![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Audrey Hepburn, actress
Aug. 18th, 2019 10:32 pmThis post is part of the Summer under the Stars Blogathon held by Journeys in Classic Film and Musings of a Classic Film Addict.
Audrey Hepburn may have been one of the most photogenic people who ever lived. Stacks of books (I own a few of them) have been published full of shots of her looking glamorous, sophisticated, playful, pensive, ethereal, down to earth, but always beautiful. It didn't hurt that she was born with impeccable fashion sense, either. Her looks and style alone were enough to make her an icon.
But somehow, amid all that, what tends to get lost is that she had a significant amount of talent at her chosen profession.
Perhaps part of that was that it wasn't really her "chosen" profession; she became an actress almost accidentally, after she grew too tall to become a ballerina. Perhaps part of it was that very appearance that made her so memorable -- as with many beautiful people, many unfairly assume she got by on her looks. And perhaps part of it was the fact that she didn't believe much in her own talent at all, always insisting that her success was largely based on luck. How could she believe in it, when her own mother said things to her like "Considering that you have no talent, it's really extraordinary where you've got"? Imagine trying to keep your career going with a judgment like that hanging over your head.
And yet she did, precisely because she WAS talented. Of course she had a persona; most of the great classic stars did. It was par for the course then. But like them, she also had range, which meant she could take that persona and mold it into any number of characters.
Confronted with people who think Hepburn was more of a fashionista than an actress, I often suggest that they watch certain of her movies back-to-back: say, Roman Holiday (proper princess who lets loose in Rome), The Nun's Story (intense nurse in a religious order who drives herself to the point of a complete breakdown), and Charade (slightly ditzy young widow chasing Cary Grant and a small fortune). Or Wait until Dark (terrorized young blind woman with a spine of steel) and How to Steal a Million (stylish Parisienne who teams up with a presumed burglar to protect her father, an art forger). Most of these characters had traits in common, including backbone and charisma, and all of them looked gorgeous (frequently in Givenchy), but all were indelibly different. Several earned her Oscar nominations (she won for Roman Holiday, her first starring role). All of them, whether serious or fun or both, were utterly believable.
My first Audrey Hepburn movie was My Fair Lady, and I've always been glad of that. Unlike most of those who already knew her as an elegant waif, I was able to come to it with no expectations. I completely believed her as the gritty flower seller, as much as I believed her as the transformed society lady. Especially because of the way she lets the two blend into each other at times. When post-transformation Eliza is startled, for instance, her inflections go slightly Cockney again. Not completely, just slightly, so you get a sense of what's still under the surface but carefully restrained. (I'm not talking about the racetrack scene, the one moment when she drops all restraint, but moments like when she sees her father dressed for his wedding.) Even her facial expression takes on characteristics of Cockney Eliza.
Actresses do things like that. Not style icons.
I'm not saying there's anything wrong with being a style icon. I did buy all those books, after all. I'm just saying that Audrey Hepburn was so much more than that, and deserves to be remembered as so much more than that. Next time you watch one of her movies, try to put aside all the preconceptions and just watch her inhabit her character. I guarantee you'll find yourself savoring the presence of a master talent.
Audrey Hepburn may have been one of the most photogenic people who ever lived. Stacks of books (I own a few of them) have been published full of shots of her looking glamorous, sophisticated, playful, pensive, ethereal, down to earth, but always beautiful. It didn't hurt that she was born with impeccable fashion sense, either. Her looks and style alone were enough to make her an icon.
But somehow, amid all that, what tends to get lost is that she had a significant amount of talent at her chosen profession.
Perhaps part of that was that it wasn't really her "chosen" profession; she became an actress almost accidentally, after she grew too tall to become a ballerina. Perhaps part of it was that very appearance that made her so memorable -- as with many beautiful people, many unfairly assume she got by on her looks. And perhaps part of it was the fact that she didn't believe much in her own talent at all, always insisting that her success was largely based on luck. How could she believe in it, when her own mother said things to her like "Considering that you have no talent, it's really extraordinary where you've got"? Imagine trying to keep your career going with a judgment like that hanging over your head.
And yet she did, precisely because she WAS talented. Of course she had a persona; most of the great classic stars did. It was par for the course then. But like them, she also had range, which meant she could take that persona and mold it into any number of characters.
Confronted with people who think Hepburn was more of a fashionista than an actress, I often suggest that they watch certain of her movies back-to-back: say, Roman Holiday (proper princess who lets loose in Rome), The Nun's Story (intense nurse in a religious order who drives herself to the point of a complete breakdown), and Charade (slightly ditzy young widow chasing Cary Grant and a small fortune). Or Wait until Dark (terrorized young blind woman with a spine of steel) and How to Steal a Million (stylish Parisienne who teams up with a presumed burglar to protect her father, an art forger). Most of these characters had traits in common, including backbone and charisma, and all of them looked gorgeous (frequently in Givenchy), but all were indelibly different. Several earned her Oscar nominations (she won for Roman Holiday, her first starring role). All of them, whether serious or fun or both, were utterly believable.
My first Audrey Hepburn movie was My Fair Lady, and I've always been glad of that. Unlike most of those who already knew her as an elegant waif, I was able to come to it with no expectations. I completely believed her as the gritty flower seller, as much as I believed her as the transformed society lady. Especially because of the way she lets the two blend into each other at times. When post-transformation Eliza is startled, for instance, her inflections go slightly Cockney again. Not completely, just slightly, so you get a sense of what's still under the surface but carefully restrained. (I'm not talking about the racetrack scene, the one moment when she drops all restraint, but moments like when she sees her father dressed for his wedding.) Even her facial expression takes on characteristics of Cockney Eliza.
Actresses do things like that. Not style icons.
I'm not saying there's anything wrong with being a style icon. I did buy all those books, after all. I'm just saying that Audrey Hepburn was so much more than that, and deserves to be remembered as so much more than that. Next time you watch one of her movies, try to put aside all the preconceptions and just watch her inhabit her character. I guarantee you'll find yourself savoring the presence of a master talent.
![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif){kind=small}
![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-community.gif){kind=small}
