Mary Ann Sorrentino's 2 Cents Worth

Opinions, Observations and Musings

Mary Ann Sorrentino

Mary Ann Sorrentino
Location
RI or FL depending on season, USA
Birthday
June 19
Bio
Mary Ann is a columnist for the Keene (NH) Sentinel, the Providence Phoenix and other newspapers and has appeared on Salon.com She was an Associated Press Award-winning radio talk host for 13 years and the Executive Director of Planned Parenthood of RI 1977-1987. Her most recent book, ABORTION - The A Word (Gadd Books) is available on line and in major bookstores.

MY RECENT POSTS

DECEMBER 13, 2011 11:24AM

Frankly, Rhett REALLY Didn't Give a Damn

Rate: 14 Flag

(The original version of this post appears in my column in today's Keene, Sentinel)

  Loretta_Young_in_She_Had_to_Say_Yes_trailer_2

(Young in, "She Had to Say Yes" which, apparently, she did)

  judy02

Judy Lewis 2002 - The apple didn't fall far from the tree

About 75 years ago, when Hollywood starlet Loretta Young started filming “Call of the Wild” with film icon Clark Gable, she probably didn’t imagine her responding to such a “Call” would change her life forever. Single and a “devout Catholic,” Young left the film shoot pregnant and fearing a scandal that would devastate her career and Gable’s.

The daughter born of that union, Judy Lewis, 76, died this month.  Lewis spent much of her life grappling with the painful reality that she was raised as Young’s “adopted” child rather than her natural born child. Lewis as even kept in seclusion by Young for a few months following her birth, then actually placed in a children’s home only to be retrieved two years later. All this was to add more credibility to the adoption myth.

In her 1994 book, Uncommon Knowledge, Lewis wrote of the painful abandonment she felt and, ironically, the truth about her parentage was the one issue that created divisive friction between mother and daughter their entire adult lives. Young only told Lewis who her father was after Gable died in 1966 when Lewis was in her 30’s.

Lewis wrote that a similar situation evolving when her book was published would not have caused such a stir. Today, 16 years beyond that, it not only creates no stir, it is almost common practice. Single women have and raise children of their own with no marriage plan: celebrities routinely have sumptuous weddings where their toddler out-of-wedlock children serve as ring bearers and flower girls.

In today’s new context, it is not uncommon to hear comments about what some see as the deteriorating morality of our society. Single parenthood is still frowned upon by many, and “single mothers,” in particular have become an idiom for “loose and irresponsible” women, despite the fact that their loved and cared-for children often seem perfectly content and thriving.

Though every child in an ideal world deserves and should have two loving parents, there can be no question that one loving and caring parent is certainly better than subjecting any child to the kind of abandonment, shame and rejection Loretta Young used against her daughter. Going through the bureaucratic hoops of placing the baby in an orphanage only to fetch her again two years later to raise her as an “adopted” child gives new meaning to the word bizarre. And to withhold the identity of the child’s true father until after that father was dead and the child over thirty years-old makes it clear whose interests the mother protected.

Unplanned pregnancies happen. Sometimes they are terminated: usually they go forward to the birth of a child. When that happens, both the mother and the father of that child have an obligation to the child. In Judy Lewis’s case, her mother clearly favored her career and former lover over her child.

Clark Gable as the father, on the other hand, apparently was telling them both what he told Scarlet in “Gone with the Wind”—that, “Frankly, my dear[s], I don’t give a damn.”

 

 

 

Your tags:

TIP:

Enter the amount, and click "Tip" to submit!
Recipient's email address:
Personal message (optional):

Your email address:

Comments

Type your comment below:
This is quite interesting and I admire your take on the whole thing.
Maryann, I love this post, and learning more about the "behind the scenes stuff." Did the daughter look like Gable or Young? (Let's hope Young.) RRRR
I didn't know any of this. How sad it is that her ". . .mother clearly favored her career and former lover over her child."

R♥
I can understand what Loretta Young did, as heinous as it was. I was raised in the 50s, so I know a little about ignorance. And she was a public figure and such normal real life shenanigans would have killed her career. Not his so much, but certainly hers.

My guess is, it wasn't about "protecting" Clark Gable. It was about protecting everyone. Clearly he didn't want his child in his life. If he did, he would have been at the very least, a presence in her life. A beloved uncle or something. As her mother did, her father could have as well...created an illusion, an alternate relationship that would have kept them together.

No good would have come of it I don't think. I can be wrong, but I think Loretta Young did what she could to keep her child without suffering professional "consequences". Two years is not a short time, but it's not a very long time either. My guess is, she was in close contact with them throughout their separation. Did she never visit? This is such an interesting story...such dilemmas.

TO me what's sad is that her mother did her best to remain a working professional and raise her daughter but she comes out of it looking rather poorly from her daughters POV.

That was a heavy load to carry back then, having children "out of wedlock". Children were of such unions were considered to be "bastards". Ghastly ignorance and everyone suffered. I can't imagine a better solution than what Ms Young did. I really can't. So sad that her daughter is angry.
I heard about this case. Very sad. What it must have done to Judy Lewis's self esteem and identity to discover the origin of her birth and that she came second to her mother's career. Happens all too often, though. Rated.
The more things change, the more they stay the same! (not always true) I think it is an improvement the way the situation would be handled today. The stigma which was once put on illegitimate children in the past came from a false sense of morality to be sure.
R
Fascinating to read, as I was only vaguely aware of the details of Lewis's story. Your comments are a reminder to everyone of the responsibility we owe to our children. You also bring some of our stars down to Earth. Super post.
Very sad. Did Gable know? Perhaps this was all about Ms. Young's wishes. I wonder. Too bad for the child. What parents!
Loretta looked like a glamorous movie star but she was self -righteous mess. What she and Gable did to their daughter is reprehensible.
Thanks, Sarah- Glad you enjoyed this...and welcome.
Bernardine - I've now posted Judy's photo above for you and all to see...spitting image if Mom, methinks.
Fusun...Young was also trying to save HIS career...he was married at the time...she was single
"Foolish Monkey" - her daughter's not angry, she's dead: and she died rejected by her mother and not knowing her father all her life. Please don't make excuses for that kind of parental abuse by two rich and powerful people who had the means to do better.

Honestly, think a bit more out of the box, for god's sake...Loretta Young was a rich woman: she didn't have to go through all these pseudo-Catholic hoops to wreck her child's world just to protect her and her lover's careers. She wasn't like the average woman of her time. She could have easily embraced her child and eventually no one would have given a damn.
Out on a Limb- Thanks for the thoughtful read/comment...just one observation-- There are no "illegitimate" children...only irresponsible parents.
Sheila - Gable knew but didn't meet Judy until she was grown up.
Thanks, Paul...Stars need to be brought down to earth most of the time...they are either way out there in space or down in the gutter somewhere, but seldom on terra firma.
Knowing a little about my father's sensitivity about the fear that he was a "bastard" child, I have a glimmer of understanding. Growing up in the fifties and sixties and having a different perspective, I agree with you, Mary Ann. I have only read one other review of the book but I believe that even after Young "adopted" Lewis she treated her rather poorly.

Loretta Young's television show was one we watched regularly when I was a kid. I remember her sweeping through a doorway, always in a flowing gown. In our family she was seen as something of a saint, her devout Catholicism was always observed and admired. I thought she was a little creepy. I think that even more now. But does anyone really think that big Hollywood stars aren't generally pretty ruthless about their career advancement?
Yes, nerd, I agree...the other thing they often do is use their kids as "props" for good publicity. I think Madonna and Anjelina do this, for example.
I'd read a little bit about this Mary Ann, plus FM's comment and your reply. The public morality of the day was awfully heavy-handed. I was recently reading of how Ingrid Bergman was driven out of Hollywood and the U.S. for having an affair with Roberto Rosselini. Although they married in the same year that the affair began, she stayed away for six years.

From those days, can you think of any prominent woman who owned up to having a child out of wedlock and refused to name the father?
She was 67 in that picture?

Hi Mary Ann!

*waving*
I'll never feel the same about Loretta Young again. That was a different time; teen age girls left school to live with their "aunt", children were given up through private adoption, or never got here at all. How could anyone have looked at Judy Lewis and not known the truth? R
I did not know this, Mary Ann. All I remember of Loretta Young was her TV show where, at the beginning, the door to a grand ballroom opens and she comes swirling in in an evening gown. Some philosopher--I forget who--has said one can measure the state of a culture by the way it treats its children. Your post makes that case.
Mary Ann, I'm not making excuses for anyone. I don't know them. What I am saying is what Ms Young did given what I know which admittedly isn't much, seems perfectly understandable to me. Not everyone is cut out to be a crusader. At the time the Catholic Church was perfectly willing and able and active in taking on quite a few crusades of their own - morality crusades. As a result of MANY churches actions in this area, the Hayes office was created.

Ms Young did better than most. She had a baby out of wedlock and made arrangements with an orphanage to take her and adopt her. She didn't have to sacrifice her career and she kept her life and her affairs private, did not expose herself or her daughter to ridicule or moral judgments. Those were NOT the times of bastard children acting as ring bearers. Sometimes there much to be said for privacy and discretion.

Whether she should have told her daughter of her father's identity is not for me to determine. As in ALL things there are always details that are omitted. I'm not saying she was right to do it but I refuse to judge her for it either. What HE did was his to account for. NONE of us know the circumstances. What appears to others as protecting him, might in fact have been an effort to protect her daughter.

So Ms Young should have taken on morality and mores and equality of the sexes? What I see is a mother who tried to do the best for herself and her child and I see a father who was not there. And I don't know exactly why.

If this woman was estranged from her mother at the end of her life, then I'm sorry for both of them. That's the saddest part of this story - embracing anger instead of acceptance and forgiveness. But what do I know? I wasn't there.
Foolish Monkey,
Of course you have the right to your opinions. I still disagree strongly with what you say...which is also my right.
Merry Christmas.
Thanks, Maryann, for posting the picture. She sure looks like her mother! Looks for traces of Gable. Eyebrows? Larger mouth? Not sure. Thanks for updating.
Larry-
Hi right back atcha...Merry merry etc.
I always knew this story & was repelled by it & I'm looking forward to reading her book now. R
Everything I know about the hypocrisy of how "illegitimate" children and their mothers were treated in the 1930's, 40's and 50's, I learned from the movies, and this sounds like a movie. In fact, I think it was, (To Each His Own, The Old Maid, etc.) What she did was reprehensible, but Young's life was all about appearances. She could not have simply raised her daughter and kept her career. She would have had to choose. Think about what happened to Ingrid Bergman years later. Her films were banned and she was denounced by the church.

I don't think they knew as much about early attachment and how children who spent the first two years in institutions never lose the feeling of abandonment. I can imagine all the rationalizations that went into Young's decision.

I'm glad humans have evolved a little since then.
What interests me a lot is that most of the comments who talk about parental responsibility to the child talk about Loretta Young's responsibility - while the guy who impregnated her gets off relatively easy! Not much has changed in that area, sadly.