Talk:Lída Baarová

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

There is a discrepancy concerning the length of Lida's marriage to Kurt Lundwall. The Czech sources say that it lasted 3 years, the German sources maintain that it lasted a decade. From the context it appears that the German sources are more reliable. David Cruise 16:39, 25 September 2005 (UTC)

The current source is likely [1] (Google cache) or similar articles which say the marriage started in 1970. Other sources say 1958, e.g. [2]. Also German Wikipedia says 1958.

Relatively reliable Czech journal [3] says 1969, the husband lived for 3 years and she then inherited his wealth. It also says Lundwall waited till his first wife dies, which could explain the discrepancy.

The [4] says: 1st husband Gustav Fröhlich (1935 -1938), 2nd Jan Kopecký (1947-1956), 3rd Kurt Lundwall (1969-1972 till his deadth). It says she got divorced Kopecky because of her relation to Lunwall.

There's book about her: Baarová, Lída: Života sladké hořkosti. Publisher: Sfinga, Ostrava, Czech Republic, 1991. ISBN: 80-900578-5-3 and this may be authoritative. Unfortunately I don't have access to it. Pavel Vozenilek 21:47, 28 September 2005 (UTC)

Ahoj Pavle,
Thank you for your help with references pertaining to Lida Baarova's life. I perused all of them, but could not find the definitive answer on the length of her marriage to Dr. Lundwall. It is likely in the Zivota sladke horkosti. It read this book while visiting Prague, but did not take it with me to the US. I am reasonably sure that she was engaged, but not married to Gustav Froehlich. Why she left Honzu Kopeckych je tezko soudit, to vis-tezkej zivot emigranta. Best Wishes, David Cruise 08:05, 29 September 2005

Contents 1 Veracity of the narrative 2 Tone 3 Original Version 4 Irreconciable differences 5 Date of birth? Sept. 7 1914?

[edit] Veracity of the narrative

I am told she never loved Joesph Goebbels. 65.10.80.215 17:05, 12 October 2005 (UTC)(UTC)

Lida Baarova frequently changed her story to defend herself against incessant brutal and vulgar accusations. David Cruise 16:17, 17 October 2005 (UTC)

But Joesph Goebbels has been dead for awhile, why not tell the truth? Who's going to care if she ever loved him or not? 65.8.115.110 16:11, 22 October 2005 (UTC)

In a better world than ours the answer to your question Who's going to care? would be No one. David Cruise 01:21, 23 October 2005 (UTC)

With Lida, five years in the grave and historians digging for clues to the Nazi regime's secrets, we'll probably discover that Lida was pregnant with Joesph Goebbels's child. Her death will open a huge can of worms. 70.146.24.67 21:10, 2 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Tone

This article reads like a romantized story. It is as if a history teacher is telling a story in front of a classroom...Phrases like

In Berlin she met Gustav Fröhlich, Leonardo DiCaprio of the German cinema,;

Lída Baarová's spellbinding beauty;

Lida's magic beauty;

Joseph Goebbels never forgot Lída, nor did she forget him.;

Her filmography bears testimony to the courage and determination with which she overcame the overwhelming odds she faced during most of her life.

just don't fit an encyclopedia.SoothingR 07:11, 25 February 2006 (UTC)

---

In the original source, Leonardo DiCaprio was Rudolf Valentino. Substituting Leonardo DiCaprio makes the comparison more meaningful to the contemporary reader.

spellbinding beauty and magic beauty are English equivalents of expressions used by original sources in a language you're likely not familiar with

the validity of expression Joseph Goebbels ... is justified by facts that follow

Talking about odds she faced during most of her life... If you would know the whole story you would likely agree that "overwhelming" is an understatement.

Your objections are personal idiosyncrasies. David Cruise 08:31, 25 February 2006 (UTC)

Regardless, they're tearing down the neutrality of the article.SoothingR 09:35, 25 February 2006 (UTC)

Neutrality about what? That she was beautiful? According to many, she was. How can you talk about neutrality with respect to a dead Czech girl whom you did not know, whose movies you likely never saw and who lived in times about which you have only mediated knowledge about? David Cruise 10:51, 25 February 2006 (UTC)

That's all still very much beside the point. You can't state for a fact about any woman (or man, for one) that she is beautiful, so stating that about Lída Baarová can't be done either. I don't need to be knowledgeable of this actress to know which tone fits an encyclopedia. And the current tone, it simply just doesn't. There's too much POV in it, and the article as it currently is sounds more like a romantized story.SoothingR 11:07, 25 February 2006 (UTC)

I would recommend to get rid of the romantic tone. Encyclopedias are expected to be dry and that's how most of the people here write anyway. ;-) Being exception seldomly pays off.

The beauty-queen image were part of self-promotion, just like it is employed today, and was IMHO based on reality. The Goebbel's "never forgot" is narrative for mentions in his diaries later, I believe. That Baarova didn't forget Goebbels was ensured by the hunt she suffered after the war. Pavel Vozenilek 17:15, 25 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Original Version

I restored the original version of the Lida Baarova encyclopedia entry. You are welcome to rewrite it as you like. I have better things to do with my life. David Cruise 05:43, 26 February 2006 (UTC)

I looked on the pattern of SoothingR administrative work and changed my mind about reverting the Lida Baarova article, as his objections are not based on facts, but personal opinions.

I'm having a hard time assuming good faith out here. I suggest you start reading some policies. Articles need to be unbiased, it's edged in stone out here. I have removed your systematic bias from the article. Please don't add it back until you have read WP:NPOV. Thanks :)SoothingR 20:10, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

I agree with Pavel's feeling that encyclopedias should be "dry". Could mention be added to this article about when and why this actress changed her last name from Babková to Baarová? Also, the intro to the article probably should have a summary of why she was important (briefly mention her controversial involvement with the Nazis, for instance). Olessi 08:07, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Irreconciable differences

SR, you did not edit, you wrote your own version of the article which from my view is as NPOV as my version likely appears NPOV to you. So what should we do? Engage in revert wars? I personally abhor censorship and the reason I came to the United States forty years ago was that the US Constitution guarantees the freedom of speech as one of the basic human rights. I do not want to abridge your freedom of expression, please do not trammel mine.

What I propose is to create Lida Baarova disambig page. I'll move my version to Lida Baarova (biography) and your version to Lida Baarova (movie actress). If you wish, you can change the (movie actress) to something else, as you like. David Cruise 18:56, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

P.S. Please remove the second picture and the references from your version and replace it with your own sources. David Cruise 19:23, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

I disagree completely with such an action. It goes against the community atmosphere of Wikipedia and only creates added confusion for people interested in this actress. The Wikipedia project has several procedures to deal with dispute resolution which should be used instead of such drastic changes. Olessi 20:16, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

I disagree with the diambig too. IMHO the page as it was (with the romantic tone) was not perfect but acceptable (and better than say 90% of other articles on Wikipedia). Making "perfect" article here would require more people, knowledgeable of the topic, with access to contemporary sources, etc. The Cruise's version was good enough and I consider the reverts back and forth as waste of time. Pavel Vozenilek 19:10, 5 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Date of birth? Sept. 7 1914?

If you take a look at her tumbstone at Find-A-Grave, you can see that the date of birth is different than the one mentioned here. Lincher 16:53, 26 April 2006 (UTC)