Tuesday, May 15, 2012

Hepburn: Biography and Filmography


Family.  Katharine Houghton Hepburn was born 12 May 1907; the second of six children. The Houghton name was her mother’s family name and their wealth came from Corning Glass Works and Houghton Mifflin Publishers. Her father, Thomas, was a well-known urologist and surgeon who, along with Harvard’s Charles Eliot, founded the American Social Hygiene Association. The mission of the association was to inform the public about sexually transmitted diseases, at that time STD’s were called venereal diseases. Also a Katharine, Hepburn’s mother who was known as Kit, was an early women’s rights activist who was one of the founders of Planned Parenthood.
Childhood.  As a child, Hepburn climbed trees and wanted to be a boy. She cut her hair short and went by the name of Jimmy. Fulfilling her desire to exude a masculine character is something that Hepburn would reprise in Silvia Scarlet and Pat and Mike. When she was paddled for misbehavior, Hepburn learned not to cry. It was only then that the spankings stopped. At home, she was educated by private tutors. Therefore, when she arrived at college, she was socially awkward and did not know how to behave in regular social situations such as the dining hall.
Young Adulthood.  Hepburn attended an women’s school in Pennsylvania. It was at Bryn Mawr College that she discovered acting. Hepburn was a poor student until she learned that in order to be eligible to act in the school’s productions, one must earn good grades. Her interests outside of theatre include: writing, piloting a plane, painting, golfing, playing tennis, bicycling, gardening, and of course, swimming.
Men.  Hepburn was married to a wealthy Philadelphian Ludlow Ogden Smith. They had a brief marriage in 1927. Producer Leland Hayward was her next paramour, followed by the Aviator Howard Hughes. Hepburn met Spencer Tracy in 1940. It was Tracy “who was on to her,” and loved her for 27 years. Because Tracy was a married Roman Catholic, he would not divorce his wife Louise. Tracy’s home-life was compounded by the necessity of Louise’s care for their deaf child. Hepburn and Tracy were never seen in public as a couple, nor did they live together. They were left alone by the press for some reason which I cannot fathom. They lived in separately in homes nearby to one another until Tracy’s death in 1967. Hepburn never talked about Tracy in public until the death of his wife, Louise, in 1983.
Career.  Upon graduation from Bryn Mawr College, Hepburn worked with repertory companies when a scout noticed her work. Hepburn was fired from ‘Death Takes a Holiday’ and ‘The Animal Kingdom.’ When Hepburn made the jump to the movie making life in Hollywood, she made 43 films starting with RKO in 1932. In the beginning of her career, as a studio employee, she was cast as brittle, one-dimensional characters. This treatment soured her on the Hollywood movie scene, so Hepburn returned to the New York stage. Her first movie, ‘A Bill of Divorcement’ in 1932 was an unexpected hit. In 1933, ‘Christopher Strong’ Hepburn’s second film was a huge failure. 1933’s ‘Morning Glory,’ Hepburn won her first of four Oscar’s (The Academy Award). Tallulah Bankhead knelt when congratulating Hepburn on her performance as Jo in ‘Little Women’ in 1933. Hepburn’s other three Academy Awards were 1967’s controversial, ‘Guess Who’s Coming to Dinner?’, ‘The Lion in Winter in 1968, and On Golden Pond in 1981. Hepburn’s other outstanding films are: Little Women (1933), Alice Adams (1935), Stage Door (1937), Bringing Up Baby (1938), The African Queen (1951), The Rainmaker (1956), Long Day’s Journey into Night (1962), and The Trojan Women (1970). Her notable television movie was ‘Love among the Ruins (1975). Later stage productions include appearances in: Coco (1969), and The West Side Waltz (1991). Hepburn is also credited for several autobiographical writings and a television documentary. Hepburn starred in nine films with her long-time beau Spencer Tracy. The last film, “Guess Who’s Coming to Dinner?” finished production only 17 days before Tracy died.
Comeback.  Hepburn’s comeback film was Philadelphia Story. She returned to Hollywood with the movie and play rights to Philadelphia Story: a gift from beau Howard Hughes, sold the script to MGM, and dictated the terms of the contract. Hepburn would, of course, star in the film, chose her male costars, and refused a salary. Instead, she kept the 25% interest in the film by putting up 25% of the production costs, and bought the screen rights.
Hepburn.  Katharine Hepburn was simple and direct. She enjoyed wood fires and kept one burning in her home “no matter how hot a day it was.” Hepburn was ‘wickedly smart and unapologetically opinionated,’ and ‘was a genuine Hollywood trailblazer who helped clear a path for today’s breed of business-savvy A-list women.’ Hepburn developed many of her own projects; rewriting scripts, selecting costars, and having financial interest in her projects. She was a style icon as well. Her trademark trousers and long-term affair with Spencer Tracy demonstrated her independence from convention in a time when stars were told who to date, how to dress, and which parts they would play.
Summary.  Hepburn’s progressive New England upbringing allowed her to embody determination and independence and to develop one of the most successful stage and film careers that lasted more than sixty years. As a role model, she made way for and led the next generations of ambitious, intelligent, and career savvy women. Hepburn died at her home in Fenwick, Connecticut at the age of 96 on 29 June, 2003.

10 comments:

  1. We had an interesting question regarding a possible connection between Ibsen's Hedda Gabbler and Tracy Lord. No obvious connection between the two characters exists, but it's instructive to see how differently things turn out in different genres. Comedy allows for human imperfection, even expects it. It's what Tracy must learn to accept. In melodrama imperfection will usually lead to a bad result and not a remediable situation.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I wanted to say that I found it very interesting that Hepburn's character in the movie we watched in class got the attention of being viewed "as a goddess" from the character for which she declined marriage from. This may have to do with the transformation she underwent. She may have realized that she should not be viewed as a goddess and should not want to be viewed that way while that specific character was willing to tell her anything she wanted and be whoever she wanted. Hepburn's character chose to go with the male character who realized her flaws and did not treat her as a god, but as a human being and for whom she really was.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Great take on the film's course of events, Lauren. It's great that Hepburn's character had that realization and CHOSE to return to her first husband rather than having that decision thrust upon her. Given the context of the time period, I can definitely see how progressive it must have been in the autonomy she had. However, I was still bummed when she ended up with Cary Grant's character in the end. Tracy's fault was that she could not accept faults in herself or from others (thus her divorce and the rift between her and her father). It wasn't until she accepted those faults (the faults of men) that she felt truly happy. I may be taking the feminist approach too far, but finding solace in accepting her father's infidelity still seems to me like a fairly patriarchal attitude. She also felt truly happy when she returned to her husband (remember her mother's unhappiness in the beginning of the film because she was without her husband?) who exerted a sense of control over the wedding situation. Was anyone else a bit bummed out by subtly (or not so subtly) sexist themes?

      Delete
    2. Eloquently posted Lauren. Throughout the movie I could see Hepburn’s struggles of not wanting to be “labeled” as the “Goddess” figure, due to faults suffered previously in her life, especially her marriage. I also felt the sense that deep down she wanted that role of a Goddess, yet just didn’t want to have the “label” of Goddess. She was opinionated from the start with the male influence in the clothing she wore (not Godly at all). As the movie progressed she wore the long white pool robe that was strongly fashioned after the Greek Goddesses. Her femininity showed more with the long flowing dresses that evolved taking on a submissive role conforming to the male actors characters influence. She was a strong woman and needed a strong man to tell her that it is alright to be who she is, and wants to be in life, no matter if she is or is not a Goddess, in actions or dress. She is human no matter the role she plays in life, so be kind, watch your tongue and He will accept her faults the second time around. I am glad she didn’t marry the second guy as he didn’t have a strong enough personality, or the knowledge to handle her personality. Wonderful movie and I too would have been curious to know how the movie was viewed originally.

      Delete
    3. I agree with Rebecca in a sense that George most certainly did not have a strong enough personality to keep up with Hepburn's character. She was a very strong woman who in a way went against what the time period asked women to be. It was almost hard to keep up with the Goddess aspect in the movie because she was constantly trying to fight the stigma but at the same time it would still show through in her personality that a Goddess is a part of who she is or at least how she is viewed. I definitely did not view the "sexist" themes in this movie as anything more than the time period in which it was filmed and as to Lauren's question below I do not think that these views would be as magnified if we would have watched this movie in their time period when it was released.

      Delete
    4. Nice post Lauren. I would also like to add that I think Tracy knew deep down that C.K Dexter Haven was who she was meant to be with because he didn't her like a goddess. I also agree with Rebecca in saying that George didn't have a strong enough personality for Hepburn's character. However, if Tracy wouldn't have made the change from "goddess" to "human", George could have been perfect for her because he always treated her like a goddess. He never took her off that pedestal and he liked viewing her in that fashion. If not for C.K. Dexter Haven's intervening, I'm not sure Tracy would have made the change from goddess to human, or if she did, I'm sure it would have been much later in her life.

      Delete
  3. Interesting thoughts, Casey! I guess I was not exactly bummed by the sexist themes because I thinkg it is just expected for this time period. It is very interesting how much film reflects and influences society. It makes me wonder what people were thinking when they saw this movie when it was first released. Would any of us would notice the sexist views if we were physically in this time period? (Considering the feminist movement was much after this)

    ReplyDelete
  4. Perhaps it’s my age and gender that makes me say that even though I understand the sexist theme discussion, it doesn’t feel quite right to me when discussing The Philadelphia Story or Hepburn. I know that Hepburn was a role model who embodied ambition and determination; it is evident by reviewing her lengthy and successful career. I don’t think that it really matters what sex a person is, male or female, when it comes to having ambition, determination, and drive. I know it doesn’t matter for me; and I don’t think it would matter if I lived in a different time.

    The Lord character did have fatal flaws, but who doesn’t? My Mom says, “No idea is a good idea until it’s HIS idea!” Working through her faults was Lord’s personal decision that we witnessed through the time of the film. Did Lord have other faults prior to this time that she worked through? Will she work on other faults in the future? Probably. Does she have faults that she cannot or will not acknowledge? I think we all do. When Lord finally acquiesced and decided that she wasn’t yare during her marriage, to her father, and to men in general, and that it was time for her to be yare and that she could be yare; then and only then could she have a complete and solid marriage to C.K. Dexter Haven.

    In 2009, this same situation of marriage, divorce, and remarriage reoccurred in a modern movie, 2012. Twentytwelve is a wonderful movie that is accurate geologically speaking, with the added bonus of an underlying love story. Kate Curtis is divorced from Jackson Curtis (Amanda Peet and John Cusack) and in the end of the movie, Kate gets back together with Jackson. They don’t remarry before the end of the movie, but the feeling the audience is left with is that they may do so. They have been through an ordeal as a family and survived as a family. The forgone conclusion is that they will become a family once again.

    The idea of family and being made whole is not a sexist position, in my mind, it is a natural one! The need for family and the desire to repair broken families are needs brought to us courtesy of our genetic makeup. Family is a fundamental and societal necessity, and the lack of them brings about a state of non-equilibrium. Working to repair family can be seen as an attempt to return to equilibrium, to regain those things that support and nurture us. Lord performed her repair by accepting her father despite his black past; just as her mother did. Lord agreed to remarry Haven, the only man she had ever loved, to regain the emotional and physical benefits of not being alone and to restate equilibrium for not only herself, but her family as well.

    ReplyDelete
  5. From your description, 2012 now seems more interesting to me as an apocalyptic "family" film, as family struggles and apocalyptic fears converge. Significantly, Tracy's dilemma, as the film frames it, doesn't ever question that the choice for her always involves marriage (family is kept out of it, as it often is in these "remarriage" films). The only real options open to Tracy are who she'll marry--George or Dex (or maybe Mike, but he's not seriously entertained).
    It's not that marriage or being single should be valorized, but that there's only one socially acceptable option (or even considered). Even at that some might not find it problematic if that's the option which coincides with their desires. It only becomes an issue if it's not.
    In other words, it's not the point that we should think Tracy's decision to be "yare" is "wrong." As you note, it's what she decides she wants. It's really more how she arrives at the decision that we're interested in--and what we see is there isn't a decision, in effect. Compliance is the only one allowed, or "right," however willing she eventually is.

    ReplyDelete
  6. This is interesting. I was thinking that the film was promoting marriage. I guess society seems to deem that marriage is the "normal" way of life. But for some of us who are single, society does not look favorable upon. I agree that it really is a decision that the person makes and that there isn't a right or a wrong.

    ReplyDelete