Publishers Weekly

File:Pwtiny.png
Editors	Jim Milliot and Michael Coffey
Categories	Trade magazines
Weekly
Total circulation (June 2011)	15,407[1]
First issue	1872
Company	PWxyz LLC
Country	United States
Language	English
Website	www.publishersweekly.com
ISSN	0000-0019

Publishers Weekly, also known as PW, is an American weekly trade news magazine targeted at publishers, librarians, booksellers and literary agents. Published continuously since 1872, it has carried the tagline, "The International News Magazine of Book Publishing and Bookselling". With 51 issues a year, the emphasis today is on book reviews.^[2]

The magazine began as The Publishers' Weekly (with an apostrophe), a collective catalog for publishers to pool their resources. That listing of books enabled booksellers to learn about forthcoming titles, and eventually the publication expanded to include features and articles.^[3]

Harry Thurston Peck was the first editor-in-chief of The Bookman, which began in 1895. Peck worked on its staff from 1895 to 1906, and in 1895, he created the world's first bestseller list for its pages. In 1912, Publishers Weekly began to publish its own bestseller lists, patterned after the lists in The Bookman. These were not separated into fiction and non-fiction until 1917 when World War I brought an increased interest in non-fiction by the reading public.^[4][3]

Through much of the 20th century, Publishers Weekly was guided and developed by Frederic Gershom Melcher (1879–1963), who was editor and co-editor of Publishers' Weekly and chairman of the magazine's publisher, R.R. Bowker, over four decades. Born April 12, 1879, in Malden, Massachusetts, Melcher began at age 16 in Boston's Estes & Lauriat Bookstore, where he developed an interest in children's books.^[5] He moved to Indianapolis in 1913 for another bookstore job. In 1918, he read in Publishers' Weekly that the magazine's editorship was vacant. He applied to Richard Rogers Bowker for the job, was hired and moved with his family to Montclair, New Jersey. He remained with R.R. Bowker for 45 years.^[5] While at Publishers Weekly, Melcher began creating space in the publication and a number of issues dedicated solely to books for children.^[6] In 1919, he teamed with Franklin K. Mathiews, librarian for the Boy Scouts of America, and Anne Carroll Moore, a librarian at the New York Public Library, to create Children’s Book Week.^[5] When Bowker died in 1933, Melcher succeeded him as president of the company, resigning in 1959 to become chairman of the board of directors.^[7][3]

Writers and readers[link]

In 2008, the magazine's circulation was 25,000. In 2004, the breakdown of those 25,000 readers was given as 6000 publishers; 5500 public libraries and public library systems; 3800 booksellers; 1600 authors and writers; 1500 college and university libraries; 950 print, film and broad media; and 750 literary and rights agents, among others.

Subject areas covered by Publishers Weekly include publishing, bookselling, marketing, merchandising and trade news, along with author interviews and regular columns on rights, people in publishing, and bestsellers. It attempts to serve all involved in the creation, production, marketing and sale of the written word in book, audio, video and electronic formats. The magazine increases the page count considerably for four annual special issues: Spring Adult Announcements, Fall Adult Announcements, Spring Children's Announcements, and Fall Children's Announcements.^[2]

Book reviews[link]

The book review section, not added until the early 1940s, grew in importance over the past half-century, and it currently offers opinions on 7,000 new books each year. Since reviews are scheduled to appear one month or two months prior to the publication date of a book, books already in print are seldom reviewed. These anonymous reviews are short, often no more than 220 words, and the review section can be as long as 40 pages, filling the second half of the magazine. In the past, a book review editorial staff of eight editors assigned books to more than 100 freelance reviewers. Some are published authors, and others are experts in specific genres or subjects. Although it might take a week or more to read and analyze some books, reviewers were paid $45 per review until June 2008 when the magazine introduced a reduction in payment to $25 a review. In a further policy change that month, reviewers received credit as contributors in issues carrying their reviews.

Now titled "Reviews," the review section was once called "Forecasts." For several years, that title was taken literally when a review was followed with italicized sentences that attempted to predict a book's success. The "Forecasts" editor for many years was Genevieve Stuttaford, who greatly expanded the number of reviews. She joined the PW staff in 1975, after a period as a Saturday Review associate editor, reviewing for Kirkus Reviews and spending 12 years on the San Francisco Chronicle staff. During the 23 years Stuttaford was with Publishers Weekly, book reviewing was increased from an average of 3800 titles a year in the 1970s to well over 6500 titles in 1997. She retired in 1998.^[2] Former "Forecasts" editor Sybil Steinberg, who began reviewing for Publishers Weekly in 1976, later edited Writers and Their Craft: Interviews from Publishers Weekly (2003) and other books about writing.

Some PW critics are actually well-known writers. Katharine Weber was an anonymous PW reviewer before she became an acclaimed novelist. Texas novelist Clay Reynolds,^[8] in The Texas Institute of Letters Newsletter (February, 2004), gave a behind-the-scenes glimpse into the policies of PW and other review publications:

You were right on the money with regard to the impact reviews in Publishers Weekly (PW), Library Journal (LJ), Kirkus Review (KR) and the New York Times Book Review (NYTBR) have on publishers and sales; what you may not know is that I also write or have written for all of them. I’m approaching 700 reviews, by the way. I no longer write for KR and LJ, as their policies forbid anyone from writing for PW or one of the others (except the NYTBR), and the work they offered was steadier and more reliable. I’ve now done 87 reviews for PW (given three stars in all that time). For years, Sybil Steinberg was the Forecasts Fiction Editor there, but she retired about two years ago, and the position was taken over by Deena Croog [wrong: Deena was an editorial assistant; Jeff Zaleski succeeded Sybil Steinberg]. Sybil ran a tight ship and taut operation. Deena, who sounds as if she’s about 13, is a little less well organized, but she’s a tougher nut to crack in some ways. What’s interesting about the PW reviews, though, is that copy is sometimes altered before printing. On a few occasions, I’ve had opinions utterly reversed from what I wrote. I’ve questioned this, but I’ve never received satisfactory answers. I keep doing it because it’s good work and satisfies the university administration. I’m thinking of “retiring,” though, when I hit number 100.^[9]

In 1967, F. G. Melcher's son, David Melcher, explained what happened to the thousands of review copies sent to PW:

Needless to say, our house was always full of books, some of which became mine, but some of which were birds of passage which I had to read rapidly before they were taken back to the office. People often ask what happens to all the review copies received at the office of the Publishers' Weekly. They are worked rather hard actually, as I early became aware. Until they have served their intended purpose of being listed, forecast, reviewed, and commented upon, they stay on the working shelves and are taken out, if at all, only overnight or over the weekend. Later they become available for staff borrowing. Finally, they are divided up among the staff.^[10]

Before the use of e-mail, reviewers were given paper lined for a character count. They then made two carbon copies, kept one copy and mailed in the other copy along with the original typed on the lined paper. For years, freelance reviewers were instructed to return bound galleys after the review was written, but beginning in 2005, reviewers were allowed to keep those advance reading copies.

Some reviews now are published only online as "web exclusives". PW's long standing policy of not reviewing self-published or vanity press books changed in 2010 with the introduction of PW Select, a quarterly supplement requiring self-published authors to pay for a listing and the possibility of being selected for a review, as they outlined:

If you are a self-published author with a finished book that carries an ISBN, you can register to have your book listed in a seasonal supplement that will be bound into issues of Publishers Weekly. Overprints will be available for purchase and bonus distribution. Additionally, a digital edition and online database will be made available. The registration fee of $149 entitles you to a listing of your book—title, author, illustrator (where applicable), pagination, price, format, ISBN, and a description of the book's contents—all of which will appear in the supplement and online database. Authors should also include the online location at which to place orders for their book. All registered listings that meet the above criteria will be listed (though we reserve the right to decline an author's registration and return the fee if we if we deem the book inappropriate to our broad readership).^[11]

Magazines and mergers[link]

For most of its history, Publishers Weekly, along with the Library Journal-related titles, were owned by founding publisher R. R. Bowker. When Reed Publishing purchased Bowker from Xerox in 1985, it placed Publishers Weekly under the management of its Boston-based Cahners Publishing Company, the trade publishing empire founded by Norman Cahners, which Reed Publishing had purchased in 1977. The merger of Reed with the Netherlands-based Elsevier in 1993 led to many Cahners cutbacks amid takeover turmoil. Nora Rawlinson, who once headed a $4 million book selection budget at the Baltimore County Library System, edited Library Journal for four years before stepping in as editor-in-chief of Publishers Weekly from 1992 to 2005.

Sara Nelson era[link]

Beginning January 24, 2005, the magazine came under the direction of a new editor-in-chief, veteran book reviewer Sara Nelson, known for her publishing columns in the New York Post and The New York Observer.^[12] A senior contributing editor for Glamour, in addition to editorial positions at Self, Inside.com and Book Publishing Report, she had gained attention and favorable reviews as the author of So Many Books, So Little Time: A Year of Passionate Reading (Putnam, 2003), in which she stirred a year's worth of reading into a memoir mix of her personal experiences after a New Year's resolution to read a book each week.^[13]

Nelson began to modernize Publishers Weekly with new features and a makeover by illustrator and graphic designer Jean-Claude Suares. The many alterations included added color (with drop shadows behind color book covers), Nelson's own weekly editorial, illustrated bestseller lists and "Signature,"^[14] longer boxed reviews written by well-known novelists. The switch to a simple abbreviated logo of initials effectively changed the name of the magazine to PW, the name long used for the magazine within the book industry.^[2]

She also introduced the magazine's Quill Awards, with nominees in 19 categories selected by a nominating board of 6,000 booksellers and librarians. Winners were determined by the reading public, who could vote at kiosks in Borders stores or online at the Quills site. Reed Business dropped the Quill Awards in 2008.^[15]

In the past, the front covers of Publishers Weekly were used to display advertisements by book publishers, and this policy was changed to some degree in 2005. Although new PW covers now feature illustrations and photographs tied to interior articles, these covers are often hidden behind a front cover foldout advertisement. The visual motif of each cover is sometimes repeated on the contents page.^[2]

The Nelson years were marked by turbulence within the industry as well as a continuing trend away from serious writing and towards pop culture. Publishers Weekly had enjoyed a near monopoly over the past decades, but it was getting vigorous competition from Internet sites, e-mail newsletters and daily newspapers.^[16] The industry was consolidating. Many independent booksellers, who had been bread–and–butter clients of Publishers Weekly, were going out of business.^[16] Paid circulation dropped by 3,000 to 25,000 in the mid 2000s,^[16] Nelson pushed for significant changes towards modernization, greater use of the Web and more focus on analytical reporting, but she was contending with economic forces working against the book buying market,^[16] problems she addressed in a 2005 interview:

Advertising downturn and sale[link]

In 2008, faced with a decline in advertising support, Reed's management sought a new direction. In January 2009, Sara Nelson was dismissed along with executive editor Daisy Maryles, who had been with PW for more than four decades. Stepping in as editorial director was Brian Kenney, editorial director of School Library Journal and Library Journal.^[2] The dismissals, which sent shockwaves through the industry, were widely covered in newspapers.^[17]

In April 2010, George W. Slowik Jr., a former publisher of the magazine, purchased Publishers Weekly from Reed Business Information, under the company PWxyz, LLC. Cevin Bryerman remained as publisher along with co-editors Jim Milliot and Michael Coffey.^[2]

On September 22, 2011, PW began a series of weekly podcasts: "Beyond the Book: PW's Week Ahead".^[18]

Archives[link]

PW maintains an online archive of past book reviews from February 2001 to the present.^[19] The earliest articles posted in PW's online archive date back to 1995. A redesigned website was unveiled on May 10, 2010.^[2]

See also[link]

• Booklist
• Editor & Publisher
• ForeWord
• Kirkus Reviews
• Library Journal
• San Francisco Review of Books
• School Library Journal

References[link]

Listen to[link]

• "PW's Week Ahead" podcasts

External links[link]

• Publishers Weekly official site
• Publishers Weekly iPhone/iPad app
• Interview on magazine's history
• 20th Century American Bestsellers
• Sybil Steinberg discusses Publishers Weekly

Philip George Zimbardo
Zimbardo speaking in Poland, 2009
Born	(1933-03-23) March 23, 1933 (age 79) New York City, New York
Residence	United States
Nationality	American
Fields	Psychology
Institutions	Yale University New York University Columbia University Stanford University
Alma mater	Brooklyn College Yale University
Known for	Stanford prison study, spouse of Christina Maslach, UC Berkeley, Time paradox, Lucifer Effect, Abu Ghraib
Influences	Stanley Milgram
Spouse	Christina Maslach

Philip George Zimbardo (born March 23, 1933) is a psychologist and a professor emeritus at Stanford University. He is president of the Heroic Imagination Project. He is known for his Stanford prison study and authorship of various introductory psychology books and textbooks for college students, including The Lucifer Effect and The Time Paradox.

Early years[link]

Zimbardo was born in New York City on March 23, 1933, from a family of Sicilian immigrants. He completed his BA with a triple major in psychology, sociology, and anthropology from Brooklyn College in 1954, where he graduated summa cum laude. He completed his M.S. (1955) and Ph.D (1959) in psychology from Yale University, where Neal E. Miller was his advisor.^[1] He taught at Yale from 1959 to 1960. From 1960 to 1967, he was a professor of psychology at New York University. From 1967 to 1968, he taught at Columbia University. He joined the faculty at Stanford University in 1968.

Prison study[link]

In 1971, Zimbardo accepted a tenured position as professor of psychology at Stanford University. With a government grant from the U.S. Office of Naval Research, he conducted the Stanford prison study in which 24 clinically sane individuals were randomly assigned to be "prisoners" or "guards" in a mock prison located in the basement of the psychology building at Stanford (three additional college students were selected as alternates, only one of whom participated^[2] in the study). The planned two-week study into the psychology of prison life ended after only six days due to emotional trauma being experienced by the participants. The students quickly began acting out their roles, with "guards" becoming sadistic and "prisoners" showing extreme passivity and depression.

The volunteers knew they were being used in a study but they did not know when the study would be taking place, so the initial shock of being randomly arrested one morning and taken to the mock prison put them in a mild state of shock. On arrival, the "prisoners" were stripped, searched, shaved and deloused, which caused a great deal of humiliation. They were then issued uniforms, ID numbers, and escorted to their cells by the volunteer prison guards. These changes isolated the prisoners making it harder for them to portray their individual characteristics. The guards themselves were not given any specific instruction or guidelines for the way they were to treat the prisoners. Instead, the psychologists allowed them to do whatever was needed to keep order in the prison. They were dressed very professionally in identical uniforms. They also wore a whistle around their neck and carried a night stick.

At the beginning of the experiment, Zimbardo started off with nine guards and nine prisoners. All the original volunteers were kept as backups and 3 prisoners as well as 3 guards occupied the prison at a time. Their first night in the prison, the volunteer prisoners were awakened at 2:30 AM by the guards blowing their whistles. They did this several times to familiarize the prisoners with how things were going to work and to let them know who was in charge.

The study shows that before the volunteer prisoners started showing signs of distress, they did not take the guards and their authority seriously. The prisoners mocked the guards, trying to regain their individuality. This, however, was short-lived. The prisoners soon realized that the attitude of the guards was very serious and that they demanded obedience. This began a long string of confrontational quarrels between the guards and prisoners. The guards used physical punishment and exercises, such as pushups, in order to show their authority to the prisoners.

In the morning of only the second day, a rebellion broke out among the volunteer prisoners. They ripped off their uniforms and locked themselves in their cells by pushing their beds up against the door. In response to this, the guards became very angry and called for backup assistance to the situation. This surprised Zimbardo as well as the rest of the psychologists because they had not thought it would be taken this far. Guards who were not on duty were called in and the guards who were assigned to only the night shift stayed with the guards who came in all the way through their shift the next morning. The tactic the guards came up with was to fight back in order to discipline the unruly prisoners and make them obey. In response to the prisoners barricading themselves in their cells, the guards used fire extinguishers on them to get them away from the entrances.

Once the guards were able to get into the cells, they stripped the inmates naked, tore apart the beds and the cell, and put the prisoners who had started the rebellion in solitary confinement. As all nine guards could not be on duty at once, they began rewarding the prisoners for good behavior. The prisoners who had not been involved in starting the riot were allowed to lie in their beds, wash themselves and brush their teeth and eat while those who had started the riot were not allowed to. The guards continued to use tormenting tactics to break up the prisoners relations with each other to avoid further organized resistance. In the case with one prisoner, who was a smoker, the guards were able to control his behavior because they decided when and if he was allowed to smoke.

Less than two full days into the experiment, one inmate began suffering from depression, uncontrolled rage, crying and other mental dysfunctions. The prisoner was eventually released after screaming and acting unstable in front of the other inmates. This prisoner was replaced with one of the alternates.^[2]

On the third day, the study allowed visiting hours for friends and family. The visitation was closely monitored and timed with many rules and restrictions.

The next event that added to the prison experiment "drama" was a rumored escape plan that the prisoners were planning on carrying out directly after visiting hours. The prisoner was going to have some of his friends round up, break into the prison and free all of the prisoners. After one of the guards overheard this plan, an informant was placed in among the prisoners and the escape never happened. The prisoners who had been thought to have organized the escape were disciplined and harassed with more pushups and toilet cleaning.

At some point, even the prisoners who were thought of as role models, those who obeyed all of the guards' commands were being punished. Going to the bathroom was considered a privilege rather than a necessity, and those who acted out against the guards were made to urinate and defecate in a bucket in their cell.

By the end of the experiment, there was no unification among prisoners as well as guards. The guards also had won complete control over all of their prisoners and were using their authority to its greatest extent. One prisoner had even gone as far as to go on a hunger strike. Refusing to eat, the guards put him into solitary confinement for three hours (even though their own rules stated the limit that a prisoner could be in solitary confinement was only one hour). Instead of the other prisoners looking at this inmate as a hero and following along in his strike, they chanted together that he was a bad prisoner and a troublemaker. Prisoners and guards had rapidly adapted to their roles, stepping beyond the boundaries of what had been predicted and leading to dangerous and psychologically damaging situations.

One-third of the guards were judged to have exhibited "genuine" sadistic tendencies, while many prisoners were emotionally traumatized and five had to be removed from the study early.

Zimbardo himself started to give into the roles of the situation. He had to be shown the reality of the experiment by Christina Maslach, his girlfriend and future wife, who had just received her doctorate in psychology.^[3]

At the end of the experiment, after all the prisoners had been released and the guards let go, everyone was brought back into the same room for evaluation and to be able to get their feelings out in the open towards one another. Ethical concerns surrounding the famous study often draw comparisons to the Milgram experiment, which was conducted in 1961 at Yale University by Stanley Milgram, Zimbardo's former high school friend.

Similar studies[link]

There were ethical issues in researching the original study. A subsequent study looked at the power of roles in selected situations.^[4]

A 2006 study was conducted by the British Broadcasting Company replicating the study by Zimbardo.^[5] This study, due to the fact that was conducted in later times, had more restrictions. While there were restrictions, there were also great differences. The first of the differences was how the participants were filtered. The Stanford Prison Experiment only gave the participants interviews and then certain personality tests. The BBC study used first psychometric tests, which combined a series of personality, attitude and mood tests. These tests were self-report tests. The second measure to filter the participants was a telephone interview. If they had passed through the first two filters the final was a full clinical interview. The second difference was how the participants were labeled either to be guards or prisoners. The Stanford Prison Experiment used random assignment to arrange them into the two groups. The BBC study first divided the participants into groups of smaller numbers in which they were organized by key psychological dimensions. From here they were then separated into prisoners and guards. Another difference was how the prisoners were brought to the mock prisons. The Stanford Prison Experiment participants were actually arrested for crimes which they did not commit, while those in the BBC study were just brought to the location by a blacked out car.

When it comes to the difference in the results between the Stanford Prison Experiment and the BBC prison study, it is clear that the BBC study is more of a struggle to figure out what to do when there is no direction given. There was more of a conflict within the two groups than between the two groups themselves. The Stanford Prison Experiment was looking at what happened when you gave one group authority over another and the power the situation.^[6] Philip Zimbardo himself even made a critique on the BBC study describing the differences in the setup, execution and results of the study. The setup differences range from the actual participants age and how the Stanford Prison Experiment actually used college students, while the BBC prison study used men of different ages. The two studies differed with how they were executed and how rules were set up and a hierarchy was put in place. Neither of these happened in the BBC prison study. In the conclusion, Zimbardo states that the conclusion was only one that was put in place for media, not for science.^[7]

Other endeavors[link]

Prof. Philip G. Zimbardo, Berlin, Germany, 2008

After the prison experiment, Zimbardo decided to look for ways he could use psychology to help people; this led to the founding of The Shyness Clinic in Menlo Park, California, which treats shy behavior in adults and children. Zimbardo's research on shyness resulted in several bestselling books on the topic. Other subjects he has researched include mind control and cultic behavior.^[8]

Zimbardo is the co-author of an introductory Psychology textbook entitled Psychology and Life, which is used in many American undergraduate psychology courses. He also hosted a PBS TV series titled Discovering Psychology which is used in many college telecourses.^[9]

In 2002, Zimbardo was elected president of the American Psychological Association. Under his direction, the organization developed the website PsychologyMatters.org, a compendium of psychological research that has applications for everyday life. Also that year, he appeared in the British reality television show, The Human Zoo. Participants were observed inside a controlled setting while Zimbardo and a British psychologist analyzed their behavior.

In 2004, Zimbardo testified for the defense in the court martial of Sgt. Ivan "Chip" Frederick, a guard at Abu Ghraib prison. He argued that Frederick's sentence should be lessened due to mitigating circumstances, explaining that few individuals can resist the powerful situational pressures of a prison, particularly without proper training and supervision. The judge apparently disregarded Zimbardo's testimony, and gave Frederick the maximum 8-year sentence. Zimbardo drew on the knowledge he gained from his participation in the Frederick case to write a new book entitled, The Lucifer Effect: Understanding How Good People Turn Evil, about the connections between Abu Ghraib and the prison experiments.^[10]

In September 2006, Zimbardo joined the faculty at Palo Alto University as Professor of Psychology, where he teaches social psychology to doctoral students in the clinical psychology program.

Zimbardo's writing appeared in Greater Good Magazine, published by the Greater Good Science Center of the University of California, Berkeley. Zimbardo's contributions include the interpretation of scientific research into the roots of compassion, altruism, and peaceful human relationships. His most recent article with Greater Good magazine is entitled: "The Banality of Heroism",^[11] which examines how ordinary people can become everyday heroes. In February 2010, Zimbardo was a guest presenter at the Science of a Meaningful Life seminar: Goodness, Evil, and Everyday Heroism, along with Greater Good Science Center Executive Director Dacher Keltner.

Zimbardo, who officially retired in 2003, gave his final "Exploring Human Nature" lecture on March 7, 2007, on the Stanford campus, bringing his teaching career of 50 years to a close. David Spiegel, professor of psychiatry at the Stanford University School of Medicine, called Zimbardo "a legendary teacher", saying that "he has changed the way we think about social influences."^[12]

Though retired Zimbardo still conducts research at Stanford University and teaches one class at the former Pacific Graduate School of Psychology, now Palo Alto University.

Zimbardo has made appearances on American TV, such as The Daily Show with Jon Stewart on March 29, 2007,^[13] The Colbert Report on February 11, 2008 ^[14] and Dr. Phil on October 25, 2010. ^[15]

Zimbardo is currently heading a movement for everyday heroism as the founder and director of The Heroic Imagination Project (HIP), a non-profit organization dedicated to promoting heroism in everyday life. The project is currently collecting data from former American gang members and former individuals with ties to terrorism for comparison, in an attempt to better understand how individuals change violent behavior. This research portion of the project is co-headed by Dr. Rony Berger, Dr. Yotam Heineburg, and Dr. Leonard Beckum. ^[16] He published an article contrasting heroism and altruism in 2011 with Dr. Zeno Franco and Kathy Blau in the Review of General Psychology.^[17]

Recognition[link]

In 2005, Zimbardo received the Dagmar and Václav Havel Foundation Vision 97 Award in Prague.

In 2003, Zimbardo, Gian Vittorio Caprara and Claudio Barbaranelli an academic of the University of Rome La Sapienza were awarded the sarcastic Ig Nobel Award for Psychology^[18] for their report "Politicians' Uniquely Simple Personalities."^[19]

Works[link]

• Influencing attitude and changing behavior: A basic introduction to relevant methodology, theory, and applications (Topics in social psychology), Addison Wesley, 1969
• The Cognitive Control of Motivation. Glenview, IL: Scott, Foresman, 1969
• Stanford prison experiment: A simulation study of the psychology of imprisonment, Philip G. Zimbardo, Inc., 1972
• The psychology of imprisonment: privation, power and pathology, Stanford University, 1972
• Influencing Attitudes and Changing Behavior. Reading, MA: Addison Wesley Publishing Co., 1969, ISBN 0-07-554809-7
• Canvassing for Peace: A Manual for Volunteers. Ann Arbor, MI: Society for the Psychological Study of Social Issues, 1970, ISBN
• Influencing Attitudes and Changing Behavior (2nd ed.). Reading, MA: Addison Wesley., 1977, ISBN
• How to Overcome Shyness. Family Circle magazine, May 31, 1977 page 14 (with questionnaire)
• Cults go to high school: A theoretical and empirical analysis of the initial stage in the recruitment process, American Family Foundation, 1985
• Shyness: What It Is, What to Do About It, Addison Wesley, 1990, ISBN 0-201-55018-0
• The Psychology of Attitude Change and Social Influence. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1991, ISBN 0-87722-852-3
• Psychology (3rd Edition), Reading, MA: Addison Wesley Publishing Co., 1999, ISBN 0-321-03432-5
• The Shy Child : Overcoming and Preventing Shyness from Infancy to Adulthood, Malor Books, 1999, ISBN 1-883536-21-9
• Violence Workers: Police Torturers and Murderers Reconstruct Brazilian Atrocities. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press, 2002, ISBN 0-520-23447-2
• Psychology - Core Concepts, 5/e, Allyn & Bacon Publishing, 2005, ISBN 0-205-47445-4
• Psychology And Life, 17/e, Allyn & Bacon Publishing, 2005, ISBN 0-205-41799-X
• The Lucifer Effect: Understanding How Good People Turn Evil, Random House, New York, 2007, ISBN 1-4000-6411-2
• The Time Paradox: The New Psychology of Time That Will Change Your Life, Simon & Schuster, New York, 2008, ISBN 1-4165-4198-5
• The Journey from the Bronx to Stanford to Abu Ghraib, pp. 85–104 in "Journeys in Social Psychology: Looking Back to Inspire the Future", edited by Robert Levine, et al., CRC Press, 2008. ISBN 0-8058-6134-3
• Zimbardo, Philip G. " A Simulation Study of the Psychology of Imprisonment Conducted at Stanford University." The Stanford Prison Experiment. 2009. Web. 1 Dec 2009
• Psychology, AP* Edition, Zimbardo, Phil, Johnson, Robert, Weber, Ann, Gruber, Craig, Allyn & Bacon, Boston, 2010

See also[link]

• Human experimentation in the United States
• List of social psychologists
• Stanford prison experiment
• Banality of evil
• Milgram experiment
• Seductive Poison

References[link]

External links[link]

• Zimbardo's official website
• Philip G. Zimbardo Papers (Stanford University Archives)
• Appearances on C-SPAN
• Philip Zimbardo at TED Conferences
• Philip Zimbardo at the Internet Movie Database
• Works by or about Philip Zimbardo in libraries (WorldCat catalog)
• Philip Zimbardo on the Lucifer Effect, in two parts

Author Steven Pressfield, June 2011

Steven Pressfield (September 1943— ) is an American author, of historical fiction and non-fiction, and screenplays.

He was born in Port of Spain, Trinidad, in 1943, while his father was stationed there, in the Navy. He graduated from Duke University in 1965 and in 1966 joined the Marine Corps.^[1] In the years following, he worked as an advertising copywriter, schoolteacher, tractor-trailer driver, bartender, oilfield roustabout, attendant in a mental hospital, fruit-picker in Washington state, and screenwriter.^[2] His struggles to make a living as an author, including the period when he was homeless and living out of the back of his car, are detailed in his book The War of Art (book).^[3]

His first book, "The Legend of Bagger Vance," was published in 1995, and made into a movie of the same name, starring Will Smith, Charlize Theron, and Matt Damon, and directed by Robert Redford.

His second novel, "Gates of Fire," is about the Spartans and the battle at Thermopylae. It is taught at U.S. Military Academy ^[4] and United States Naval Academy, and at the Marine Corps Basic School at Quantico.^[5][6]

Fiction[link]

• The Legend of Bagger Vance (see The Legend of Bagger Vance (film) for the movie), about a young man trying to come to terms with his spiritual demons through the medium of golf (1995)
• Gates of Fire, about the Battle of Thermopylae (1998)
• Tides of War, A Novel of Alcibiades and the Peloponnesian War (2000)
• Last of the Amazons, in which Theseus, the legendary King of Athens, sets sail to the north coast of the Black Sea inhabited by a race of female warriors (2002)
• The Virtues of War, about Alexander the Great (2004)
• The Afghan Campaign, about Alexander the Great's conquests in Afghanistan (2006)
• Killing Rommel (2008), a fictionalized account of a patrol of the British Long Range Desert Group during the North African Campaign of World War II.
• The Profession (2011), Pressfield's first book set in the future, where military force is for hire everywhere. Oil companies, multinational corporations and banks employ powerful, cutting-edge mercenary armies to control global chaos and protect their riches.

Non-Fiction[link]

• The War of Art: Break Through the Blocks and Win Your Inner Creative Battles (2002), a motivational book that investigates the psychology of creating art and how "writer's block" can be cured.
• Do The Work (2011)
• The Warrior Ethos (2011)
• Turning Pro (2012)

Online series[link]

• Writing WednesdaysAn ongoing, blog-version of The War of Art.
• What It Takes A journal by Shawn Coyne and Callie Oettinger, that explores "What It Takes" in publishing and other industries and venues, to make things happen.
• The Warrior Ethos
• It's the Tribes, Stupid a blog about the tribes in Afghanistan
• War Stories a blog dealing with issues of honor and virtue and courage in the face of adversity.
• The Creative Process A Q&A with a wide range of creative people—from writers to business entrepreneurs and beyond—probing how they do that thing they do.

Film work[link]

Prior to publishing his first original works of fiction, Pressfield wrote several Hollywood screenplays, most notably 1988's Above the Law starring Steven Seagal and directed by Andrew Davis, 1992’s Freejack, a work of science fiction starring Emilio Estevez, Mick Jagger, and Anthony Hopkins, and 1993's Joshua Tree (a.k.a. Army Of One) starring Dolph Lundgren and George Segal. Joshua Tree was directed by Academy Award and Bafta winning stuntman Vic Armstrong.

His novel The Legend of Bagger Vance was made into a 2000 film starring Matt Damon as the golf pro and Will Smith as his spiritual guide.

Steven Pressfield also appeared as one of the historians in The History Channel's 2007 documentary "Last Stand of the 300".

References[link]

Sources[link]

Pressfield, Steven. (2012 ed.). "War of Art". New York/Los Angeles: Black Irish Books. ISBN 978-1-936891-02-3 Pressfield, Steven. (2012 ed.). "Turning Pro". New York/Los Angeles: Black Irish Books. ISBN 978-1936891-03-0

External links[link]

Biography portal

• Steven Pressfield Official Website
• Part of Learn From My Life
• Steven Pressfield leads discussion about The Creative Battleground as guest host of LitChat
• Steven Pressfield's "Writing Wednesdays" series
• New York Times Blog "At War" features article about Steven Pressfield's blog and the "One Tribe At A Time" paper, by Major Jim Gant

Persondata
Name	Pressfield, Steven
Alternative names
Short description	United States Marine
Date of birth	1943
Place of birth
Date of death
Place of death

v t e Works by Steven Pressfield Novels The Legend of Bagger Vance (1995, made into The Legend of Bagger Vance (film))  • Gates of Fire (1998) Tides of War (2000)  • Last of the Amazons (2002)  • The Virtues of War (2004)  • The Afghan Campaign (2006)  • Killing Rommel (2008)  • The Profession (2011) Non-Fiction The War of Art (2002)  • Do The Work (2011)  • The Warrior Ethos (2011) Screenplays Above the Law (1988)  • Freejack (1992)  • Joshua Tree (1993)

Marcus Borg speaking in Mansfield College chapel.

Marcus J. Borg (born 1942) is an American New Testament scholar, theologian and author.^[1] He is a fellow of the Jesus Seminar and was formerly Hundere Distinguished Professor of Religion and Culture at Oregon State University, a position from which he retired in 2007. Borg is among the most widely-known and influential voices in progressive Christianity and is a major figure in scholarship related to the Historical Jesus.^[2][3]

Career[link]

Borg was born and raised in a Lutheran family in South Dakota. After high school he attended Concordia College in Minnesota, initially planning to be an astrophysicist and majoring in math and physics. He later changed his major to political science and philosophy. Though plagued by doubt as a young adult, after his undergraduate studies Borg decided to study at Union Seminary in New York City, where he became familiarized with liberal theology. One of the profound influences on Borg during his seminary years was his professor and the noted theologian W. D. Davies. After graduating from Union he then enrolled at Oxford University, where he earned his D. Phil.^[4]

Borg was a faculty member at Oregon State University from 1979 till his retirement in 2007 as Distinguished Professor in Religion and Culture and the Hundere Endowed Chair in Religious Studies. Borg was appointed Chair of the Religious Studies Department in January 1988. The Religious Studies Department was closed at the end of the 1991-1992 academic year and Borg became became a faculty member in the Philosophy Department. ^[5] During his time at Oregon State he organized and led two nationally televised symposia, one in 1996 (Jesus at 2000), and another in 2000 (God at 2000). Borg has been national chair of the Historical Jesus Section of the Society of Biblical Literature, co-chair of its International New Testament Program Committee and president of the Anglican Association of Biblical Scholars.^[6] On May 31, 2009, he was installed as the first canon theologian at Trinity Episcopal Cathedral.^[7] Borg has been a frequent collaborator with his friend John Dominic Crossan^{[8][9][10][11]} He is also a friend of N.T. Wright, despite their theological differences. The two discussed their differences in their book The Meaning of Jesus: Two Visions (2000).^[12][13] Borg has frequently been featured in programs on networks such as PBS, NPR and National Geographic, and has also made appearances on ABC World News and The Today Show.^[14]

Books[link]

• Speaking Christian: Why Christian Words Have Lost Their Meaning, 2011; ISBN 978-0-06-197655-1
• Putting Away Childish Things: A Tale of Modern Faith, 2010; ISBN 978-0-06-188814-4
• The First Paul: Reclaiming the Radical Visionary Behind the Church's Conservative Icon, co—authored with John Dominic Crossan, 2009; ISBN 0-06-143072-2
• The First Christmas: What the Gospels Really Teach About Jesus' Birth, co-authored with John Dominic Crossan, 2007
• "Executed by Rome, Vindicated by God," Stricken by God?, ed. by Brad Jersak and Michael Hardin, 2007, ISBN 978-0-9780174-7-7
• Jesus: Uncovering the Life, Teachings, and Relevance of a Religious Revolutionary, 2006, ISBN 0-06-059445-4
• Living the Heart of Christianity: A Guide to Putting Your Faith into Action, co-authored with Tim Scorer, 2006
• The Last Week: A Day-by-Day Account of Jesus's Final Week in Jerusalem, co-authored with John Dominic Crossan, 2006, ISBN 0-06-084539-2
• The Heart of Christianity: Rediscovering a Life of Faith (2003)
• Reading the Bible Again for the First Time: Taking the Bible Seriously but Not Literally, 2001, ISBN 0-06-060919-1
• The Apocalyptic Jesus: A Debate, co-authored with Dale C. Allison, John Dominic Crossan, and Stephan J. Patterson, 2001
• God at 2000 (editor, with Ross Mackenzie, 2001)
• The Meaning of Jesus: Two Visions. Co-authored with N. Thomas Wright, 1999, ISBN 0-06-060875-7
• Will the Real Jesus Please Stand Up?: A Debate Between William Lane Craig and John Dominic Crossan, 1998 (Marcus Borg, Respondent)
• Conflict, Holiness and Politics in the Teachings of Jesus, rev. ed., 1998 (originally published in 1984)
• Jesus and Buddha: The Parallel Sayings, ed., 1997
• The God We Never Knew, 1997
• The Lost Gospel Q, ed., 1996
• Jesus at 2000, ed., 1996
• The Search for Jesus: Modern Scholarship Looks at the Gospels, co-authored with John Dominic Crossan and Stephen Patterson, ed. by Hershel Shanks, 1994
• Jesus in Contemporary Scholarship, 1994
• Meeting Jesus Again for the First Time, 1994, ISBN 0-06-060917-6
• Jesus: A New Vision, 1987
• The Year of Luke, 1976
• Conflict and Social Change, 1971

References[link]

External links[link]

• Borg's Blog for the Washington Post

Rudolph Valentino
Born	Rodolfo Alfonso Raffaello Pierre Filibert Guglielmi di Valentina d'Antonguolla (1895-05-06)May 6, 1895 Castellaneta, Italy
Died	August 23, 1926(1926-08-23) (aged 31) New York City, New York
Cause of death	Pleuritis
Occupation	Actor, pop icon
Years active	1914-1926
Spouse	Jean Acker (m.1919-1923; divorced) Natacha Rambova (m.1923-1926; his death)

Rudolph Valentino (May 6, 1895 – August 23, 1926) was an Italian actor, known simply as "Valentino" and also an early pop icon. A sex symbol of the 1920s, Valentino was known as the "Latin Lover".^[1] He starred in several well-known silent films including The Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse, The Sheik, Blood and Sand, The Eagle and Son of the Sheik. He had applied for American citizenship shortly before his death.^[2]

His sudden death at age 31 caused mass hysteria among his female fans, further propelling him into icon status. Though his films are not as well known today, his name is still widely known.^[3]

Early life[link]

Childhood[link]

Valentino was born Rodolfo Alfonso Raffaello Pierre Filibert Guglielmi di Valentina D'Antonguolla in Castellaneta, Puglia, Kingdom of Italy. His mother, Marie Berta Gabrielle (née Barbin; 1856–1919), was French, born in Lure in Lorraine. His father, Giovanni Antonio Giuseppe Fedele Guglielmi di Valentina D'Antonguolla, was Italian; he was a veterinarian who died of malaria when Valentino was 11.^[4][5][6] He had an older brother, Alberto (1892–1981), a younger sister, Maria, and an older sister Beatrice who died in infancy.^[7]

As a child, Valentino was reportedly spoiled and troublesome. His mother coddled him while his father disapproved of his behavior.^[8] He did poorly in school, and was eventually enrolled in agricultural school at Genova where he received a degree.^[9]

After living in Paris in 1912, he soon returned to Italy. Unable to secure employment, he departed for the United States in 1913.^[10] He was processed at Ellis Island at age 18 on December 23, 1913.^[11]

New York[link]

Arriving in New York City, Valentino soon ran out of money and spent time on the streets. He supported himself with odd jobs such as bussing tables in restaurants and gardening.^[10] Eventually, he found work as a taxi dancer at Maxim's.^[12] Among the other dancers at Maxim's were several displaced members of European nobility and there was a premium in demand for them.

Valentino eventually befriended Chilean heiress Blanca de Saulles who was unhappily married to prominent businessman John de Saulles, with whom she had a son. Whether Blanca and Valentino actually had a romantic relationship is unknown, but when the de Saulles couple divorced, Valentino took the stand to support Blanca de Saulles' claims of infidelity on her husband's part. Following the divorce, John de Saulles reportedly used his political connections to have Valentino arrested, along with a Mrs. Thyme, a known madam, on some unspecified vice charges. The evidence was flimsy at best and after a few days in jail, Valentino's bail was lowered from $10,000 to $1,500.^[13]

The trial and subsequent scandal was well publicized, following which Valentino could not find employment. Shortly after the trial, Blanca de Saulles fatally shot her ex-husband during a custody dispute over their son. Fearful of being called in as a witness in another sensational trial, Valentino left town, joining a traveling musical that led him to the West Coast.^[14]

Film career[link]

Early bit parts[link]

In 1917, Rudolph Valentino joined an operetta company that traveled to Utah where it disbanded. He then joined an Al Jolson production of Robinson Crusoe Jr., travelling to Los Angeles. By fall, he was in San Francisco with a bit part in a theatrical production of Nobody Home. While in town, Valentino met actor Norman Kerry, who convinced him to try a career in cinema, still in the silent film era.^[7]

Valentino, with Kerry as a roommate, moved back to Los Angeles and took up residence at the Alexandria Hotel. He continued dancing, teaching dance and building up a following which included older female clientele who would let him borrow their luxury cars.^[7]

With his dancing success, Valentino found a room of his own on Sunset Boulevard and began actively seeking screen roles. His first part was as an extra in the film Alimony, moving on to small parts in several films. Despite his best efforts he was typically cast as a "heavy" (villain) or gangster.^[13] At the time, the major male star was Wallace Reid, with a fair complexion, light eyes, and an All American look, with Valentino the opposite,^[15] eventually supplanting Sessue Hayakawa as Hollywood's most popular "exotic" male lead.^[16][17]

By 1919, he had carved out a career in bit parts. It was a bit part as a "cabaret parasite" in the drama Eyes of Youth that caught the attention of screenwriter June Mathis, who thought he would be perfect for her next movie.^[18] He also appeared as second lead in The Delicious Little Devil (1919) with star Mae Murray.

Acting[link]

Displeased with playing "heavies", Valentino briefly entertained the idea of returning to New York permanently. He returned for a visit in 1917, staying with friends in Greenwich Village, eventually settling in Bayside, Queens. It was here he met Paul Ivano, who would help his career greatly.^[19]

While traveling to Palm Springs, Florida to film Stolen Moments, Valentino read the novel The Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse by Vicente Blasco Ibáñez.^[19] Seeking out a trade paper, he discovered that Metro had bought the film rights to the story. In New York, he sought out Metro's Office, only to find June Mathis had been trying to find him. She cast him in the role of Julio Desnoyers. For director, Mathis had chosen Rex Ingram, with whom Valentino did not get along, leading Mathis to play the role of peacekeeper between the two.^[19]

The Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse was released in 1921, becoming a commercial and critical success. It was one of the first films to make $1,000,000 at the box office, as well as the sixth highest grossing silent film ever.^[18][20]

Metro Pictures seemed unwilling to acknowledge it had made a star. Most likely due to Rex Ingram's lack of faith in him, the studio refused to give him a raise beyond the $350 a week he had made for Four Horsemen. For his follow up film, they forced him into a bit part in a B film called Uncharted Seas. It was on this film that Valentino met his second wife, Natacha Rambova.^[19][21]

Rambova, Mathis, Ivano, and Valentino began work on the Alla Nazimova film Camille. Valentino was cast in the role of Armand, Nazimova's love interest. The film, mostly under the control of Rambova and Nazimova, was considered too avant garde by critics and the public.^[21]

Valentino's final film for Metro was the Mathis-penned The Conquering Power. The film received critical acclaim and did well at the box office.^[21] After the film's release, Valentino made a trip to New York where he met with several French producers. Yearning for Europe, better pay, and more respect, Valentino returned and promptly quit Metro.^[21]

[edit] The Sheik

From A Sainted Devil

After quitting Metro, Valentino took up with Famous Players-Lasky, a studio known for films that were more commercially focused. Mathis soon joined him, angering both Ivano and Rambova.^[21]

Jesse Lasky intended to capitalize on the star power of Valentino, and cast him in a role that would solidify his reputation as the "Latin Lover". In The Sheik, Valentino played the starring role as Sheik Ahmed Ben Hassan. The film was a major success and would go on to define not only his career but his image and legacy. Valentino tried to distance the character from a stereotypical portrayal of an Arab man. Asked if Lady Diana (his love interest) would have fallen for a 'savage' in real life Valentino replied, "People are not savages because they have dark skins. The Arabian civilization is one of the oldest in the world...the Arabs are dignified and keen brained."^[22]

Famous Players produced four more feature length films over the next 15 months. His leading role in Moran of the Lady Letty was of a typical Douglas Fairbanks nature, however to capitalize on Valentino's bankability, his character was given a Spanish name and ancestry.^[22] The film received mixed reviews but was still a hit with audiences.^[22]

In November 1921, Valentino starred alongside Gloria Swanson in Beyond the Rocks. The film contained lavish sets and extravagant costumes, though Photoplay magazine said the film was "a little unreal and hectic". Released in 1922, the film was a critical disappointment. Years after its release, Beyond the Rocks was thought to be lost, save for a one minute portion.^[23] In 2002, the film was discovered by the Netherlands Film Museum. The restored version was released on DVD in 2006.^[24]

In 1922, Valentino began work on another Mathis-penned film, Blood and Sand. Co-starring Lila Lee and Nita Naldi, Valentino played the lead, bullfighter Juan Gallardo. Initially believing the film would be shot in Spain, Valentino was upset to learn that the studio planned on shooting on a Hollywood back lot. He was further irritated by changes in production, including a director of whom he did not approve.^[25]

After finishing the film, Valentino married Rambova, which led to a bigamy trial. The trial was a sensation and the pair was forced to have their marriage annulled and separated for a year. Despite the trial, the film was still a success, with critics calling it a masterpiece on par with Broken Blossoms and Four Horsemen. Blood and Sand went on to become one of the top four grossing movies of 1922, breaking attendance records, and grossing $37,400 at the Rivoli Theatre alone. Valentino would consider this one of his best films.^[26]

During his forced break from Rambova, the pair began working (separately) on the Mathis-penned The Young Rajah. Only fragments of this film, recovered in 2005, still remain.^[26] The film did not live up to expectations and underperformed at the box office. Valentino felt he had underperformed in the film, being upset over his separation with Rambova.^[26] Missing Rambova, Valentino returned to New York after the release of The Young Rajah. They were spotted and followed by reporters constantly. During this time Valentino began to contemplate not returning to Famous Players, although Jesse Lasky already had his next picture, The Spanish Cavalier, in preparation. After speaking with Rambova and his lawyer Arthur Butler Graham, Valentino declared a 'One man Strike' against Famous Players.^[26]

Strike against Famous Players[link]

Valentino's reasons for striking were financially based. At the time of his lawsuit against the studio, Valentino was earning $1,250 per week, with an increase to $3,000 after three years. This was $7,000 per week less than what Mary Pickford made in 1916.^[27] He was also upset over the broken promise of filming Blood and Sand in Spain, and the failure to shoot the next proposed film in either Spain or at least New York. Valentino had hoped while filming in Europe he could see his family, whom he hadn’t seen in ten years.^[22]

In September 1922, he refused to accept paychecks from Famous Players until the dispute was solved, although he owed them money he had spent to pay off Jean Acker. Angered, Famous Players in turn filed suit against him.^[28]

Valentino did not back down,^[28] and Famous Players realized how much they stood to lose. In trouble after shelving Rosco "Fatty" Arbuckle pictures, the studio tried to settle by upping his salary from $1,250 to $7,000 a week. Variety, erroneously, announced the salary increase as a 'new contract' before news of the lawsuit was released. Valentino refused the offer.^[26]

Valentino went on to claim that artistic control was more of an issue than the money. He wrote an open letter to Photoplay magazine, titled "Open Letter to the American Public", where he argued his case,^[26] although the average American had trouble sympathizing, as most made $2,000 a year. Famous Players made their own public statements deeming him more trouble than he was worth (the divorce, bigamy trials, debts) and that he was temperamental, almost diva-like. They claimed to have done all they could and that they had made him a real star.^[28]

Other studios began courting him. Joseph Schenck was interested in casting his wife, Norma Talmadge, opposite Valentino in a version of Romeo and Juliet. June Mathis had moved to Goldwyn Pictures where she was in charge of the Ben-Hur project, and interested in casting Valentino in the film. However, Famous Players exercised their option to extend his contract, preventing him from accepting any employment other than with the studio. By this point Valentino was around $80,000 in debt. Valentino filed an appeal, a portion of which was granted. Although he was still not allowed to work as an actor, he could accept other types of employment.^[28]

Mineralava Dance Tour[link]

In late 1922, Valentino met George Ullman, who would soon become Valentino's manager. Ullman previously had worked with Mineralava Beauty Clay Company, and convinced them that Valentino would be perfect as a spokesman with his legions of female fans.^[28]

The tour was a tremendous success with Valentino and Rambova performing in 88 cities in the United States and Canada. In addition to the tour, Valentino also sponsored Mineralava beauty products and judged Mineralava sponsored beauty contests.^[29] One beauty contest was filmed by a young David O. Selznick titled Rudolph Valentino and His 88 Beauties.^[30]

Return to films[link]

When Valentino returned to the United States, it was to an offer from Ritz-Carlton Pictures (working through Famous Players), which included $7,500 a week, creative control, and filming in New York.^[31] Rambova negotiated a two picture deal with Famous Players and four pictures for Ritz Carlton.^[32] He accepted, turning down an offer to film an Italian production of Quo Vadis in Italy.^[31]

The first film under the new contract was Monsieur Beaucaire, wherein Valentino played the lead, Duke of Chartres. The film did poorly and American audiences found it 'effeminate'.^[33] The failure of the film, under Rambova's control, is often seen as proof of her controlling nature and would later cause her to be barred from Valentino sets.^[32] Valentino made one final movie for Famous Players. In 1924 he starred in A Sainted Devil, now one of his lost films. It had lavish costumes but apparently a weak story. It opened to strong sales but soon dropped off in attendance and ended up as another disappointment.^[33]

With his contract fulfilled, Valentino was released from Famous Players but still obligated to Ritz-Carlton for four films. Valentino's next film was a pet project titled The Hooded Falcon. The production was beset with problems from the start, beginning with the script written by June Mathis. The Valentinos were dissatisfied with Mathis' version and requested that it be rewritten.^[34] Mathis took it as a great insult and did not speak to Valentino for almost two years.^[35] While Rambova worked designing costumes and rewriting the script for Falcon, Valentino was persuaded to film Cobra with Nita Naldi. Valentino agreed only on condition that it not be released until after The Hooded Falcon debuted.^[36]

After filming Cobra, the cast of The Hooded Falcon sailed for France to be fitted for costumes. After three months, they headed back to the United States, where Valentino's new beard, which he had grown for the film, caused a sensation.^[37] The crew and cast headed for Hollywood to begin preparations for the film, but much of the budget was taken up during pre-production.^[38] Due to the Valentinos' lavish spending on costumes and sets, Ritz-Carlton terminated the deal with the couple, effectively ending Valentino's contract with Ritz-Carlton.^[39]

United Artists[link]

During the filming of Monsieur Beaucaire, both Charlie Chaplin and Douglas Fairbanks approached Valentino privately, due to his contract with Ritz Carlton, about joining with United Artists.^[32] Valentino's contract with United Artists provided $10,000 a week for only three pictures a year, plus a percentage of his films. The contract excluded Rambova from production of his films and the film set. Valentino's acceptance of the terms caused a major rift in his marriage to Rambova. George Ullman, who had negotiated the contract with United Artists, offered Rambova $30,000 to finance a film of her own. It became her one and only film, titled What Price Beauty? and starred Myrna Loy.^[40]

Valentino chose his first UA project, The Eagle. With the marriage under strain, Valentino began shooting and Rambova announced that she needed a "marital vacation".^[41] During the filming of The Eagle, rumors of an affair with co-star Vilma Bánky were reported and ultimately denied by both Bánky and Valentino.^[18] The film opened to positive reviews, but a moderate box office.^[42]

For the film's release, Valentino travelled to London, staying there and in France, spending money with abandon while his divorce took place. It would be some time before he made another film, The Son of the Sheik, despite his hatred of the sheik image.^[43] The film began shooting in February 1926, with Valentino given his choice of director, and pairing him again with Vilma Banky. The film used the authentic costumes he bought abroad and allowed him to play a dual role. Valentino was ill during production, but needed the money to pay his many debts. The film opened on July 8, 1926 to great fanfare. During the premiere, Valentino was reconciled with Mathis; the two had not spoken in almost two years.^[43]

Image[link]

Dating back to the de Saulle trial in New York, during which his masculinity had been questioned in print, Valentino had been very sensitive with his public perception. Women loved him and thought him the epitome of romance. However, American men were less impressed, walking out of his movies in disgust. With the Fairbanks type being the epitome of manhood, Valentino was seen as a threat to the "All American" man. One man asked in a street interview what he thought of Valentino in 1922 replied, "Many men desire to be another Douglas Fairbanks. But Valentino? I wonder..."^[26] Women in the same interview found Valentino, "triumphantly seductive. Puts the love-making of the average husband or sweetheart into discard as tame, flat, and unimpassioned."^[26] Men may have wanted to act like Fairbanks, but they copied Valentino's look. A man with perfectly greased-back hair was called a "Vaselino".^[26]

Some journalists were still calling his masculinity into question, going on at length about his pomaded hair, his dandyish clothing, his treatment of women, his views on women, and whether he was effeminate or not. Valentino hated these stories and was known to carry the clippings of the newspaper articles around with him and criticize them.^[7]

In July 1926, The Chicago Tribune reported that a vending machine dispensing pink talcum powder had appeared in an upscale hotel washroom. An editorial that followed used the story to protest the feminization of American men, and blamed the talcum powder on Valentino and his films. The piece infuriated Valentino and he challenged the writer to a boxing match since dueling was illegal.http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,722230,00.html Neither challenge was answered.^[44] Shortly afterward, Valentino met with journalist H.L. Mencken for advice on how best to deal with the incident. Mencken advised Valentino to "let the dreadful farce roll along to exhaustion",^[45] but Valentino insisted the editorial was "infamous."^[45] Mencken found Valentino to be likable and gentlemanly and wrote sympathetically of him in an article published in the Baltimore Sun a week after Valentino's death:^[46]

It was not that trifling Chicago episode that was riding him; it was the whole grotesque futility of his life. Had he achieved, out of nothing, a vast and dizzy success? Then that success was hollow as well as vast—a colossal and preposterous nothing. Was he acclaimed by yelling multitudes? Then every time the multitudes yelled he felt himself blushing inside... The thing, at the start, must have only bewildered him, but in those last days, unless I am a worse psychologist than even the professors of psychology, it was revolting him. Worse, it was making him afraid... Here was a young man who was living daily the dream of millions of other men. Here was one who was catnip to women. Here was one who had wealth and fame. And here was one who was very unhappy.^[47]

After Valentino challenged the Tribune's anonymous writer to a boxing match, the New York Evening Journal boxing writer, Frank O'Neill, volunteered to fight in his place. Valentino won the bout which took place on the roof of New York's Ambassador Hotel.^[48]

Boxing heavyweight champion Jack Dempsey, who trained Valentino and other Hollywood notables of the era in the art of boxing, said of him "He was the most virile and masculine of men. The women were like flies to a honeypot. He could never shake them off, anywhere he went. What a lovely, lucky guy."^[49]

Valentino's sex symbol status and his untimely death was a biographical part in Dos Passos' 42nd parallel in the U.S.A Trilogy. His title was the Adagio Dancer.^[50]

Other ventures[link]

In 1923, Valentino published a book of poetry titled Day Dreams,^[51] He would later serialize events in various magazines. With Liberty magazine, he wrote a series entitled, "How You Can Keep Fit" in 1923.^[51] "My Life Story" was serialized in Photoplay during his dance tour. The March issue was one of the best selling ever for the magazine.^[28] He followed that with My Private Diary, serialized in Movie Weekly magazine. Most of the serials were later published as books after his death.^[52]

Valentino was fascinated with every part of movie-making. During production on a Mae Murray film he spent time studying the director's plans.^[15] He craved authenticity and wished to shoot on location,^[21][26] finally forming his own production company, Rudolph Valentino Productions, in 1925.^[42] Valentino, George Ullman, and Beatrice Ullman were the incorporators.

On May 14, 1923, while in New York City, Valentino made his only two vocal recordings for Brunswick Records; "Kashmiri Song" (The Sheik) and "El Relicario" (Blood and Sand). The recordings were not released until after Valentino's death by the Celebrity Recording Company; Brunswick did not release them because Valentino's English/Spanish pronunciation was subpar.^[53]

Valentino was one of the first in Hollywood to offer an award for artist accomplishments in films. The Academy Awards would later follow suit. In 1925, he gave out his one and only medal, to John Barrymore, for his performance in Beau Brummel. The award, named The Rudolph Valentino Medal, required the agreement of Valentino, two judges and the votes of 75 critics. Everyone other than Valentino himself was eligible.^[42]

Personal life[link]

In 1919, just before the rise of his career, Valentino impulsively married actress Jean Acker who was involved with actresses Grace Darmond and Alla Nazimova. Acker got involved with Valentino in part to remove herself from the lesbian love triangle, quickly regretted the marriage, and locked Valentino out of their room on their wedding night. The couple separated soon after, the marriage never consummated.^[5] The couple remained legally married until 1921, when Acker sued Valentino for divorce, citing desertion.^[18] The divorce was granted with Acker receiving alimony. She and Valentino eventually renewed their friendship. The two remained friends until his death.^[5]

Valentino first met Winifred Shaughnessy, known by her stage name, Natacha Rambova, an American silent film costume and set designer, art director, and protégée of Nazimova, on the set of Uncharted Seas in 1921. The two worked together on the Nazimova production of Camille, by which time they were romantically involved.^[54] They married on May 13, 1922, in Mexicali, Mexico, which resulted in Valentino's arrest for bigamy since he had not been divorced for a full year, as required by California law at the time. Days passed and his studio at the time, Famous Players-Lasky, refused to post bail. Eventually, a few friends were able to post the cash bail.^[55]

Having to wait the year or face the possibility of being arrested again, Rambova and Valentino lived in separate apartments in New York City, each with their own roommates. On March 14, 1923, they legally remarried.^[56]

Many of Valentino's friends disliked Rambova and found her controlling.^[42] During his relationship with her, he lost many friends and business associates, including June Mathis. Toward the end of their marriage, Rambova was banned from his sets by contract. Valentino and Rambova divorced in 1925. The end of the marriage was bitter, with Valentino bequeathing Rambova one dollar in his will.^[18]

From the time he died until the 1960s, Valentino's sexuality was not generally questioned in print.^[57][58] At least four books, including Hollywood Babylon, suggested that he may have been gay despite his marriage with Rambova.^{[59][60][61][62] [63]} In fact, the marriages to Acker and Rambova, as well as the relationship with Pola Negri, only serve to add to the suspicion that Valentino was gay and that these were "lavender marriages", as all have documented lesbian relationships.^[64] Such books gave rise to claims that Valentino had a relationship with Ramón Novarro, despite Novarro stating they barely knew each other.^[57][60] Hollywood Babylon recounts a story that Valentino had given Novarro an art deco dildo as a gift, which was found stuffed in his throat at the time of his murder. No such gift existed.^[57][59][60] These books also gave rise to claims that he may have had relationships with both roommates Paul Ivano and Douglas Gerrad, as well as Norman Kerry, openly gay French actor Jacques Herbertot and André Daven.^[65] However, Ivano maintained that it was untrue and both he and Valentino were heterosexual.^[19] Biographers Emily Leider and Allan Ellenberger generally agree that he was most likely straight.^[66][67]

Further supposed evidence that Valentino was gay are documents in the estate of the late author Samuel Steward indicating that Valentino was a sexual partner of his.^[68] However, evidence found in Steward's claim was subsequently found to be false, as Valentino was in New York on the date Steward claimed a sexual encounter occurred in Ohio.^[69]

Shortly before his death, Valentino was dating actress Pola Negri. Upon his death, Negri made a scene at his funeral, claiming they had been engaged. Valentino had never confirmed the engagement claim.^[51]

Death and funeral[link]

On August 15, 1926, Valentino collapsed at the Hotel Ambassador in New York City, New York. He was hospitalized at the Polyclinic in New York and an examination showed him to be suffering from appendicitis and gastric ulcers which required an immediate operation. Despite surgery Valentino developed peritonitis. On August 18 his doctors gave an optimistic prognosis for Valentino and told the media that unless Valentino's condition changed for the worse there was no need for updates.^[70] However, on August 21 he was stricken with a severe pleuritis relapse that developed rapidly in his left lung due to the actor's weakened condition.^[70] The doctors realized that he was going to die, but, as was common at the time with terminal patients, decided to withhold the prognosis from the actor who believed that his condition would pass. During the early hours of August 23, Valentino was briefly conscious and chatted with his doctors about his future. He fell back into a coma and died a few hours later, at the age of 31.^[18][70]

An estimated 100,000 people lined the streets of New York City to pay their respects at his funeral, handled by the Frank Campbell Funeral Home. The event was a drama itself: Suicides of despondent fans were reported. Windows were smashed as fans tried to get in and an all-day riot erupted on August 24. Over 100 mounted officers and NYPD's Police Reserve was deployed to restore order. A phalanx of officers would line the streets for the remainder of the viewing. The drama inside would not be outdone. Polish actress Pola Negri, claiming to be Valentino's fiancée, collapsed in hysterics while standing over the coffin, and Campbell's hired four actors to impersonate a Fascist Blackshirt honor guard, which claimed to have been sent by Benito Mussolini. It was later revealed as a planned publicity stunt.^[71] Media reports that the body on display in the main salon was not Valentino but a decoy were continually denied by Campbell.

Valentino's crypt

Valentino's funeral Mass in New York was held at Saint Malachy's Roman Catholic Church, often called "The Actor's Chapel", as it is located on West 49th Street in the Broadway theater district, and has a long association with show business figures.^[72]

After the body was taken by train across the country, a second funeral was held on the West Coast, at the Catholic Church of the Good Shepherd in Beverly Hills.^[72] Valentino had no final burial arrangements and his friend June Mathis offered her crypt for him in what she thought would be a temporary solution. However, she died the following year and Valentino was placed in the adjoining crypt. The two are still interred side by side in adjoining crypts at the Hollywood Memorial Park Cemetery (now the Hollywood Forever Cemetery) in Hollywood, California.

Estate[link]

Valentino left his estate to his brother, sister, and Rambova's aunt Teresa Werner, who was left the share originally bequeathed to Rambova.^[73] His Beverly Hills mansion, Falcon Lair, was later owned by heiress Doris Duke. Duke died there in 1993. The home was later sold and underwent major renovations. The estate was bulldozed in 2006 and put back on the market.^[72]

Legacy[link]

After his death many of his films were reissued to help pay his estate expenses. Many were reissued well into the 1930s, long after the demise of silent film. Several books were written including one by Rambova.^[74] Several songs, including "There's a New Star in Heaven Tonight" and one by his first wife Jean Acker, entitled "We will meet at the end of the trail", became best sellers.^[12] A photomontage print showed Valentino arriving in Heaven and being greeted by Enrico Caruso.

Over the years, a "woman in black" carrying a red rose has come to mourn at Valentino's grave, usually on the anniversary of his death. Several myths surround the woman, though it seems the first woman in black was actually a publicity stunt cooked up by press agent Russel Birdwell in 1928. Several copycats have followed over the years.^[75]

Valentino's hometown of Castellaneta, Italy has created several services in his honor. A Museo Rodolfo Valentino was opened in his childhood home. A Fondazione Rodolfo Valentino was created to promote his life and his work.^[76] In 2009 a film school was also opened in his hometown, "Centro Studi Cine Club Rodolfo Valentino Castellaneta".^[77] At the centennial of his birth several events were held in his honor. From 1972 to 2006 an Italian acting award, "The Rudolph Valentino Award", was handed out every year. Several actors from all over the world received this award, including Leonardo DiCaprio and Elizabeth Taylor.^[78]

In 2006, the Italians planned a one-off film festival to celebrate the opening of the Museo Rodolfo Valentino.^[79] In May 2010, the American Society held The Rudolph Valentino Film Festival in Los Angeles, California.^[80]

Films about Valentino[link]

The life of Rudolph Valentino has been filmed a number of times for television and the big screen. One of these biopics is Ken Russell's 1977 film, Valentino, in which Valentino is portrayed by Rudolf Nureyev.^[81] The film itself is only loosely based on his life.

An earlier feature film about Valentino's life, also called Valentino, was released in 1951, starring Anthony Dexter as Valentino.^[82]

Upcoming American full length silent movie Silent Life (2012) is based on the life of Rudolph Valentino.

Filmography[link]

See also[link]

Biography portal

References[link]