FRIDAY, OCTOBER 9, 2026
...Brando admired "the girl:" Her name at birth was actually Saint. The leading authority offers this overview of the life of a widely admired person:
Eva Marie Saint
Eva Marie Saint (July 4, 1924 – October 6, 2026) was an American actress...
...She made her film debut in Elia Kazan's On the Waterfront (1954), opposite Marlon Brando. The film won eight Academy Awards, including Best Picture, and earned her the Academy Award for Best Supporting Actress.
[...]
Eva Marie Saint was born on July 4, 1924, in Newark, New Jersey, to John Merle Saint and Eva Marie (née Rice) Saint. Her parents were Quakers. She attended Bethlehem Central High School in Delmar, New York, graduating in 1942. Saint studied acting at Bowling Green State University in Ohio.
And so on, at length, from there. In the obituary in yesterday's print editions, the New York Times includes this:
Eva Marie Saint, Oscar Winner for ‘On the Waterfront,’ Is Dead at 102
Eva Marie Saint, who won an Academy Award in 1955 for her gripping movie debut as the shy love interest of Marlon Brando’s longshoreman in “On the Waterfront,” and who proved equally convincing as a stylish siren opposite Cary Grant in the romantic Hitchcock thriller “North by Northwest,” died on Tuesday at her home in Los Angeles. She was 102.
[...]
Her supporting performance in “On the Waterfront,” which boasted one of the most impressive casts and crews ever assembled, would alone have assured her a place in movie history; the movie remains near the top of the American Film Institute’s list of the country’s greatest films. It won the Oscar for best picture and director (for Elia Kazan), and Mr. Brando took home the award for best actor, for his tormented performance as a former prizefighter who moonlights as muscle for a corrupt union.
Even if Mr. Brando had the most indelible lines (“I coulda been a contender”), Budd Schulberg, who won the screenwriting Oscar, said Ms. Saint had the riskiest assignment—portraying a convent-educated young woman, Edie, who simmers with passion for Mr. Brando’s Terry Malloy. Edie, who discovers Terry played a role in the death of her brother, who had run afoul of union racketeers, plays a critical role waking Malloy’s conscience.
We could do without the stock about "simmering with passion." But as we noted quite recently, the Edie character does indeed "play a critical role waking Malloy’s conscience."
As we noted on Wednesday, we've always admired Robert Redford for what he chose to portray in The Horse Whisperer—for his portrait of a grown man who is wise enough, and human enough, to care about the suffering of "the girl."
As we recently noted, we've also long admired the thematic undercard of On the Waterfront, in which the female character, portrayed by Saint in her film debut, "plays a critical role waking [the male character's] conscience."
The film ends in the classic male-centric way, with a fistfight down on the waterfront. But along the way, the Brando character sees that Edie is a better person than he is, and God bless his decency all the way down:
He decides that he wants to be like her!
He decides he wants to be more like "the girl!" He's helped along by Karl Malden's Father Barrie, who memorably offers this:
Jesus Christ is down here on the waterfront...
So the Malden character says, in this famous scene.
The Redford character cares about and respects the girl. The Brando character wants to learn how to be more like her. You rarely see expression of such gender dynamics—of such gender values—in major American films.
This week, it's been hard to avoid comparing those male characters to the gruesome performance of the men and women running such campuses as Cornell. To the gruesome misogyny displayed each night on the Fox News Channel. To the uniform silence meeting such cable news shows within elite Blue America.
We expect to talk about this more in the future. Over here, in Blue America, the uniform silence will persist.
No one will say the first word about the ugly values sold to boys and young men on those grisly Fox News Channel shows. The CEO who invented those shows will instead be sent to the Hall of Fame!
The Brando character admired the superior qualities of "the girl!" In last Sunday's New York Times, Jennifer Weiner described that very person:
My kind, smart, big-hearted daughter...
Her kind, smart, big-hearted daughter, who is now (gulp) a freshman in college, from whose values our struggling culture could gain.
Pete Hegseth is planning to livestream an execution by firing squad.
ReplyDeleteOne purpose of executions is to deter more crime. Will livestreaming this execution have a bigger effect on would-be criminals than doing it privately?
Delete“One purpose of executions is to deter more crime.”
DeleteAnother is to feed the insatiable appetite for cruelty of gruesome, hateful people like you.
David would love to kill a bunch of us commies but is only restrained by the thought of the death penalty.
Delete@12:43 - Here's a way to see if it's really gruesomeness and hated that upsets you. Did you publicly denounce the murder of Charlie Kirk Did you denounce the Trump assassination attempts?
DeleteFuck you, David, you're a fucking fascist freak. We don't cheer for murder like you.
DeleteThe death penalty has zero deterrence impact, this has been debunked since forever.
DeleteExcept it deters dickhead in cal from killing us commie democrats.
Delete2:02 is correct. DiC proceeds from a false assumption. Studies have shown that the death penalty has zero effect on the homicide rate. On the other hand, DIC neglects to consider the negative traumatizing (as in causing PTSD) psychological impact on children and sensitive people, and possibly even psychopaths getting off on watching the killing of a human being, as if it were a snuff film. It is sick coarse and disgusting. So of course DiC is for it.
Delete"Did you publicly denounce the murder of Charlie Kirk?" Oh I see , it is a public denunciation that will satisfy the MAGAt. Denouncing the state turning an execution into public theatre has nothing to do with Charlie Kirk, numbskull.
DeleteHey Dickhead, One of thousands of reasons to detest Charlie Kirk, "On his weekly panel discussion, "ThoughtCrime," Kirk was discussing death penalties....
Delete"Death penalties should be public, should be quick, it should be televised. I think at a certain age, its an initiation...What age should you start to see public executions?" Kirk asked.
Kirk, along with his co-hosts Jack Posobiec, Tyler Bowyer and Blake Neff, continued to discuss at what age should children watch the public executions, with one co-host pointing out as young as 12 years old.
"I think maybe age 12, sixth grade or so when you are old enough... " Neff said.
While Bowyer pointed out that it should be at an age when someone "can embrace the meaning" of the execution."
They are so far removed from Christ it makes my head spin. Just jaggoffs and weirdos. (Detest is not the same as happy he was murdered you fucking asshole DiChead.)
The death penalty protects society from additional crimes by someone who has proven beyond a shadow that he has no redeeming value. It also saves the state from the expense of maintaining that person for the rest of his life. Deterrence is not the only consideration.
DeleteThe death penalty only serves as a tool of vengeance. It is not part of a healthy society.
DeleteNot only has deterrence been debunked, but it is significantly cheaper to give a life sentence than the death penalty.
These are facts commonly known among Americans, these trolls must be foreign.
Trump draws his sex with minors line also at age 12.
DeleteThe election ratfucking begins in earnest:
ReplyDeletehttps://apnews.com/article/ice-department-of-homeland-security-janelle-stelson-scott-perry-c29eb70c6f4f11580fd8cd631e290a4e
“the gruesome performance of the men and women running such campuses as Cornell.”
ReplyDeleteWhat exactly is Somerby accusing these men and women of, and what is a campus “such as” Cornell? (I recall dic saying a couple of days ago that this kind of thing only happens at institutions run by “liberals”. Is that what Somerby is implying here?)
Some statistics:
* Data Reports: Federal data collected under the Clery Act and analyzed by outlets like CBS News shows that most large U.S. college campuses (with 5,000 or more students) report at least two sexual assaults or related incidents (such as rape and fondling) per year.
* Prevalence Rates: Studies estimate that roughly 19% to 27% of college women and 6% to 8% of college men experience some form of sexual assault or rape during their time in higher education.
The odd dynamic here is that the right wing is accusing the woman of fabricating the rape. Megyn Kelly goes so far as to claim that the accuser was “probably thrilled to be so admired because she clearly didn't grow up the incredibly beautiful one.”
There was a "party monitor" present in the frat who somehow missed what was going on.
DeleteIt is a myth that men rape women because they are physically attractive or that the appearance of the woman contributes to her rape (i.e., dressing slutty). Rape is a hate crime. Kelly is compounding the assault on the victim, which is extra ugly, much like Hegseth frothing at the mouth with glee over a public execution:
Tiedrich says:
"Did you notice how completely fucking excited Piss-Drunk Pete was, in that clip? He was absolutely giddy with glee as he burbled away at a mile a minute about how the military was going to publicly kill shit out of someone. That’s insane. Nobody should be that happy about meting out death — and nobody who’s that over-the-moon about killing should be put in charge of the lives of others."
Kelly comes across the same way as she talks about the Cornell gang rape.
Somerby again says that no one but him complains about Fox News. That is a complete lie. What does Somerby gain by telling this lie over and over? It obviously reflects poorly on actual human beings, if we were ignoring Fox, but we are not. Only Republicans find Kelly, Hegseth, and Fox normal, and something is clearly wrong with them. And Somerby, in my opinion, because he avoids topics in order to target libs who he thinks don't come down hard enough on Fox, even though there is a whole world of other issues to focus on. All of which Somerby ignores.
That, too, is a weird dynamic.
The GOP is the party of psychotic loons.
DeleteMurdering a mudurous Muslim in a wheelchair. What the actual fuck
DeleteRepublicans are sick fucks.
Delete"...Brando admired "the girl:"
ReplyDeleteI am convinced that Somerby uses this language deliberately to irritate those of us who don't think adult women should be confused with female children (girls) and vice versa. It isn't cute because too many men take it literally and think jailbait is actual bait. This is why we had Epstein and still have so many men chasing teens eager for money or validation of attractive or attention from a daddy figure missing (or defective) in their lives. Taking advantage of the vulnerable seems to be what men do these days.
"Taking advantage of the vulnerable seems to be what men do these days."
DeleteSexist.
Yes many men are sexist.
DeleteAnd?
And so are you.
DeleteOh the old I am rubber and you are glue.
DeletePlease, tell us more about your weirdo thoughts on sexism and sexual assault.
I love it when trolls dig their own grave.
No, you're not rubber. You're a sexist who stereotypes based on gender.
Delete"No one will say the first word about the ugly values sold to boys and young men on those grisly Fox News Channel shows. "
ReplyDeleteOne way those values are sold to boys and young men is to completely ignore and never prosecute the Epstein sex trafficking, which is primarily a gang bang of young teens at parties with drinking and drugs, conducted for money and influence over powerful men (who are blackmailed and squeezed for favors, even now). It is the grown-up equivalent of the frat gang bang. Notice the way men in both parties have closed ranks to prevent prosecution of those involved in ruining the lives of those very young teens.
Trump engaged in sex crimes against young teens too, which were revealed before the election in 2016, and yet he was elected president, twice. But Somerby wants to blame Fox for ugly messaging. The bad messages come from the very top, from TV shows and movies and video games and a culture that denigrates women and gives boys permission to attack them through poor examples that are rarely punished, right on up to Trump lusting after Ivanka (now Nicole Harp), buying several wives who he cheated on, and beating the rap on all but one trial for sexual misbehavior (E. Jean Carroll) while telling a young girl in his office yesterday to stand up and let the press see her because of how pretty she is.
Crickets from Somerby about the actual abuse of women by men, still going on in the oval office, Republican efforts to roll back progress on women's issues, and even a blatant campaign to deny women the vote.
If Somerby were serious about any of this, he wouldn't be smirkingly calling Eva Marie Saint (who just passed away), "the girl" while he emphasizes Brando's reaction to her, and not the performance she won an Oscar for.
Why does Somerby never discuss the values she portrayed in that film, the ones Brando admired so much? Somerby says the problem is that Fox gives young men poor messaging, not that the young men in question lack values themselves. Even Somerby does not hold them accountable for their bad decisions and commission of a crime, which is what rape is. It is a major crime not a peccadillo. It is time for Somerby to regard it as such, before he blames Fox for corrupting youth, when the Fox audience skews Somerby's age and male, as does the Republican base Fox caters to.
On the Waterfront is anti-union propaganda.
ReplyDeleteSomerby returns to it year after year. It obviously speaks to him.
DeleteI never viewed it as anti-union. It's anti-crime and anti-corruption.
DeleteIt is anti union, you can view it however you like.
DeleteIt is anti-corruption
DeleteThe movie is anti union, if you fell for its propaganda, that is on you.
DeleteWell, I was born and raised near the Jersey waterfront and grew up around the corrupt bastards depicted in the film. They don't represent "unions" in general, just corrupt mobbed up unions. ok?
DeleteIt is a problem of representational generalization: a work can claim to depict one corrupt individual while using that figure to make a whole group seem corrupt. In On the Waterfront, Charley is not just “one bad union man”, he is a prominent union insider, and the film gives viewers no counterexample of a democratic, worker-serving union. That makes the “only this one local” defense not persuasive as a description of the film’s effect.
DeleteNazis did this with the film Jud Süß.
Even if Charley is meant to represent a corrupt leadership faction, he can function as a stand-in for union power more broadly, especially because the film offers no positive portrayal of union democracy or effective collective action.
Unions declined dramatically proceeding the film.
The film didn’t cause that decline, but it greased the wheels, making anti-union arguments feel morally intuitive; unions appear as coercive and corrupt, while individual testimony against them appears heroic.
The director and writer of the film in their personal lives both betrayed people who were politically interested in promoting worker rights, not only was the film then a self-justifying exercise but it also dovetails well with an anti-union stance.
Agree, it is an anti-union film.
AI Overview
DeleteSupporters argue the film is an authentic depiction of real-life labor racketeering and murder on the New Jersey docks—inspired by journalist Malcolm Johnson's Pulitzer Prize-winning reporting—rather than an attack on the labor movement as a whole.
The leadership of the union Terry Malloy stands up to is financially corrupt, as well as being murderers.
DeleteMalloy struggles against the "d & d' culture (deaf and dumb) under which one does not 'rat' on one's buddies, even if they are criminals.
Given director Elia Kazan's involvement with the House Un-American Activities committee, the movie can be viewed as being about speaking the truth when those around you remain silent.
The ending is ambiguous, but can be read to mean that Malloy's courage has paved the way for a non-corrupt union leadership to emerge.
Is this the “truth” that Kazan was speaking, Hector?
Delete“Director Elia Kazan named eight former members of the Communist Party and colleagues from New York's Group Theatre during his testimony before the House Un-American Activities Committee (HUAC) on April 10, 1952.”
And what happened to those people that he named, Hector?
“The people Elia Kazan named in his 1952 House Un-American Activities Committee (HUAC) testimony faced ruined careers, blacklisting, damaged personal reputations, or premature death during the Red Scare”
"Is this the “truth” that Kazan was speaking?"
DeleteIf you'd read a little more carefully, you'd note I said the movie can be viewed as "being about speaking the truth", and that's a true statement, regardless of anything Kazan said or did away from the screen.
It is hard to argue that director and writer were good and decent people.
DeleteThey destroyed innocent lives and then made an anti-union film to justify their actions.
In reality, the union in the film, the ILA, was thoroughly investigated and there was only a single conviction, coming after the film's release, of the ILA president receiving money from an employer. That conviction was overturned, but then later reinstated by the Supreme Court.
There was no widespread corruption, the film was excusing the director and writer's bad behavior and serving as anti-union propaganda.
@3:16 - Kazan's action was consistent with the movie's theme. Kazan was speaking the truth when he outed some former Communists. Kazan has been criticized by people who believe that loyalty to one's group is more important than ratting on people who had done bad things.
DeleteAgree, the film tries to justify Kazan's actions and his personal right wing beliefs about demonizing communists as well as unions.
DeleteThe people Kazan ratted on were innocent had done no harm, the action was purely about Kazan clinging to power in Hollywood.
Instead of protecting the innocent, Kazan chose to protect himself at the expense of others who were completely innocent.
2:52 is referring to synecdoche.
DeleteThe film generalizes about unions from one made up story.
In reality, there was no widespread corruption.
Kazan and writer Schulberg made up a fake story to excuse their rat behavior as well as push anti union propaganda.
Belonging to the Communist party early on (before the Hitler-Stalin pact caused most people to leave the party) was not anything wrong. It was legal. Spying or committing treasonous acts on behalf of Russia was illegal and wrong, but there is no evidence that most of the people named in the hearings did any of that. Nevertheless, their careers were ruined by an industry blacklist. Those testifying recognized the consequences to innocent people who did nothing illegal, but they named them anyway, to save their own skins. Honorable people declined to testify or took the 5th throughout and refused to name any names.
DeleteOpinions do differ:
Delete"I do appreciate the attitude On the Waterfront takes toward labor unions and organized crime—valorizing the former and reviling the latter,"
https://pkcantexplain.blogspot.com/2019/11/on-waterfront-1954.html
Watch Woody Allen's film "The Front" for an examination of this process.
DeleteUnions are powerful in the film industry. That protects the exploitation of workers in a highly competitive field where there are always lots of others willing to step in for any job opening. Even so, look at how Harvey Weinstein used his casting couch to coerce actresses into sleeping with him. Others did the same. Where was the union through that? Obviously, not protecting women but averting their gaze. And of course, crickets from Somerby about #metoo, which he considered bogus and tried to declare over, when it is far from it.
DeleteLet's hear it for Somerby's appreciation of values, his admiration of respect for women. Remember when he called Stormy an extortionist? I do.
AI Overview
DeleteOn the Waterfront makes a corrupt union the story’s central villain and presents informing on it as heroic; the film’s central conflict is framed as workers versus their union. By concentrating blame on union leadership, the story makes labor appear to be the chief source of waterfront exploitation, even though there is no evidence to support this. The film has been criticized as anti-union because its framing generalizes from fictional corrupt union leaders to actual organized labor. The film can also be read as giving Kazan and Schulberg’s own testimony a favorable allegorical framing.
I partly agree with @6:12. I agree that belonging to the Communist party early on (before the Hitler-Stalin pact caused most people to leave the party) was legal. But, IMO it was wrong. Lenin and then Stalin were monsters doing monstrous things. Taking actions based on orders from these people was wrong IMO.
DeleteFuck you, David, you Nazi bastard
DeletePeople who were members of the communist party ascribed to an economic ideology. They didn't "take orders" from anyone in Russia. They attended meetings where they discussed how to solve poverty and distribute resources more equitably in our society. Most were idealists, not operatives.
DeleteThere have been Russian spies working in the USA, such as Alger Hiss, who was tried and convicted. There were not Russian spies uncovered by McCarthy's committee, which presented no evidence people were taking orders or doing anything to harm the US. People today need to understand that this was a cooked up political witchhunt that played on cold war fears but did nothing to root out spies, especially in Hollywood and the Military and the Govt, which were McCarthy's targets.
Does the Redford character care about and respect the girl's mother? Does Somerby even wonder about that? Is it right to extoll the virtues of someone who is only saying and doing what any decent human being should do in that situation with such a girl. Does Somerby think that because Redford's character didn't seduce the teen that he is displaying some wonderful restraint? It is Scarlett Johanson, Somerby gushed.
ReplyDeleteWhat does it take to get men to recognize that sex crimes are aberrant behavior?
Normalizing men being sexual predators is a major component driving Republicans.
DeleteAnonymouse 2:08pm, what we can’t seem to do is to normalize the notion that a good time can be had by all. That includes women… There’s the issue. That’s the hang up. This is what turns consensual sexcapades into “rape”. There’s as much political power to be found in the stereotype of women being little girls down by the garden gate as there is with being born with a penis. It’s all politics now.
DeleteFuck off you nasty ass troll.
DeleteAnonymouse 3:36pm, you first.
DeleteThe man pretending to be a woman is also pro rape.
DeleteWho knew?
Your mama.
DeleteCornell frat boys: Free pussy!
DeleteLater: Shop still open?
Response: Yes!
Pretending sexual assaults are merely "sexcapades" is how Republicans try to normalize rape culture.
Anonymouse 5:12pm, you've trivialized rape culture by treating it as your go-to political weapon. It’s your "big gun”. No matter the scenario. You’re only too willing to turn grown women into utter children because that makes them useful politically.
DeleteAnonymouse 5:12pm, no, I don’t have to pretend that trifling horny college guys are all rapists, anymore than I have to pretend women are clueless naïfs.
DeleteBeing pro rape and joking about rape is not the flex you think it is.
DeleteYou just come off looking psychotic.
When a woman wants to engage in "sexcapades," she says "yes". When a woman is too drunk to consent, the answer is "no." That is the controversy -- she didn't consent and that made it rape. No one here is arguing that women cannot or do not enjoy sex, as Cecelia claims. This is about having the choice to say yes or no when frat boys have pressured a relatively inexperienced woman into sex she does not want and has not agreed to.
DeleteCecelia's remarks are certainly pro rape. They are arguing that women enjoy being raped. That is ugly and wrong on many levels. It also suggests she does not have any empathy for women and does not understand what sexual encounters are like for women.
On what planet would anyone assume any young woman would want to be fucked, hit, drugged by men she didn't know, one after another, for four hours, to the point where she went to the hospital afterwards? No one wants that, even the most sex positive women don't want it. That isn't fun or exciting. It is gang rape and only the men possibly enjoyed it. And then there is the stigma and hazing afterwards, where she was the campus whore, called a slut and tormented for what happened. Does Cecelia imagine any woman enjoys that kind of humiliation?
These trolls are as ugly as the frat assholes who committed this crime, attempting to condone it. Cecelia isn't psychotic, She writes this stuff for money.
Anonymouse 5:56pm, but the echolalia is all yours.
DeleteAnonymouse 6:06pm, what sort of leeway will you give the men for being drunk?
DeleteWell said 6:06.
DeleteSomeone hurt this Cecelia dude badly, even if he writes this junk for money.
I hope the people that have to interact with him are safe, and stay safe.
Most sexual assaults are committed by someone you know well.
Anonymouse 6:19pm, and most people write posts having actually read the facts of the encounter. That wouldn’t be you.
DeleteYou supposedly have read the details of the case, which details numerous rapes, yet you still joke about it and are generally pro rape.
DeleteThis is who you are.
A pro rape loon.
This young woman at Cornell knew one of the men in the frat, who talked her into having sex with him and one of his friends, after she had arrived. At that point, she had had numerous drinks (4+) and then done some drug (speculated to be ketamine) provided by the frat boys. She was beyond giving consent then, even with the guy she knew. Then a bunch of other men had sex with her without consent, gave her more drinks (up to 10 drinks total are estimated) and more drugs. Her version of the story is that she didn't know what was going on and didn't know how to stop it. She was not conscious during a substantial part of the 4 hours. This is clearly rape. The lawsuit is about the failure of the frat, the campus and the police to investigate and prosecute the crimes against her.
DeleteThere are many more "details" being circulated against this woman, but this is the gist from her case filing. The hospital substantiated that she had been beaten and took pictures of her bruises. Hitting is not part of sex for most people but it does tend to coerce a person who has wavered in their consent.
I’m as loony as Cecelia, but I don’t condone rape.
Delete"Her kind, smart, big-hearted daughter, who is now (gulp) a freshman in college, from whose values our struggling culture could gain."
ReplyDeleteSomerby originally mocked Weiner's description of her daughter. Now he uses it for his own purposes.
Mike Ditka has died, eighty-six years old. I don’t know if he was good or bad on gender issues.
ReplyDeleteHe was a magat.
DeleteDitka, Bakker, Hastert. The rats are fleeing the ship.
DeleteBakker and Hastert were very bad on sex and gender. I still don’t know about Ditka.
DeleteBakker was a world class grifter, bilking millions of people in the name of Jesus. A disgusting person.
DeleteBrando had an affair with Richard Pryor.
ReplyDeleteGood for them, sad they had to hide it.
"Set your face on fire, just like Richard Pryor, cocaine." Heard a band use that line covering JJ Cales song that was most famously covered by Clapton. Still makes me smile.
DeleteReposting:
ReplyDeleteThis is that merit based hiring that DIC praises Trump for bringing back:
“DOJ's civil rights division, down about 300 career lawyers, has hastily hired a new crop of 130 people -- some w/ criminal records, minimal experience, tarnished work histories, hyperpartisanship and downright bizarre public statements.”
First time commenter here. I check in periodically to see if Somerby's posts are still home to the most unhinged bickering on the internet, and this post about the passing of Eva Marie Saint shows it is. Thanks, all!
ReplyDeleteNo problemo.
DeleteYup.
DeleteSomerby can't get away with his sexism, racism, and xenophobia.
Oh well, he tried.