Discussion about this post

User's avatar
sixes's avatar

Thanks Clint, for the Murray Bartlett of the day. He was on The Guiding Light for the last 2 of its 57 years.

Expand full comment
Sam L. Archer's avatar

Dear Clint,

You asked for my review of "The Eye Has To Travel," so here it is.

The documentary is quite well produced, with the quality of the images sharp and the selection of the images from archive appropriate to support the discussion of the subject. The interviews with people associated with Diana Vreeland were nicely excerpted and, I would presume, well done in each one's entirety. Similarly, they supported the historical report well.

Judging from the bibliography, this documentary was thoroughly researched and likely that was quite expensive to do.

Diana Vreeland is a woman who had to grow into her best face. The first images we see of her are of the very mature Diana Vreeland, and my initial reaction was, "what a beautiful lady." It is sad to learn that her mother called her ugly as a child. The photographs I saw of her at ages earlier than thirty showed a somewhat unmemorable, but not ugly, face. There were intelligent things going on behind that face, as was proven by her ability and determination to rise to the occasion when life thrust her into the sudden necessity of earning her own living. She did not whine; she looked around and pursued remunerative work.

. After enduring the emotional abrasions of having to "suck it up" doing entry-level jobs, she displayed her talent for attention-grabbing photo-journalism to the right person and got hired into a position of influential writing, from which she launched into the photographic creativity that defined her ultimately. She was fortunate to ride the rising tide of United States quasi adolescent exuberance after its emergence as the only fully functioning industrialized economy after World War II, when we in North America (including Canada somewhat) were buying it up, burning it up, roaring it up consuming, consuming, consuming. In our urban centers the forces that made money slosh from one place to another were pursuing success via excess, and Diana Vreeland had the mind to compete in that environment with images that jumped off the page at the reader.

. In the documentary we see Diana Vreeland almost invariably dressed in lovely garments of the highest quality fabrics tailored beautifully to drape just right and allow her the freedom of motion to do her work; while she turned the women who appeared on her pages in "Vogue" into the most hideous specters of ugliness I would rather not imagine. Indeed, a slashed-open corpse could not be any uglier than those women after the Diana Vreeland treatment. She got paid well for it, and so laughed all the way to the bank, I suppose. It is not surprising that the documentary ends with Diana Vreeland's curatorial work on the 18th century rich women's high fashion, notable for its preposterous daring and shameful abuse of women's bodies.

It is good that Diana Vreeland was picked up from her devastation at being terminated from employment in journalism, and employed honorably as a curator and presenter of women's clothing history. She was self-reliant and heroic. Her strength and bravery are rightly chronicled in this documentary.

. - Sam

Expand full comment
7 more comments...