>>14892423So why is the way she speaks and acts so dramatic and apeing the grandeur of the on screen personas of those 40s and 50s Hollywood actresses?
Because it's developed into its own thing, rather than just a copy of the one thing which initially influenced it.
>Those actresses did not behave like that at all in private and were far more normalWhich is why I said "stereotype." Also, Joan "no wire hangers" Crawford provides something of a counterpoint.
>Also Dietrich was not a lesbian, she was a voracious bisexual and the whole sewing circle stuff is more evocative of the 30s.Sorry, I used "lesbian" in the older, broad sense of "woman who has sex with other women." I didn't mean to imply that she was exclusively homosexual. And I did say, "20s, 30s, and 40s". The 30s were the peak of the Dietrich "sewing circle," to be sure, but actresses dabbling in lesbianism was already a thing in the silent era. Louise Brooks, for instance, was open in her later life about having had sex with multiple women in the 20s, including Geta Garbo (Brooks didn't actually consider herself a "lesbian" or even bisexual, and claimed she was merely "curious").
