Perhaps Lena Dunham Tweeted it best:
Because Helen Gurley Brown’s vision of female sexuality and power was messy and contradictory, and to love her—or even just to embrace some part of her spirit—is to recognize that being a woman in this culture can be a loopy, wild thrill ride of messiness and contradiction a whole lot of the time. Back in the late 80s, when I was a budding young feminist fresh out of school and starting out in publishing, she seemed like the enemy. Two decades and a whole lot of perspective on the magazine business later, I realize she helped make me—and all my snotty-ass friends who thought we were re-inventing the world—possible.
Helen Gurley Brown was the type of woman who called herself a feminist, to the great consternation of those who considered themselves to more purely embody feminist values. But her story—and the story she encouraged her readers to tell in their own lives—of emerging from “mouseburger” un-specialness to achieve financial autonomy, sexual satisfaction and success writ huge, is the very portrait of female empowerment. That she would go on to marry a peer—movie producer David Brown—and tell the Times that she looked after him “like a geisha” was the type of thing that infuriated people in the movement. But it was all of a piece to her.
Some of her most memorable quotations from this list the Daily Beast compiled yesterday—like for instance “If you’re not a sex object, you’re in trouble,”—are maddening, but others are simply fantastic. “Nearly every glamorous, successful, career woman you might envy now started out as some kind of schlepp,” she once said, and unpaid interns filing class action suits would do well to take note.
Also, here’s a first edition copy of Sex and the Single Girl if you’re interested in adding it to your bookshelf. Later covers have a more groovy sexy vibe, but I love that this one looks more like an anthropological textbook.
Also: you might very much need to own a first edition of the Single Girl’s Cookbook, just for the cover alone.
And finally: here’s this, from the first paragraph of HGB’s Times obit: ”She was 90, though parts of her were considerably younger.” This seems undignified no? Coming as it does from the paper of record? Not even to mention colossally disrespectful: think what you will about Helen Gurley Brown, she was a serious force not only in the popular culture, but in the business world as well, and her magazine not only minted money, it spawned countless spinoffs that minted money too. No man in a similar position would be subjected to this. I was discouraged—but alas, not surprised—to see that the piece was written by a woman.
Yep NY Times try that on when you write the obit for an equally successful guy. Was. Not. Necessary. I get her now, didn’t when i was a young’un. She was pretty great.
While I didn’t agree with all of her viewpoints on relationships, I always loved her emphasis on women taking their careers seriously. Even in this day and age, I think that women’s career aspirations are still viewed in many circles as a time-filler or hobby, as opposed to a path to self-realization.
HGB had a great career, and a loving husband. I still have her book, “The Late Show”…and it’s a fun read with some not bad advice. Yes, she was a geisha to her husband – and they were together for many happy years so why knock it? She paved the way for many women.
That’s a great point: we may not have approved, but she gave exactly zero f*cks.
Someone told me Ms Brown asked to have “some parts of her were considerably younger” in her obit years ago. I have no proof either way, but I hope that notion is true rather than just meanness of the part of the obit writer.
I do think there is a modern interpretation of ‘If you’re not a sex object, you’re in trouble’, which is that your significant other should be absolutely besotted with you and even after many years of being together, still thinks you’re fantastic – physically and in every other way. Personally I haven’t experienced that, but a friend’s husband still worships her (in a good way!) after more than 10 years of marriage. I guess it’s a nice thing to hope and strive for!
Thank you! That line in the NYTimes jumped out at me, too. I read all the accompanying reader comments expecting to find outrage, but, alas there was none. Also discouraging.
I admired her too. If the NYT was doing that on purpose, they should have said so. But, I still love the NYT.
I don’t know a thing (yet) about that lawsuit, but, if companies can afford it they really should be paying for the work. Unless it actually is educational, and even then, if they can, they should pay.
Otherwise it is only rich youngsters who can take the jobs. It reinforces our already ridiculously rigged society. I am no expert in this area of law but my gut — and my perusal of Craigslist — tells me that employers are taking gross advantage of this cr*ppy economy. And it is wrong.
I agree about the paid internships. I was never able to do an internship in college because I lived alone and needed a paying job. Therefore I didn’t get the industry specific experience that others did.
Oh, the unpaid internship thing is a big old thorny mess, Donna. I agree ENTIRELY that a person shouldn’t have to work for nothing to get ahead, and it’s always bothered me that that’s how publishing has jerry-rigged the system.
But this frustration and annoyance exists separate and apart from my horror at the level of entitlement I’ve encountered among kids right out of school over the course of the past decade. Internships involve, in HGB parlance, shlepp work. Shlepp well and diligently, and you will eventually be recognized as a person who’s reliable and very much gives a fuck. Initiate class action suits because you were sent to get coffee one too many times—and I say this as a person who shlepped a lot of coffee, even after I got a staff job— and and you might want to consider a new field.
“Initiate class action suits because you were sent to get coffee one too many times—and I say this as a person who shlepped a lot of coffee, even after I got a staff job— and and you might want to consider a new field.”
This. What happened to asking (politely, professionally) for more work/responsibility? Or watching, learning and asking questions?
Asking for more work responsibility and *expecting* it right out of the gate are, alas, two very different things. As far as watching, learning, asking questions go: yes of course! But this generation (and again, not all, because I worked with some very motivated 20-ish people too) is not big on watching and learning. They want to skip straight to GO, regardless of their level of experience. They think—and I say this not snidely, because I think it’s part of the pathology—that because one of them was Mark Zuckerberg, they all are bound to be, just any moment now.
Ah, the raging sense of entitlement issue. I agree that is separate from the pay question. I don’t know many of these youngsters nowadays so I don’t have an opinion on them…
In the interest of fair play, I should probably say that I am unemployed and have been for a while. So frankly I would remove a limb to have some of these opportunities to network AND I would grow the coffee beans myself (which, alas, in turn, makes me cranky when I see this kind of stuff.)
But I have worked with college students. And when I was asked by parents to go and get their college aged child out of bed to make sure they get to class on time, I really struggle.
But again, this probably says more about me than them.
I loved HGB when I was a teen in the total nowhere, no money back woods of New England. I waited eagerly each year for Cosmo’s Bedside Astrologer. Remember those? The little pullout books bound into the magazine that advised the various Sun Signs on what colors and style of shoes they ought to wear for a fabulous 1987?
I wonder what HGB thought of Kate White who has helmed Cosmo for some time now. I like to think they got along like the cliched house on fire. Kate has the same work ethic that HGB is celebrated for.
Great post, KF!!!!! HGB was so confusing and I secretly loved her too. She was the embodiment of the kind of feminist I wanted to be – doing whatever the fck she wanted. When I was coming up everyone had rules. I came from a town of strict rules, moved to NYC and was given a new set. I just wanted to do what I wanted to do. She did that. HGB was dirty and sexy and rich and smart and had really bad days when she’d look in the mirror and think ‘hell, what am I going to do with this mug’ . . .
She was so confusing, in fact, that the NYT writer is still not sure how to deal with her and therefore puts her down with her little distancing technique. Insecure bitch.
I had the same reaction to that line in the NYT obit. I remembering being
similarly surprised at Charla Krupp’s obit which read: “She was 58 but
looked the perennial 49.” That line worked because it supported her legacy.
as she wrote “How Not to Look Old”. But this reference to plastic surgery,
I assume. just fell flat as the late Nora Ephron’s chest in her famous Esquire
piece. It seemed tasteless and incongruous. I thought I was the only one
it stung but girls of a certain age evidently think alike. Love your blog!
Wow-how had I missed that Charla Krupp died? And you’re right: there it is in the very first paragraph again. This doesn’t rise to the same level of irksome to me, because Krupp’s whole gig was about looking younger. But still, something about the line “….the perennial 49″ is so retrograde.
I missed that too.
People can use that kind of advice. I say that having recently seen a really egregious dye job — on a man. He would look so much better with at least some gray in it. Just a little tweaking is so much better.
The line sounds like a bad weekend update joke. I’m also surprised that a woman wrote it. Agee that if HGB wanted the line, the NYT should have noted it. Would be interesting coda to her complicated legacy.
I think she would have thought it funny.
i have no problem with that statement…it’s obvious her mind was still young as was her spirit. we all fight so hard to age gracefully and wit dignity while still wanting to be thought of as attractive to others.
Lena Dunham wins the Internet with that tweet.
Something about HGB always freaked me out. She was so right on about so many career issues for women which for me was often cancelled out by one of her outrageous statements about sex. But I do remember being at the movie premiere of “A Few Good Men” and she was there with her husband who had produced the play on Broadway and the film as well. As the lights went down she reached over and took his hand. I thought that was so sweet….and has always stayed with me.
Agree with every word you said. Thank you!
Like Gloria Steinem, Brown, has late great relationship. that they could do this( be a geisha) is as remarkable as all they did for feminism.
My goodness, had not heard about Ms. Krupp either. Very sad.
Here’s the obit: http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/25/style/charla-krupp-self-help-author-on-womens-looks-dies-at-58.html
Great article on HGB. Snotty remarks from the NYT that don’t surprise me.
I missed the news about Charla as well. Her books were pretty helpful to many.
I though HGB was right on in several respects. I read the original edition of ‘Sex and the Single Girl’ back in the 70s–it was a bit dated in some respects at that time, but some of her advice hasn’t aged at all. She was into working hard at your job and making a terrific life for yourself rather than waiting for Prince Charming to provide that for you. That resonated with me a lot. It seemed that she and her husband had a great life together. Bravissima, Helen.
I think so much attention has been paid to HGB’s statements on sex that people miss her bigger message. Remember, Sex and the Single Girl was published at a time when society expected all women to be housewives and mothers – unmarried women were pitied (“old maids” and “spinsters”) and women who pursued careers were considered freakish.
HGB’s message was that a woman didn’t have to be married in order to have a fulfilling life – that whether you were single by choice or not, you could and should have a meaningful career, be financially independent and live the life you wanted. This was absolutely radical for that time.