @ Tue Dec 05, 2006 1:27 pm wrote:I am very surprised that a member of this site would pass up a bargain. I'll assume they wanted $1 or less?
In any event, your county library system may have it, or a community college with its better resources. (Hint.)

If you are talking about my yard sale adventure, Ray:

A. I didn't realize at that time that it was a book good enough for Harry to have read (I had never heard of it before that day),

B. If I had known that I would have paid $30. + for it, and,

C. I don't like Libraries because I like to read at my leisure with out feeling like I have a return deadline hanging over my head like a hatchet. It is cheaper for me (and healthier) to trot down a few blocks to my local used book store than burn-up a gallon or two of gas, pollute the atmosphere, finding a parking place and then repeating the process when returning the book.

Sorry, Ray, but you assumed wrong. By the way, don't be afraid to talk directly with someone on the forum. You can even call that person by name, like I'm doing with you. That is better than using "they" or a "member." Don't you think? Practice showing a little more kindness to others and sooner or later you will get the hang of it. It will make you a pleasant person to be around. Relax.

-1bigsteve (o:

1bigsteve · Post by **1bigsteve** » Tue Dec 05, 2006 6:18 pm

Harry @ Tue Dec 05, 2006 5:45 am wrote:Speaking of de Mille's book I ran across the paragraph below (page 115) concerning the amount of blood. Ms. de Mille and Judge Welch had just been shown the hip-bath collection by the Warings.

"... There had been no more spots on the bedspread or pillow sham we had examined than a man would lose cutting himself shaving. The bedspread had not been laundered since Bridget Sullivan turned it out fresh and clean the day before the killing. In the photographs the bureau scarf and doilies directly beside Mrs. Borden's body were also spotless. The bulk of her blood lay under her in a great black pool. Likewise, with Mr. Borden, in the photographs we studied certain splatterings jetted on to the wall. But on a carpet in front of the sofa and on a small table nearby, there was no blood. The antimacassar under his right cheek, the side next the door, behind which the murderer probably waited, was white and unsoiled. If the murderer was not in the path of trajectory, the murderer would not be stained.
On the evidence of material objects and photographs, Lizzie then need not have been blood-drenched, and the cleaning of her person and dress, which the defense claimed could not possibly have been accomplished in the nine minutes available, could easily have been, as it turns out. ..."

Just thought it interesting that so many objects and areas in the rooms where the murders occurred were not touched by the blood.

What is your over-all view of the book, Harry? Did you like it? When I first saw the cover I thought it was complete fiction but it sounds like it may be worth reading.

-1bigsteve (o:

Harry · Post by **Harry** » Tue Dec 05, 2006 6:59 pm

It's been quite a while since I read it, Steve. The book consists of two parts, the first a history of the crime, the second the story of the ballet.

She and Judge Welch went to Fall River and interviewed a lot of people who had some knowledge of the times and crime, Virginia Lincoln, Mrs. Dr. Kelly's daughter, the Warings' (Jennings' family) and Knowlton's daughter among them.

As I say it's been a while so perhaps one who read it recently could tell you more. I don't remember anything particularly striking about it.

You did miss a bargain though at $1.00! It's definitely worth reading.

1bigsteve · Post by **1bigsteve** » Tue Dec 05, 2006 7:15 pm

Thank you, Harry. I'll pick up a copy next time I see one.

-1bigsteve (o:

Kat · Post by **Kat** » Wed Dec 06, 2006 4:30 am

Hey Har, that quote you gave mentions a *bureau scarf*. I wonder what that was, where is it and if it was that big elaborate thing the FRHS has that had cuts and blood?

Thanks Bob, I learned something new!

Harry · Post by **Harry** » Wed Dec 06, 2006 7:36 am

I passed right over that "bureau scarf" item. Thanks for bringing it up, Kat.

Using Google I found quite a few photos of them. Most of them appear to be embroidered and fairly large. The photos of the dresser in the guest room do not appear to show one.

de Mille mentions both bureau scarf and doilies so I assume they are not the same.

Where would a bureau scarf fit on that already crowded dresser top? The only place would appear to be in that middle area beneath the pin cushion and bell like objects. But that looks uncovered to me.

Bob Gutowski · Post by **Bob Gutowski** » Wed Dec 06, 2006 10:35 am

I adore this book! It's the one which pulled me into the mystery! De Mille is at least as good a writer as Lincoln, and though she has her own theory (murder for real estate and freedom), she doesn't try to bend every known bit around to fit it. As a journalist of the creative process, de Mille has few peers. It's worth remembering that this was the first book to offer shockingly clear photos of the crime scenes, as de Mille was able to reproduce the originals from the hip-bath cache. It wasn't until I saw the autopsy photo of Andrew in the Knowlton Papers that I knew what she had seen and found "sickening" so many years ago during that trip with Welch.

RayS · Post by **RayS** » Wed Dec 06, 2006 2:21 pm

1bigsteve @ Tue Dec 05, 2006 7:13 pm wrote:
RayS @ Tue Dec 05, 2006 1:27 pm wrote:I am very surprised that a member of this site would pass up a bargain. I'll assume they wanted $1 or less?
In any event, your county library system may have it, or a community college with its better resources. (Hint.)

If you are talking about my yard sale adventure, Ray:

A. I didn't realize at that time that it was a book good enough for Harry to have read (I had never heard of it before that day),

B. If I had known that I would have paid $30. + for it, and,

C. I don't like Libraries because I like to read at my leisure with out feeling like I have a return deadline hanging over my head like a hatchet. It is cheaper for me (and healthier) to trot down a few blocks to my local used book store than burn-up a gallon or two of gas, pollute the atmosphere, finding a parking place and then repeating the process when returning the book.

Sorry, Ray, but you assumed wrong. By the way, don't be afraid to talk directly with someone on the forum. You can even call that person by name, like I'm doing with you. That is better than using "they" or a "member." Don't you think? Practice showing a little more kindness to others and sooner or later you will get the hang of it. It will make you a pleasant person to be around. Relax.

-1bigsteve (o:

Its a question of style isn't it? Do you live in Los Angeles? Here in the urban East there are no long drives to a library.
It is just a matter of scheduling time. 2 or 4 weeks should be enough for this book. Only part deals with the visit to FR, the rest on show business. And I do mean "business"!

1bigsteve · Post by **1bigsteve** » Wed Dec 06, 2006 6:22 pm

Kat @ Wed Dec 06, 2006 1:30 am wrote:Hey Har, that quote you gave mentions a *bureau scarf*. I wonder what that was, where is it and if it was that big elaborate thing the FRHS has that had cuts and blood?

Thanks Bob, I learned something new!

Has anyone determined, or does anyone have ideas, as to how or why that scarf had cuts in it? I mean was it used to cover the head during the killing maybe to prevent splatter or was it already wrapped in Abby's hair (by Abby herself)? I remember this being discussed before but I can't find the thread.

-1bigsteve (o:

Kat · Post by **Kat** » Thu Dec 07, 2006 1:21 am

We know there was a white-ish kerchief at the scene, because it is in the photos. Then we have seen the one in the video, which is not that white thing. Now there may be a scarf-like object.
One of these kerchiefs moved from near Abbie's head to near the window- so I am getting thoroughly confused.

Susan · Post by **Susan** » Thu Dec 07, 2006 9:57 pm

I stared at the crime scene photo of Abby where the view of the bureau is head on, there is too much glare to make out if there is any sort of scarves or doilies there. But, when the bureau is viewed from the side, you can clearly make out the doilies in front of the small drawers on either side of the mirror. And, if you look closely at the lower area just under the mirror, youi can just make out what looks like some sort of linen laying on top of the marble.

Shelley · Post by **Shelley** » Thu Dec 07, 2006 10:51 pm

Yes, and in the center dropped section are two glass-stoppered perfume bottles, and on the left and right raised drawers are situated what may be a round-lid hair receiver, something lying flat, possibly a small hand mirror, and a framed photo, vase, and easel calendar and crocheted doilies with a darker -colored edging. The funny little thing hanging on the wall in the photo is a match safe. There was one in every room. New matches go on one side, the striker is in the middle and used matches go on the other. We hunted a while to get one like it for the house.

1bigsteve · Post by **1bigsteve** » Fri Dec 08, 2006 12:55 am

You must have been reading my mind, Shelley. I was just going to ask what those do-dads are that are seen on the dresser.

My Grandmother had a "hair-receiver", a pink glass bowl with a lid she stored strands of her hair in. Why she did that I'll never know.

Thank you for the info, Shelly.

-1bigsteve (o:

AmberDragon · Post by **AmberDragon** » Fri Dec 08, 2006 2:54 am

1bigsteve @ Fri Dec 08, 2006 12:55 am wrote: My Grandmother had a "hair-receiver", a pink glass bowl with a lid she stored strands of her hair in. Why she did that I'll never know.

::Squeaks up from the deep depths of newbie lurkerdom::

When hair-receivers were popular, the hair that the women collected in them was used for stuffing small pillows and pin cushions, and for making rats like the one found with Abby Borden. An elderly acquaintance of mine had a hair-receiver to her dying day, and claimed that the the best pin cushions were stuffed with hair because the hair oils kept the pins in good condition and made it easier to push them through the fabric.

::Retreats back into the shadows::

1bigsteve · Post by **1bigsteve** » Fri Dec 08, 2006 9:20 am

Welcome Aboard, AmberDragon!

It look's like you finally got your feet wet. I had been wondering when you would do that. Don't be shy around here, just speak your mind anytime and have fun.

Thank you for the info on the hair bowl. I had always wondered what they were for. I thought my Grandmother was saving up for the world's largest hairball or something. Well, some people save belly button lint so you never know.

Again, welcome aboard.

-1bigsteve (o:

Harry · Post by **Harry** » Fri Dec 08, 2006 12:31 pm

Thanks AmberDragon for the info and welcome!

You mean I should have been saving all the hair I've lost? Could have made a LOT of pin cushions.

Bob Gutowski · Post by **Bob Gutowski** » Fri Dec 08, 2006 4:14 pm

AD, that is goddamn fascinating! See, there are things that "common sense" will not figure out for you - specialized knowledge is sometimes needed.

shakiboo · Post by **shakiboo** » Fri Dec 08, 2006 4:54 pm

Hi, AmberDragon, welcome! Don't hide, come on in, I'm fairly new myself and let me tell you what a fascinating, eye-opening, fact finding, great time you'll have!!! filled with a really great bunch of people! What more could you ask for? But here's a warning>>>>>>It's deffinately addicting!!!

Shelley · Post by **Shelley** » Fri Dec 08, 2006 6:05 pm

Not to be an old poop,

and grumbly curmudgeon

AD, but I did happen to handle Abby's hairpiece and it was a "switch"- loosely braided. They have the 4 plain wire hair pins also. A "rat" is indeed a little hair pad , usually made of spare hair tucked into a little net, or sheer stocking "sausage" and used to plump out thin hair or create fullness on side sweeps or pompadours. They made a huge comeback in the 1940's.
Poor Abby probably needed a rat or two.(unless you want to count Emma and Lizzie!!)

1bigsteve · Post by **1bigsteve** » Fri Dec 08, 2006 6:58 pm

Harry @ Fri Dec 08, 2006 9:31 am wrote:Thanks AmberDragon for the info and welcome!

You mean I should have been saving all the hair I've lost? Could have made a LOT of pin cushions.

You and me both, Harry.

-1bigsteve (o:

1bigsteve · Post by **1bigsteve** » Fri Dec 08, 2006 7:35 pm

Shelley @ Fri Dec 08, 2006 3:05 pm wrote:Not to be an old poop, and grumbly curmudgeon AD, but I did happen to handle Abby's hairpiece and it was a "switch"- loosely braided. They have the 4 plain wire hair pins also. A "rat" is indeed a little hair pad , usually made of spare hair tucked into a little net, or sheer stocking "sausage" and used to plump out thin hair or create fullness on side sweeps or pompadours. They made a huge comeback in the 1940's.
Poor Abby probably needed a rat or two.(unless you want to count Emma and Lizzie!!)

Tell me, Shelley, what did you feel when you handled that hair piece? I mean did you feel like you were back in time and touching a piece of history? And how do you feel about the house, going from room to room, being there where to killings took place, having that direct contact with part of history?

I once handled an old rifle that belonged to a well-respected Indian and there was a 150 year old photo of him on the wall holding the same rifle. I had a very erie feeling come over me knowing I was holding something that belonged to someone long dead and gone. I thought about him, what he was like, how he lived and how he died. I felt as if I should hand it back to him, almost like I was peeking through someone's key hole.

Whenever I see or touch something I've read about in history books I alway's think of the people who built it, the people who were there. I was wondering how you feel about being there and touching the things that we read about. Any thoughts you have about it?

-1bigsteve (o:

AmberDragon · Post by **AmberDragon** » Fri Dec 08, 2006 7:53 pm

Shelley @ Fri Dec 08, 2006 6:05 pm wrote:Not to be an old poop, and grumbly curmudgeon AD, but I did happen to handle Abby's hairpiece and it was a "switch"- loosely braided. They have the 4 plain wire hair pins also. A "rat" is indeed a little hair pad , usually made of spare hair tucked into a little net, or sheer stocking "sausage" and used to plump out thin hair or create fullness on side sweeps or pompadours. They made a huge comeback in the 1940's.
Poor Abby probably needed a rat or two.(unless you want to count Emma and Lizzie!!)

No problem, Shelley - a little gentle correction is always welcome. At least this wasn't the stinging slap of a moderator smackdown like I'd feel on some other forums.

Oh, and thanks to everyone for all the nice welcome messages!

Shelley · Post by **Shelley** » Fri Dec 08, 2006 10:48 pm

Well, thank goodness for emoticons so there can be no doubt at how something is meant to be taken! The great disadvantage of the written word is not knowing the tone of the writer.

I wish I could say I had a "moment" Steve, but actually Mrs. Brigham was just showing me a caption on a photo in a case and I just briefly moved the hank of hair out of the way. Looking back now, I wish I had paused to reflect more. It just felt dry and coarse, but it was human hair.

I cannot overestimate, however, the impact of being at the crime scene has to anyone even remotely interested in this case. The many hours spent alone, retracing the steps, listening to the sounds of the house, imagining the daily life there, are invaluable,- as anyone who has stayed even one night will tell you. I happen not to be one of those who gets into the psychic stuff, ghosties and all that. I do very much enjoy experimenting, measuring, timing, and coming to conclusions about what may have happened, who might have seen or heard what, - and how the inmates of that house interacted with each other.

I also glean much from a careful persual of the neighborhood, angles, points of view from various vantage points -all of which serve to augment the already excellent maps and charts published in books, and the testimonies we have on record on the fateful day. There is no substitute for being on the spot. To lie on Bridget's bed in the evening on a Saturday and listen to St. Mary''s bell toll, to awaken to the cry of seagulls on the Taunton River, or just to lie on the grass in the sun in the side yard and picture through half-closed eyes, Bridget talking over the fence to the Kelly maid. Real places bring the real people to life from the pages of the books about the case. The cellar has much to tell in the dark of the night, picturing Medley, the heap of bloody clothing on the floor in front of that old chimney, the tool box with its axes and hatchets. Helping Dave cook breakfasts in the morning on the old black cookstove brings images of Bridget to mind, frying jonnycakes in the same place 115 years later and treading the wellworn path into the diningroom to serve them. Every time my hand goes up to the second shelf in the kitchen closet, I think with a sudden jolt of that dress waiting to be burned. Sometimes I almost believe I can hear the dim ghosts of conversation, sometimes I fancy I can hear the footfalls on the stairs and in the back hallway off the kitchen. .

On one August 4th morning awhile back I awoke in Lizzie's old room, and looked out the window at the Kelly house, and thought about Lizzie 112 years ago waking up looking at this same ceiling- out these same windows. What did she think? What might have been the plan for that morning- if it was planned. Do buildings retain energies and old memories?- sometimes I wonder. . . .

shakiboo · Post by **shakiboo** » Fri Dec 08, 2006 11:17 pm

Geez, Shelley you should be a writer! You have a way with words that draws a person in to see what your seeing, hearing and feeling, it's a gift.

Harry · Post by **Harry** » Fri Dec 08, 2006 11:30 pm

Yes, Shelley, what an excellent post. You have a way with words.

1bigsteve · Post by **1bigsteve** » Sat Dec 09, 2006 11:27 am

Thank you for your insights, Shelly. I feel pretty much the same way when I am looking at historical sites. Ghosts are never my thing either. I like to think about the people who were there and how the site has changed over the years.

I once saw a book on historical American trees that are mentioned in history books. It had old drawings of the trees from 2, 3, or 4 hundred years ago and modern day photos of the same trees. I wish I had bought it. I like that kind of historical comparisons.

-1bigsteve (o:

Bob Gutowski · Post by **Bob Gutowski** » Tue Dec 26, 2006 9:45 am

Back to de Mille for a sec! I discovered a heretofore unknown (well, to me) second full-length recording of the score of Fall River Legend.

It's by The Nashville Symphony, and I'll be comparing it to the one recorded in Rochester years ago (it should show up at the office in a day or two). I've been planning to write and submit an article on some of the mysteries of this score to The Hatchet for some time, and maybe 2007 is the year!

UPDATE: It arrived yesterday, and barring the unwelcome "narration" by a prestigious Southwestern attorney with an accent to match (did the murder take place in Fall River, Tennessee?), the 2004 recording is amazing. It contains MORE music than the performance version, with restored passages (and there are some familiar bars of music which also show up, perversely, only in Morton Gould's suite version of the score). This must be the music which Aggie had Morton cut the night after the premiere, when she saw that the ballet was way too long - that the magnificent set had reversed the values of some of the piece, making the pantomimed sections in the house stronger and some of the formal dancing excessive.

As I was listening to it one of my sisters called to tell me about the rerun of the forensic docu that was on right then, and I flipped the TV on, too, and was rewarded with the sight of our Kat as the ballet played in the background! Truly surreal.

Bob Gutowski · Post by **Bob Gutowski** » Mon Jul 02, 2007 10:57 am

If you go to YouTube and search for Fall River Legend (or use the link below), you'll find a one-minute piece of an odd film of the ballet, filmed or taped off a TV with minimal sound, starring Sallie Wilson as The Accused and Lucia Chase as Her Stepmother. It appears to have been filmed outside a big ol' New England (or upstate New York) house. I may try to track down Ms. Wilson, whom I met many years ago, to find out about this version, which I have seen stills from, and another full, taped version which I've seen excerpted in the British South Bank show on de Mille.

The kicker is that even when the dread threesome "enter" the house, they end up outside the house, against the clapboards. Methinks this may have been the inspiration for the clapboarded set of the last, great Glimmerglass/NYCO production of the opera Lizzie Borden.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=n1sZRlxV_iQ

Susan · Post by **Susan** » Mon Jul 02, 2007 9:28 pm

Cool find, Bob! It would have been nice if they had included some of the dancing, how does one dance a double homicide?

Bob Gutowski · Post by **Bob Gutowski** » Tue Jul 03, 2007 12:38 pm

Well, The Dance Theatre of Harlem's production, videotaped in The Netherlands some time ago, is readily available on VHS and DVD, though, aside from the beautifully-acted and danced Lizzie of Virginia Johnson, it's a bit sub-par, IMO. Simple mime, as seen on the famous clip from the "Omnibus" version from the 1950's, becomes frenzied mugging. Where Lucia Chase, de Mille's favorite Abby, simply leans over to Andew, her hand in the typical "gossip" position, indicating to Lizzie that she's being spoken of, Stephanie Dabney, the Abby in the Dance Theatre version, literally mouths the words "She's going CRAZY!" It's just not good. As opposed to the righteous woman you could find on every other New England porch who'd destroy your life, thinking she was doing good, which de Mille emphasizes that Chase captured, the African American dancer seems more like the ABT dancer who actually originated the role in 1948, Muriel Bently. Bently seemed to de Mille to be too exotic and, indeed, foreign to the community. Also, frankly, the Dance Theatre dancer seems, in her close-ups, a bit loony herself.

Susan · Post by **Susan** » Thu Jul 05, 2007 9:59 pm

Thanks, Bob. Yes, it sounds like it would be better if there was a filmed version of the original cast to watch. My old theater arts teacher hated mugging on stage, he taught us how so much more could be read in a simple gesture, a look, posture, etc. than frantically getting your point across in a frenzied manner.