Dave Newhouse: The bottomless fall of Fatty Arbuckle

Post by **silentfilm** » Mon Jul 04, 2011 5:05 pm

http://www.mercurynews.com/columns/ci_1 ... ck_check=1

Dave Newhouse: The bottomless fall of Fatty Arbuckle
By Dave Newhouse
Oakland Tribune columnist
Posted: 07/03/2011 12:00:00 AM PDT
Updated: 07/03/2011 03:11:10 PM PDT
Life 90 years ago was so radically different from the present that the tweeting generation might think it fictional. Television hadn't been invented, radio was a brand-new novelty, and the movie screen was voiceless.

Silent films marked the roots of Hollywood, and among its biggest early stars -- as big as Charlie Chaplin -- was Roscoe "Fatty" Arbuckle, who headlined the first "trial of the century" in 1921, right here in San Francisco.

Newspapers were the media back then, but some in the printed press leaned toward the fictional rather than the factual as they sought to convict Arbuckle prematurely during his three -- yes, three -- manslaughter trials.

Eventually, he was acquitted in the tragic case of actress Virginia Rappe, who died mysteriously after attending a party given by Arbuckle at the St. Francis Hotel.

This was the O.J. Simpson murder trial without the white Bronco. But like a guiltless Simpson -- if the facts don't fit, you must acquit -- Arbuckle was so scandalized that he, too, became a pariah in the minds of the public, which never forgave him.

Now virtually forgotten, the rotund Arbuckle has been given new life through a well-researched, highly entertaining book by David Kizer, an East Bay attorney and onetime Oakland resident who lives in Oakley.

Titled "Wolves at the Door: The Trials of Fatty Arbuckle," Kizer's self-published book is available through www.amazon.com

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Advertisement

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
at $18.14.

Kizer, a onetime copy editor at the Hayward Daily Review, wrote a 20-page paper on Arbuckle for the Law Journal before realizing he was hooked. And then for two years, he practiced law by day, and wrote at night.

"I felt sorry for Roscoe because he was just a big kid in an adult world," said Kizer. "But he was looked at as the epitome of what was wrong with the morality in our country."

Kizer's 532-page work is a rich slice of local history. Besides the San Francisco angle, Arbuckle grew up in Santa Clara. One of the key witnesses at his trials, singer Alice Blake, lived in Oakland. Arbuckle also did vaudeville in Oakland before achieving fame as a lovable 5-foot-8, 266-pound film star.

Having just signed a $3 million contract with Paramount Pictures in 1921, Arbuckle loaded up his $25,000 Pierce Arrow with bootleg whiskey -- it was Prohibition -- and drove to San Francisco to celebrate. Two friends came along, including director Fred Fishbach, who had discovered silent film child star "Baby Peggy" (Peggy-Jean Montgomery, now Diana Serra Cary, 92, of Gustine) in 1920.

Arbuckle booked three adjoining suites at the St. Francis. Phone calls were made to a dozen ladies to join the two-day party, including Rappe (pronounced Ra-PAY), a B actress who also was in San Francisco looking for a fun time.

What then occurred on the 12th floor became a he-said, she-said scenario. Rappe, 25, had become violently sick at the party after drinking alcohol. She died several days later of organ failure induced by peritonitis -- an inflammation of the membrane that lines the abdominal cavity and encloses the stomach, liver and intestines. The cause of death was a ruptured bladder.

Witnesses contended they saw Rappe enter a room with Arbuckle, who locked the door. These witnesses purportedly heard her scream, "I am dying. He hurt me." Their feeling was that Arbuckle's heft or some foreign instrument, such as a piece of ice or a soda bottle forced into Rappe which ruptured the bladder.

However, those same witnesses proved unreliable; they appeared determined to get Arbuckle. Two San Francisco newspapers, the Hearst-owned Examiner and the Chronicle, hammered him with inflammatory headlines.

Then medical information was presented that proved a ruptured bladder for someone already suffering with peritonitis -- Rappe -- could be caused by consuming alcohol. And she had experienced violent attacks before from drinking booze, new witnesses said.

Rappe also had been sexually active, having become an unwed mother at 15. She was rumored to have had two abortions, which possibly led to her developing cystitis, an inflammation of the bladder.

Though not legally divorced from her first husband, she lived with her fiance, producer-director Henry Lehrman. Rappe told a nurse that she had suffered for six weeks from what appeared to be a venereal disease.

She was a medical time bomb.

When Arbuckle testified, at last, in the third trial, he said that he had discovered Rappe on the floor of his bathroom, writhing and tearing at her clothes, obviously in distress. He was so convincing, the prosecution's case fell apart, and after he was acquitted in 1922, the jury foreman apologized to him.

"Only two people knew what really happened in that room," said Kizer. "But Roscoe hadn't shown that kind of (aggressive) personality before. He was a very sweet man who was devoted to his mother."

Arbuckle wouldn't ever regain his popularity, even as a free man. New Hollywood morality czar Will Hays promptly banned Arbuckle from the silver screen forever.

Though technically reinstated a year later, Arbuckle was finished in the movies. He tried the stage without success, then opened a nightclub. He seemed depressed, drank excessively, married twice (three times total), and died of a heart attack in 1933. He was 46.

Had it been otherwise 90 years ago, Kizer is convinced Arbuckle would have continued his stardom into talking pictures, which began in 1927, and beyond.

"Roscoe had a good voice. He could sing, and he was a good dancer -- light on his feet -- besides being a great actor," said Kizer. "He would have had the same career as Jackie Gleason, Chris Farley and John Candy. Roscoe also directed some of his own movies, and I feel he would have done more as a director."

But Roscoe "Fatty" Arbuckle's career died with Virgina Rappe.

Dave Newhouse's columns appear Monday, Thursday and Sunday, usually on the Local page. Know any Good Neighbors? Call 510-208-6466 or email dnewhouse(at)bayareanewsgroup.com.

Frederica · Post by **Frederica** » Mon Jul 04, 2011 10:14 pm

silentfilm wrote:http://www.mercurynews.com/columns/ci_1 ... ck_check=1

Halfway through it now and losing patience. Approaches materials as a lawyer, which is an interesting take. Does not approach materials like a criminal attorney in 1921, disastrous. Too many factual errors (some inconsequential, some really, really not). Too little objectivity (he's not exactly alone in that). Docudrama-esque presentation, flirts with being a conspiracy theorist but doesn't dive headfirst into the pool like Yallop or Edmonds. No citations, what is up with that? And just plain old "making shit up."

I am surprised to learn that Virginia "MacGuffin" Rappe (that "medical time bomb") had a husband. Who knew?

Fred

P.S. Still not as annoying as Paul Merton getting the first two jury final votes wrong.

Penfold · Post by **Penfold** » Tue Jul 05, 2011 12:18 am

From what little I know, the "Big kid in an adult world" doesn't fit either; it fits 'Fatty', but not Roscoe.....Roscoe did not have that career, directing his own, technically advanced and knowledgeable, and talent-spotting Keaton (from the movies viewpoint, at least) is not the achievement of some naive know-nothing, but of a man as shrewd as he was talented.

Brooksie · Post by **Brooksie** » Tue Jul 05, 2011 1:38 am

I saw a copy of Yallop's `The Day The Laughter Stopped' in the $5 pile at an antique market on the weekend. I was going to ask whether I should have invested my cash. Sounds like I have my answer. A conspiracy theory fan I am not.

The Blackbird · Post by **The Blackbird** » Tue Jul 05, 2011 5:48 am

Brooksie wrote:I saw a copy of Yallop's `The Day The Laughter Stopped' in the $5 pile at an antique market on the weekend. I was going to ask whether I should have invested my cash. Sounds like I have my answer. A conspiracy theory fan I am not.

That book single-handedly turned Arbuckle into my hero as a youth. I don't get where the sensationalsim supposedly comes in, it seemed a straightforward telling of the story to me. What I have always seen is a set of tragic, unforseeable circumstances, a ridiculous grifter using a woman with serious health problems in an attempt to make trouble after she was taken ill (fatally, as it turned out), a DA who realized too late he had to go through with his case or look like an idiot, some highly suspicious goings-on at a maternity hospital, and, of course, a media comprised of vultures and a public more than happy to believe the worst in anybody (some things never change)...

Penfold · Post by **Penfold** » Tue Jul 05, 2011 5:57 am

The Blackbird wrote:
Brooksie wrote:I saw a copy of Yallop's `The Day The Laughter Stopped' in the $5 pile at an antique market on the weekend. I was going to ask whether I should have invested my cash. Sounds like I have my answer. A conspiracy theory fan I am not.
That book single-handedly turned Arbuckle into my hero as a youth. I don't get where the sensationalsim supposedly comes in, it seemed a straightforward telling of the story to me. What I have always seen is a set of tragic, unforseeable circumstances, a ridiculous grifter using a woman with serious health problems in an attempt to make trouble after she was taken ill (fatally, as it turned out), a DA who realized too late he had to go through with his case or look like an idiot, some highly suspicious goings-on at a maternity hospital, and, of course, a media comprised of vultures and a public more than happy to believe the worst in anybody (some things never change)...

But then Yallop's book is just as one-sided as the press coverage - but in the other direction. We are now, in the days of Fox News/News International, pre-disposed to media vultures.....but the truth is, even they sometimes get it right. They may have been more right at the time than the current received wisdom allows. Work is being done on the subject; the definitive work on the trial yet to be written. Yallop certainly didn't. My money's on Fred if she can get a move on.....

The Blackbird · Post by **The Blackbird** » Tue Jul 05, 2011 6:01 am

Penfold wrote:
The Blackbird wrote:
Brooksie wrote:I saw a copy of Yallop's `The Day The Laughter Stopped' in the $5 pile at an antique market on the weekend. I was going to ask whether I should have invested my cash. Sounds like I have my answer. A conspiracy theory fan I am not.
That book single-handedly turned Arbuckle into my hero as a youth. I don't get where the sensationalsim supposedly comes in, it seemed a straightforward telling of the story to me. What I have always seen is a set of tragic, unforseeable circumstances, a ridiculous grifter using a woman with serious health problems in an attempt to make trouble after she was taken ill (fatally, as it turned out), a DA who realized too late he had to go through with his case or look like an idiot, some highly suspicious goings-on at a maternity hospital, and, of course, a media comprised of vultures and a public more than happy to believe the worst in anybody (some things never change)...
But then Yallop's book is just as one-sided as the press coverage - but in the other direction. We are now, in the days of Fox News/News International, pre-disposed to media vultures.....but the truth is, even they sometimes get it right. They may have been more right at the time than the current received wisdom allows. Work is being done on the subject; the definitive work on the trial yet to be written. Yallop certainly didn't. My money's on Fred if she can get a move on.....

I guess I just don't understand what crime it's now perceived Arbuckle is supposed to have committed? I sure as heck don't buy that he raped anyone....

sc1957 · Post by **sc1957** » Tue Jul 05, 2011 6:43 am

The Blackbird wrote: I guess I just don't understand what crime it's now perceived Arbuckle is supposed to have committed? I sure as heck don't buy that he raped anyone....

He was a rich man living life in the fast lane, and that was enough. It was easy for demagogues to turn middle America against him.

Penfold · Post by **Penfold** » Tue Jul 05, 2011 7:00 am

The Blackbird wrote:
Penfold wrote:
The Blackbird wrote: That book single-handedly turned Arbuckle into my hero as a youth. I don't get where the sensationalsim supposedly comes in, it seemed a straightforward telling of the story to me. What I have always seen is a set of tragic, unforseeable circumstances, a ridiculous grifter using a woman with serious health problems in an attempt to make trouble after she was taken ill (fatally, as it turned out), a DA who realized too late he had to go through with his case or look like an idiot, some highly suspicious goings-on at a maternity hospital, and, of course, a media comprised of vultures and a public more than happy to believe the worst in anybody (some things never change)...
But then Yallop's book is just as one-sided as the press coverage - but in the other direction. We are now, in the days of Fox News/News International, pre-disposed to media vultures.....but the truth is, even they sometimes get it right. They may have been more right at the time than the current received wisdom allows. Work is being done on the subject; the definitive work on the trial yet to be written. Yallop certainly didn't. My money's on Fred if she can get a move on.....
I guess I just don't understand what crime it's now perceived Arbuckle is supposed to have committed? I sure as heck don't buy that he raped anyone....

Woah there !!!! Didn't say that at all; I don't know anyone who is....even then, I believe, the trial was for manslaughter rather than rape. But how many of Yallop's findings - on the character, nature and histories of the protagonists - are actually borne out by a careful look at the records ??? And indeed, how relevant are they ??? A girl died....that always seems forgotten.

The Blackbird · Post by **The Blackbird** » Tue Jul 05, 2011 7:35 am

Oh, well, we'll have to see what this book says anyway. As long as Charles Higham isn't writing it we should be okay. Then maybe somebody can get to the truth about exactly what happened to Ted Healy...

FrankFay · Post by **FrankFay** » Tue Jul 05, 2011 7:49 am

Yallop's book has major flaws and errors, the chief virtue is that it's behind Arbuckle. Compared to the other gossip-mongers of the time it was good- it certainly beat getting the story from Kenneth Anger.

Frederica · Post by **Frederica** » Tue Jul 05, 2011 9:34 am

FrankFay wrote:Yallop's book has major flaws and errors, the chief virtue is that it's behind Arbuckle. Compared to the other gossip-mongers of the time it was good- it certainly beat getting the story from Kenneth Anger.

I wouldn't refer to them as "flaws and errors." And frankly--to anyone outside of this group--lying, twisting facts, and Fox News-level polemic does not particularly help Arbuckle. The first thing that non-silent film fans ask when I explain my project is "If he was so innocent, why was it necessary to lie to establish it?" It's a good question and it's one I have a hard time answering.

Frederica · Post by **Frederica** » Tue Jul 05, 2011 9:42 am

Brooksie wrote:I saw a copy of Yallop's `The Day The Laughter Stopped' in the $5 pile at an antique market on the weekend. I was going to ask whether I should have invested my cash. Sounds like I have my answer. A conspiracy theory fan I am not.

Yallop's career consists of selling conspiracy theories. He just found more fruitful subjects in the Catholic Church and the Mafia and left the world of showbiz forever. Thank heavens, says I.

rudyfan · Post by **rudyfan** » Tue Jul 05, 2011 10:40 am

Penfold wrote:But then Yallop's book is just as one-sided as the press coverage - but in the other direction. We are now, in the days of Fox News/News International, pre-disposed to media vultures.....but the truth is, even they sometimes get it right. They may have been more right at the time than the current received wisdom allows. Work is being done on the subject; the definitive work on the trial yet to be written. Yallop certainly didn't. My money's on Fred if she can get a move on.....

Like so many others, I bought into Yallop's book totally when I first read it. Having been privy to some of Fred's research, like Penfold, I am anxiously awaiting her completed manuscript.

Frederica · Post by **Frederica** » Tue Jul 05, 2011 10:51 am

rudyfan wrote: Like so many others, I bought into Yallop's book totally when I first read it. Having been privy to some of Fred's research, like Penfold, I am anxiously awaiting her completed manuscript.

Me too.

The Blackbird · Post by **The Blackbird** » Tue Jul 05, 2011 11:45 am

Frederica wrote:
FrankFay wrote:Yallop's book has major flaws and errors, the chief virtue is that it's behind Arbuckle. Compared to the other gossip-mongers of the time it was good- it certainly beat getting the story from Kenneth Anger.
I wouldn't refer to them as "flaws and errors." And frankly--to anyone outside of this group--lying, twisting facts, and Fox News-level polemic does not particularly help Arbuckle. The first thing that non-silent film fans ask when I explain my project is "If he was so innocent, why was it necessary to lie to establish it?" It's a good question and it's one I have a hard time answering.

Huh? What lie?

FrankFay · Post by **FrankFay** » Tue Jul 05, 2011 12:19 pm

The Blackbird wrote:
Frederica wrote:
FrankFay wrote:Yallop's book has major flaws and errors, the chief virtue is that it's behind Arbuckle. Compared to the other gossip-mongers of the time it was good- it certainly beat getting the story from Kenneth Anger.
I wouldn't refer to them as "flaws and errors." And frankly--to anyone outside of this group--lying, twisting facts, and Fox News-level polemic does not particularly help Arbuckle. The first thing that non-silent film fans ask when I explain my project is "If he was so innocent, why was it necessary to lie to establish it?" It's a good question and it's one I have a hard time answering.
Huh? What lie?

To start with Virginia Rappe comes off pretty badly. At the time she was painted as an innocent victim of Fatty's lust. Later the pendulum swung & Arbuckle was the victim and Rappe a loose party girl with a shady reputation. I'd say she's right in the middle- no innocent but certainly no slut.

salus · Post by **salus** » Tue Jul 05, 2011 1:04 pm

Wasn't Roscoe recently signed by some studio just before he died and was about to make a comeback.

Frederica · Post by **Frederica** » Tue Jul 05, 2011 1:09 pm

The Blackbird wrote:
Frederica wrote: I wouldn't refer to them as "flaws and errors." And frankly--to anyone outside of this group--lying, twisting facts, and Fox News-level polemic does not particularly help Arbuckle. The first thing that non-silent film fans ask when I explain my project is "If he was so innocent, why was it necessary to lie to establish it?" It's a good question and it's one I have a hard time answering.
Huh? What lie?

Well, except for the "media comprised of vultures and a public more than happy to believe the worst in anybody," these things, for instance:

...a ridiculous grifter using a woman with serious health problems in an attempt to make trouble after she was taken ill (fatally, as it turned out), a DA who realized too late he had to go through with his case or look like an idiot, some highly suspicious goings-on at a maternity hospital, and, of course, a media comprised of vultures and a public more than happy to believe the worst in anybody (some things never change)...

I don't know how long you've been on N-Ville, but we've addressed some of these issues before. The discussions should pop up on search.

FrankFay · Post by **FrankFay** » Tue Jul 05, 2011 1:20 pm

salus wrote:Wasn't Roscoe recently signed by some studio just before he died and was about to make a comeback.

Yes- he'd made several Vitaphone shorts and had signed to be in a feature but he died after filming the shorts.

Frederica · Post by **Frederica** » Tue Jul 05, 2011 1:38 pm

FrankFay wrote:
The Blackbird wrote: Huh? What lie?
To start with Virginia Rappe comes off pretty badly. At the time she was painted as an innocent victim of Fatty's lust. Later the pendulum swung & Arbuckle was the victim and Rappe a loose party girl with a shady reputation. I'd say she's right in the middle- no innocent but certainly no slut.

"Pretty badly???" Eric, you are tiptoeing through the tulips here. She comes off as a shrieking, diseased gorgon, and boy, ain't it a shame the silly bitch's death inconvenienced our hero so?

Be honest, peeps, you know that's exactly the picture Yallop painted.

I'd say that she was a human being, with both strengths and flaws and idiosyncracies--just like Arbuckle. And that in the terms of the trials, her character was immaterial because even silly bitches and shrieking diseased gorgons have a right to their own lives. All that mattered was what caused her bladder to rupture.

I will say one thing; this new book is even less concise on cause of death than is Yallop, and that's funny because the physicians involved weren't at all unconcise. So far he's blamed Virginia's ruptured bladder on cystitis, abortions, peritonitis, and when last we left the book, he was talking about diseased kidneys. I anxiously await leprosy, ebola, and an undiscovered gunshot wound to the pancreas.

FrankFay · Post by **FrankFay** » Tue Jul 05, 2011 1:45 pm

Gee Fred, I'm actually on your side. Sorry I'm not channeling your level of hate. Will try to do better.

GRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR

Frederica · Post by **Frederica** » Tue Jul 05, 2011 1:50 pm

FrankFay wrote:Gee Fred, I'm actually on your side. Sorry I'm not channeling your level of hate. Will try to do better.

GRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR

Sorry, my anger is not directed at you.

The Blackbird · Post by **The Blackbird** » Tue Jul 05, 2011 4:12 pm

Frederica wrote:
The Blackbird wrote:
Frederica wrote: I wouldn't refer to them as "flaws and errors." And frankly--to anyone outside of this group--lying, twisting facts, and Fox News-level polemic does not particularly help Arbuckle. The first thing that non-silent film fans ask when I explain my project is "If he was so innocent, why was it necessary to lie to establish it?" It's a good question and it's one I have a hard time answering.
Huh? What lie?
Well, except for the "media comprised of vultures and a public more than happy to believe the worst in anybody," these things, for instance:

...a ridiculous grifter using a woman with serious health problems in an attempt to make trouble after she was taken ill (fatally, as it turned out), a DA who realized too late he had to go through with his case or look like an idiot, some highly suspicious goings-on at a maternity hospital, and, of course, a media comprised of vultures and a public more than happy to believe the worst in anybody (some things never change)...
I don't know how long you've been on N-Ville, but we've addressed some of these issues before. The discussions should pop up on search.

Uh..... well, two years, to answer your question, but if nobody minds I'm bailing out of this thread completely before it gets even more uncomfortable, sorry....

Frederica · Post by **Frederica** » Tue Jul 05, 2011 4:43 pm

The Blackbird wrote: Uh..... well, two years, to answer your question, but if nobody minds I'm bailing out of this thread completely before it gets even more uncomfortable, sorry....

What are you uncomfortable about?

FrankFay · Post by **FrankFay** » Tue Jul 05, 2011 6:48 pm

Frederica wrote:
The Blackbird wrote: Uh..... well, two years, to answer your question, but if nobody minds I'm bailing out of this thread completely before it gets even more uncomfortable, sorry....
What are you uncomfortable about?

Myself I'm a little uncomfortable that this discussion is getting pretty heated- I'm unsubscribing.

Frederica · Post by **Frederica** » Tue Jul 05, 2011 7:41 pm

FrankFay wrote:
Frederica wrote:
The Blackbird wrote: Uh..... well, two years, to answer your question, but if nobody minds I'm bailing out of this thread completely before it gets even more uncomfortable, sorry....
What are you uncomfortable about?

Myself I'm a little uncomfortable that this discussion is getting pretty heated- I'm unsubscribing.

OK, and I get that I was perhaps too "blunt," shall we say? I wasn't feeling heated, honestly I was tickled at your description. Wayyy diplomatic.

At any rate, I haven't finished with this new book yet, but the more I read the less interested I am.

Rob Farr · Post by **Rob Farr** » Wed Jul 06, 2011 8:32 am

I don't know. What's wrong with a little passion when discussing this stuff? S'cuse me while I go watch my bootleg of Muammar Gaddafi's personal copy of London After Midnight run at the PROPER speed of 26 fps, score by the Alloy Orchestra.

greta de groat · Post by **greta de groat** » Wed Jul 06, 2011 1:47 pm

I'm really puzzled by the level of discomfort about this discussion, especially since we've discussed it so often before. I think most of us swallowed the Yallop story--why would we have any reason not to, especially since it had such an appealing narrative? But why be defensive when evidence shows how much he distorted the picture? Any why not be angry at him for doing so, and at the new author for swallowing the story instead of taking an unbiased look at the historical record.

Nobody is saying that because Yallop's account of the trials is demonstrably false that Arbuckle was guilty of manslaughter. Much less that he raped her, since the there was no evidence whatever of rape. Life isn't a movie, we don't have to have a hero to cheer for and a villain to hiss at. Yallop did Arbuckle, Rappe, and the rest of us a disservice with his lies that, unfortunately, i'm afraid we'll never hear the end of.

greta

All Darc · Post by **All Darc** » Wed Jul 06, 2011 9:40 pm

Maybe people need to put things in the context of the 20's.

Society was very different, young women was saw as umprotected innocent beings. Religious moral, or maybe better say religious "moral", was pretty strong and prejudice was very present.

It was a time that the father or brother of a girl would get a gun and go to a hard talk with the guy that he suspects that is having something with the girl.

Dave Newhouse: The bottomless fall of Fatty Arbuckle

Dave Newhouse: The bottomless fall of Fatty Arbuckle

Re: Dave Newhouse: The bottomless fall of Fatty Arbuckle