summer album of the week 08/22/09

the beatles: revolver (released august 1966)

the beatles: revolver (released august 1966)

A mere eight months after The Beatles released Rubber Soul, thus establishing an artistic depth and stylistic variance that exceeded the band’s out-of-bounds pop appeal, we received Revolver. While it opens with George’s topical Taxman, Paul quickly cuts deep with Eleanor Rigby, an elegy of devastating loneliness set to a string quartet. Just as things get heavy, Ringo sings the tune that forever endeared The Beatles to children: Yellow Submarine. Meanwhile, George is getting metaphysicial with Love You To while John gets trippy on I’m Only Sleeping and, at album’s end, the pioneering psychedelic exercise Tomorrow Never Knows. Amazingly, Revolver still sounds cohesive and thrilling while displaying The Beatles’ almost frightening escalation of pop art maturity.


The Boston Globe (Boston, MA) January 30, 1987 | Ed Quill, Globe Staff A Newton psychiatrist who sued the makers of the 1979 movie “The Bell Jar,” alleging that the movie defamed her, has been awarded $150,000 in a settlement.

Parties to the settlement also agreed that future showings of the movie will prominently include a disclaimer that the characters portrayed are fictitious. go to web site defamation of character

Although the attorney for Jane V. Anderson, the plaintiff, told an eight- person jury in US District Court that he would not ask for a specific amount in damages, the prepared suit had sought $6 million.

Lawyers on both sides said the consent judgment, a binding court order, may cause writers of fiction and screenplays to be especially careful when creating fictional characters based on the lives of real people.

Anderson told reporters yesterday, “I got what I wanted — not only straightening out the facts, but also that the allegation that I was a homosexual was a defamation.” Victor Kovner, a New York lawyer who specializes in First Amendment rights, represented one of the defendants. Kovner said: “Many of the serious concerns about the potential impact of this lawsuit upon the authors of fiction were not realized. Nonetheless, it must be noted that the law, as it stands, provides insufficient protection for authors of fiction.

“Until the courts recognize that fiction is entitled to a special measure of constitutional protection, claims by people who identify themselves with one character or another will continue to threaten expression by authors of fiction.” Harry L. Manion 3d, who represented Anderson, said, “The precedent set is that if you are dealing with autobiographical material in a drama or in any literature, due care must be taken not to write anything false about a living person or it is defamation of character.” Anderson contended during the week-old trial that her reputation had been damaged, not by the 1963 publication of the autobiographical novel about suicide written by Sylvia Plath, who later committed suicide, but by the 1979 movie version. Anderson alleged that the fictional character Joan Gilling was based on her, and that the movie portrayed the character as a lesbian.

Anderson alleged defamation of character, invasion of privacy and intentional infliction of emotional harm. She had just concluded direct testimony before the jury and Judge Robert E. Keeton when the settlement was reached.

Manion said lawyers for the defendants approached him Wednesday about a settlement after Anderson’s testimony.

In the settlement, the charges of invasion of privacy and intentional infliction of emotional harm were dropped.

All 14 defendants joined in issuing a statement that the movie “unintentionally defamed the plaintiff . . . in that it coincidentally, but falsely, seems to portray her as having homosexual inclinations; as having made a suicide attempt; as encouraging another person to commit suicide; and as a person who committed suicide by hanging.” Although a disclaimer in small type was included at the end of the movie noting that the characters were fictitious, the defendants agreed to include the same disclaimer both at the beginning and end of the movie in larger type. website defamation of character

Videocassettes or videodiscs of the movie already in circulation will not be recalled, but those made hereafter will display the new disclaimer.

Five of the defendants were not included in the payment of damages, either because they refused to agree to it or could not be reached yesterday, according to their lawyers, Kovner and Alexander Pratt Jr.

Those not included in the payment provision were CBS Inc., Home Box Office Inc., Time-Life Films Inc., LaMarca Productions Inc., and Ted Hughes, the poet laureate of England, who was Plath’s husband and administrator of her estate.

The defendants who agreed to the payment were: AVCO Embassy Pictures, which made the movie; Vestron Inc., which made the movie available for rental on video cassette; Marjorie Kellogg, who wrote the screenplay; Robert A. Goldston, the executive producer; Lawrence Peerce, the director; Brandt-Todd Productions; Jerrold Brandt Jr. and Michael Todd Jr.; and Bonime Productions Ltd.

Kovner, Hughes’ attorney, said that the settlement “confirms that there was no wrongdoing on the part of Mr. Hughes . . . Indeed, all agree that, until the commencement of this lawsuit, Mr. Hughes never met nor had he any knowledge of Dr. Anderson.” quill ;01/29 CORCOR;01/30,12:16 BELL30 Ed Quill, Globe Staff

Comments are closed.

Terms of Service | Privacy Policy | About Our Ads | Copyright