Talk:Vanessa Redgrave/Archive 1

Archive 1

Remove "Neutrality" tag?

• I haven't followed this article closely, but it seems like the "neutrality" tag can be removed, now that the "Propaganda" and "Estrangement" issues seem to have been resolved. Any thoughts?Davemcarlson 16:38, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
  • I say remove it unless someone can show a reason why not, other than unsourced unverified attacks from people who don't sign their comments. User:Pedant 05:59, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

Propaganda

This article is leftist propaganda. It whitewashes the theft of the story for "Julia" and more directly, the "Playing for Time" controversy.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.231.217.37 (talk • contribs) 8 March 2006

The neutrality of this remark is disputed! Any facts to back up the so-called "Whitewash" of the alleged"theft" of the story for the "Julia" film? And stating the entire article as "leftist propaganda" should not be allowed to remain.

Estrangement

"Estrangement" seems too strong a word to use in the opening paragraph. The only evidence I could find of any disagreement/tension between Vanessa Redgrave and her sister Lynn, is in a BBC interview from 1991 that I've recently sourced. This disagreement was over Vanessa's opposition to the Persian Gulf War, and she makes it clear in the interview that she respects her sister's right to her own opinion abut this conflict.

Originally, someone stated in this opening paragraph that it was Vanessa's "left-wing views" that were responsible for an "estrangement" from her sister. Yet no source was quoted to support this.

Perhaps that whole statement about "estrangement" (for whatever reason) needs to be deleted, as the only source I've discovered refers more to a disagreement, rather than an estrangement, between the sisters.

Other thoughts/ideas? Michael

If its contensious then you should tone it down or at the very least move it further down the article and add the propper qualifications.--JK the unwise 16:00, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

Page format

I re-formatted the page using headings. As a result, obvious gaps became evident, e.g. Redgrave's early stage career. I'll work on adding information over the next few days and of course, welcome others' contributions. Michael

Missing film in filmography

In 1985 Vanessa Redgrave stared in a three part American Playhouse series Television Movie. It's title is " Three Sovereigns for Sister Sarah " and portrays the sister of two of the women convicted and executed during the Salem Witch trials. The focus of the movie pointed to greed more than witchcraft as the motivator for the trials. Sarah Cloyce the character Ms. Redgrave portrayed gives an acount of the events that led up to the trials and her use of a map at the end of the movie reveals a new idea for the reason the trials really occured. Those few men and mostly women brought to trial apparently refused to sell land to minister Samuel Parris and others of the church who were his friend. And the map shows just who recieved the land after it was taken from the accused. An excellent movie and a very valid new idea for the cause behind the Salem Witch trials.

Redgrave working to deny people prosperity

Vanessa Redgrave amongst those denying people work and prosperity.

The people of Rosia Montana in Romania have the chance to get some investment in their poverty stricken region. But people like Redgrave work to deny them this investment.

Redgrave and Israel

I'm no expert on the subject, but it seems that the antagonism between Redgrave and the state of Israel is insufficiently documented here. The _Julia_ incident seems in need of a touch more detail explaining the reasons JDL was protesting. Further, without the context of later events -- especially her bizarre 1980 claim that Israeli snipers deliberately targeted Palestinian schoolchildren -- the whole seems insufficiently clear. Pending comments from others, I do not change the article. Czrisher 01:31, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

Redgrave on 60 Minutes

I swear I felt that Mike Wallace was acting rude with her. He judged her polictics , he judged her smoking. But it was okay because Redgrave defended herself and what she had to say was very interesting. I think that Redgrave is one of the most smartest people who knows what she's talking about. And i liked when she said that she would never retire because we don't need another Legend of the screen gone.

Working in the US

I thought members of a communist party weren't allowed entry into the United States. Or is it different for celebs? Perhaps in the United States, as in the former Soviet Union, some are more equal than others. 194.46.166.145 01:41, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

Redgrave has never been a member of a communist party in the sense of a pro-Moscow or pro-Peking Communist Party, which were the only parties covered by the US regulations. Mia-etol (talk) 21:10, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

Better photo

As one of the greatest living actors is it not possible to get a better photo of Redgrave, for example from one of her film or theatre performances? Thanks, Psteven (talk) 13:58, 9 March 2008 (UTC)P

Oscar acceptance speech

An anonymouds user 24.4.202.167 has asked for a citation regarding Redgrave's allegation in her aceptance speech that the Academy had received death threats. However it's unclear whether he/she wants a citation verifying that Redgrave said this or a citation verifying that the Academy received death threats. Unless this is clarified I'd be in favour of removing this request for a citation. The source cited for the following quote makes no mention of death threats. --Mia-etol (talk) 08:57, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Template

The {{TheRedgraveFamily}} template sucks. --91.17.215.50 (talk) 16:44, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

Socialist?

I thought she was a communist. --92.0.220.4 (talk) 17:34, 14 February 2009 (UTC)

Dame?

How come she hasn't been "dame"ed yet? Because she is a socialist? Gryffindor (talk) 09:41, 19 March 2009 (UTC)

Here's an enigmatic answer [1]. But note, however, she is a Commander of the British Empire! Thincat (talk) 13:32, 19 March 2009 (UTC)

No she's not. Not even the Queen commands the British Empire, which doesn't even exist anymore. What Vanessa Redrgave is, is a Commander of the Order of the British Empire. Big difference. Don't let the postnominal abbreviation CBE fool you. -- Jack of Oz ... speak! ... 21:32, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

Contradictions

Quite frankly, although a tremendous actress, Vanessa Redgraves makes no sense. With the movie Julia, she makes speeches against facism and anti-semitism but in her support of the PLO, she favors the killing of Israeli Jews. The contradiction is just untenable. Great artist. Terrible logic. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.234.179.52 (talk) 02:16, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

Deceased?!

Why does it say deceased next to her "years active"? Calebcjh (talk) 06:41, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

wanted to include their original research

inclusion of Coriolanus: an idea map Given that Vanessa Redgrave's performance in Coriolanus(2011) has been very widely acclaimed, the removal of this thoroughly referenced map is "odd" - not it's inclusion. It includes MULTIPLE references to her performance, her thoughts - including the very intimate feelings she shared about her process at the Berliniale press conference. Before you delete it again, it'd be helpful if you actually spent some time with the map. Putting it all these sources together is original - that's true. But the references to all these sources, internationally based, including published books, TV, print interviews, and reviews, it's astonishing that you chose to delete it. Perhaps you could spend a little time with it before unilaterally deciding it's "odd" and shouldn't be included? --AshokaPurr 01:30, 5 June 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ashokapurr (talk • contribs) What you're doing is a significant problem. These are maps created on Google by an individual. There is nothing reliable about them, and they can't be used, either in the body or in external links. It fails WP:ELNO#11 (blogs) and #13 (indirect relevance). I am even more concerned that you are adding these idea maps to many articles, which is WP:LINKSPAM. So, I strongly suggest that you revert ALL of the ELs like this you've added to other articles and let me know, either here, on your Talk page (where I've left a comment), or on my Talk page, that you've done so. Otherwise, I'll have to consider escalating the issue. Thanks.--Bbb23 (talk) 23:39, 5 June 2012 (UTC) Bbb23, 1. The map's made by an individual but so are books, films, and everything else referenced as sources on wikipedia. News articles...all of this stuff is produced by individuals typically. Why isn't that a problem? Every single wiki reference was produced by someone, wasn't it? And how do I know this? Well because most of my limited time here is spent referencing and looking for references for other peoples' writing, unsubstantiated or thinly referenced, in wikis. 2. "There is nothing reliable about them" - it's not clear who the them are that you refer to, but I'll guess it's the references. The map contains well over 40 attributions to reliable sources, like BBC, Channel 4 news, The New York Times, etc. Just about every single item is attributed through hotlinks to the reliable source - unlike many wikis on wikipedia which are filled with unattributed claims. Here's just a sample of references taken from the map: Vanessa Redgrave at the Berlinale Ralph Fiennes talks about Volumnia's role and Vanessa Redgrave's portrayal Roger Ebert's review where he explores Ralph's investigation of his relationship with his mother Why Toby Stephens covered in blood helped ticket sales way back And there are many many many more... to BBC, major newspaper websites, books, etc. But for you and the others, all these sources are suddenly unreliable. 3. "Indirect relevance": Vanessa Redgrave's performance in this film has been widely acclaimed, it was even thought she'd win an Oscar. (Darn that Meryl Streep.). It was a major role for Vanessa, and frankly, given that she performed the role not long after going through major tragedies in her own life, including the death of her daughter, many many people, including other actors, described her performance as masterful. This is particularly so, since, as she says in an interview referenced in the map, this character is from a totally different to universe to the one she knows and lives in. Indeed apparently, she told Fiennes when he approached her about the part that she didn't think she could do it. Call me stupid - oh sorry, that's right I am stupid - but I thought this might matter to a wiki about Vanessa Redgrave. She's playing the role of a woman who glories in every physical and psychological wound her son receives..... She really had to work to find this woman. And the map references several verifiable sources that explore this from her, Fiennes' and other peoples' points of view. But this doesn't matter.... 4. You and the other Arbiters of Truth who all jumped to delete this map and on me and my possible motives, with such speed, seem to think that adding this to several pages was random or done by a bot. It wasn't. I won't detail them here on Vanessa's talk page, but I will elsewhere (and that'll be my last thought on this), just for your information - not to contest your judgment(s) of course. That said, permit me, to share one example here. Ian Mckellen. I added it as an external link to his wiki because stupidly I figured you know what? Here's a man in his 70s, who's performance in the title role OVER TWENTY YEARS AGO affected Fiennes making his film in a completely different world..... Given the astonishing feelings that Mckellen shares about his performances in the play, especially in the title role (on his website - again, all attributed in the map), yes, I thought this really is relevant to a wiki about Ian Mckellen. It goes completely to his reach as an actor. It also speaks to his feelings - as he's written - as a gay man playing the role with the homoeroticism between Coriolanus and Aufidius, finally resolved through such violence. And then also, the map refers to several of his other masterful performances in leading roles in Shakespeare plays, Macbeth and King Lear, for instance. You see all this as a "significant problem" do you? All I can say now is you and the others' reactions to this has been quite an experience. Thank you for helping me understand that wikipedia is quite simply not a place for any kind of innovation or building any understanding of how artists affect each other or how a life - "real-life" Coriolanus - might inspire so many creative acts and experiences that can metamorphose so many different peoples' lives: artists and their audiences. If you need to escalate this go ahead, but I won't be adding this again. You and the others have won - obviously that's what this has been about for all of you. Thank you for helping me understand that wikipedia is LINEAR and male. It's all straight lines where nothing is connected; no one is inspired by ANYTHING outside of themselves, and everything is in a separate little box. And women who think critically and reference things in new ways are quite simply not welcome. --AshokaPurr 20:50, 7 June 2012 (UTC) If you stop adding these links to articles, there's no need to escalate the issue. As to all of the sarcastic thanks for what you think you have learned, you're welcome. Hopefully, you have also learned to contribute pursuant to Wikipedia policies and guidelines, regardless of whether you agree with them, or to stop contributing.--Bbb23 (talk) 21:28, 7 June 2012 (UTC) Reading your thoughts, I can only introduce you to a word it doesn't seem that you're familiar with: irony. It's spelled i-r-o-n-y. --AshokaPurr 22:38, 7 June 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ashokapurr (talk • contribs)

Call the midwife

I have no idea how to edit wikipedia but why isn't Vanessa Redgrave credited for voicing over "Call The Midwife"? If someone could add this that would be great. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.10.252.145 (talk) 22:16, 12 February 2013 (UTC)

Oscars

Her - let's call it controversial - statement needs to be balanced out by at least one counter-statement. Chayefsky's reaction is asserted as being relevant by at least one reliable source. If we keep removing it, we almost make it look like we endorse her statement - she thanked Hollywood for refusing to be intimidated by a bunch of Zionist thugs... quotation marks or not, this is not encyclopedic approach. EauZenCashHaveIt (I'm All Ears) 13:26, 20 January 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Vanessa Redgrave. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20101229023831/http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/theatre/article-23891608-rave-reviews-for-redgrave-sassy-at-73-after-year-of-family-heartbreak.do to http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/theatre/article-23891608-rave-reviews-for-redgrave-sassy-at-73-after-year-of-family-heartbreak.do

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:42, 6 December 2017 (UTC)

Advocate for human rights

This article has a sub-heading "Political Activism", but on the Today programme on August 30 2018, Vanessa Redgrave she did not want to be thought of as an activist but an advocate for human rights. Vorbee (talk) 07:34, 30 August 2018 (UTC)

So what? Donald Trump wants to be seen as a very stable genius.--Jack Upland (talk) 23:41, 2 December 2019 (UTC)

Trotskyism

There seems to be a gap here. The article says that Redgrave was involved in the Workers Revolutionary Party (UK) in the "1970s". However, the WRP article says that she and Corin split from the WRP to form the Marxist Party in 1987, which was apparently succeeded by the Peace and Progress Party in 2004. She was therefore involved in Trotskyism for two more decades than indicated in the article.--Jack Upland (talk) 23:53, 2 December 2019 (UTC)

She was very active in the WRP until it imploded in the mid 80s, and was close and loyal to Gerry Healy, its disgraced leader. She defended Healy over allegations of sexual misconduct, claiming that all the women accusing him were lying. I suspect her political views haven't changed much even today. The article does rather play all this down. --Ef80 (talk) 22:07, 2 March 2020 (UTC)