Ebert goes off about Bette Davis stamp

[MrMidwest]

Posted: 10/11/08 at 7:04pm

Thank you for smoking

This stamp honoring Bette Davis was issued by the U. S. Postal Service on Sept. 18. The portrait by Michael Deas was inspired by a still photo from "All About Eve." Notice anything missing? Before you even read this far, you were thinking, Where's her cigarette? Yes reader, the cigarette in the original photo has been eliminated. We are all familiar, I am sure, with the countless children and teenagers who have been lured into the clutches of tobacco by stamp collecting, which seems so innocent, yet can have such tragic outcomes. But isn't this is carrying the anti-smoking campaign one step over the line?

Depriving Bette Davis of her cigarette reminds me of Soviet revisionism, when disgraced party officials disappeared from official photographs. Might as well strip away the toupees of Fred Astaire and Jimmy Stewart. I was first alerted to this travesty by a reader, Wendell Openshaw of San Diego, who wrote me: "Do you share my revulsion for this attempt to revise history and distort a great screen persona for political purposes? It is political correctness and revisionist history run amok. Next it will be John Wayne holding a bouquet instead of a Winchester!"

(it goes on...)

http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/2008/10/thank_you_for_smoking.html

[best12bars]

Posted: 10/11/08 at 7:16pm

First of all, I don't think it's a requirement to show a picture of Bette Davis with a cigarette, even though it was her favorite movie prop.

Just like I don't think you have to show George Burns with a cigar. Or Charlie Chaplin with a cane.

But if you're going to select a photo of Miss Davis with a cigarette in her hand, then so obviously "remove" it, as in this case, I agree that's crossing the line into revisionist history. Her hand is clearly holding an invisible ciggy in this shot.

So, my advice? Either show us the cigarette in her hand, or pick another photo of Davis when she's not smoking.

There must be two or three they could have found.

[CATSNYrevival]

Posted: 10/11/08 at 8:07pm

The article says the drawing is based on a photograph with her holding a cigarette. Was the drawing done specifically for the stamp minus the cigarette or does the original drawing contain the cigarette and now it has been erased for use on the stamp? It's very confusingly worded in the article.

[Reginald Tresilian]

Posted: 10/11/08 at 8:08pm

I'm all for prohibiting advertiers from using promotions that pressure or seduce children and teen into smoking, but . . .

I grew up watching Golden Age movies where everyone smoked, and I never started.

But the odd thing here is that it's a painting (from a photo). The artist could have simply painted her hand clutching the fur, and it would have looked perfectly natural and not drawn attention to the phantom cigarette. Or omitted the hand altogether.

[PalJoey]

Posted: 10/11/08 at 8:15pm

Well, I grew up watching my parents smoke and I smoked for 10 years, from age 20 to age 30.

But I never smoked like my mother or father...I smoked JUST like BETTE DAVIS!

[best12bars]

Posted: 10/11/08 at 8:22pm

LOL!

PJ, I smoked for 11 years (from 18 to 29) and I haven't had a ciggy since.

And Reggie, the photo of Davis is like your av shot, but without the ciggy. It would be so obviously "there" to all who saw it.

CATSNY---see below:

[PalJoey]

Posted: 10/11/08 at 9:58pm

Do be a dear, Besty, and give me a light, please.

[Jon]

Posted: 10/11/08 at 10:15pm

They did the same thing around 10 years ago on a stamp honoring blues guitar legend Robert Johnson. They removed the cigarette from a famous photo.

[feinstein9]

Posted: 10/11/08 at 10:40pm

They did this also a couple of years ago with a photo of Paul McCartney on the cover of the The Beatles Capitol Albums Vol. 2. Caused a lot of flack then, too. I'm not sure where these people are coming from removing cigarettes from peoples hands as if the alternative is going to encourage people to smoke. I know it's just a stamp, but it seems rather silly to remove something just because it's taboo fifty years later. Now if it was an Al Jolson stamp in blackface...

[Reginald Tresilian]

Posted: 10/12/08 at 12:35am

"And Reggie, the photo of Davis is like your av shot"

I so can't wait for my stamp!

[best12bars]

Posted: 10/12/08 at 3:46am

...only if you're willing to lose your smoke for it.

[Q]

Posted: 10/12/08 at 5:12am

If McCain wins, blame the missing cigarette.

[SueleenGay]

Posted: 10/12/08 at 1:44pm

What I find interesting is Roger, who is suffering and (I believe) permanently disfigured because of cancer, whining about a freaking missing cigarette. The stamp is to honor Davis, not smoking.

[SueleenGay]

Posted: 10/12/08 at 2:21pm

I like this one better. This was the runner up.

[Roscoe]

Posted: 10/12/08 at 4:57pm

Roger Ebert referred to MILLION DOLLAR BABY as a masterpiece, named CRASH his best film of the year, and thought that Robert Zemeckis' CGI BEOWULF was a Monty Pythonesque spoof. The man is clearly not in full possession of his faculties.