|
Post by Partridge on Sept 26, 2014 17:04:12 GMT -5
I have seen Linda's name listed at least three ways: Maria Linda Ronstadt (1968- magazine article, newspaper item by Nick Clooney) Linda Marie Ronstadt (1967- first Stone Poneys album) Linda Maria Ronstadt (1968- second Stone Poneys album)
Whoever is editing the Wikipedia has chosen to bookmark a citation by Stephen Thomas Erlewine as a source and set that in stone. Stephen Thomas Erlewine knows less about Linda Ronstadt than I do. Whoever the Wikipedia policeman is could just as easily have cited sources for either of the other two versions of the name. Recent court records have shown Maria Linda, but some others have also shown Linda M.
I would have settled this once and for all by getting a copy of Linda's birth certificate. Requirements vary from state to state. In Arizona, you must be related to the person whose birth certificate you are requesting or have some important legal reason to obtain it. I have no legal standing, so the birth certificate idea is off the table.
But her birth name was Maria Linda Ronstadt. So Wikipedia is wrong, bullshit, or whatever.
I think I shall take some time out of my weekend to eff with Wikipedia.
|
|
|
Post by sliderocker on Sept 26, 2014 19:49:33 GMT -5
Maria Linda Ronstadt (1968- magazine article, newspaper item by Nick Clooney) Linda Marie Ronstadt (1967- first Stone Poneys album) Linda Maria Ronstadt (1968- second Stone Poneys album)
Don't you think it rather odd that of the above three items, the only item showing Linda's name as Maria Linda is a magazine or newspaper article by Nick Clooney? And as for Clooney, is he related to Rosemary or George? I recall there was a Nick Clooney related to Rosemary and George who hosted a game show in the 70s. But, newpaper and magazine articles are not always accurate in the reporting, and it's quite conceivable the writer could've switched the names by accident and didn't catch the error.
About Linda's name on the Capitol albums: when performers in a group sign with a record company, they are signed as individuals and not as a group. Linda would had to have signed her contract with the name she was born with because the recording contract is a legal document. If she was christened Maria Linda, she could not sign her contract with either Linda Maria or Linda Marie - the same if she was christened Linda Maria (or Marie), she could not sign a contract as Maria Linda. That would constitute making a false statement, possibly subject to prosecution and imprisonment.
Whoever is editing the Wikipedia has chosen to bookmark a citation by Stephen Thomas Erlewine as a source and set that in stone. Stephen Thomas Erlewine knows less about Linda Ronstadt than I do. Whoever the Wikipedia policeman is could just as easily have cited sources for either of the other two versions of the name. Recent court records have shown Maria Linda, but some others have also shown Linda M.
Likewise, no idea who Erlewine is. He could be a fan or he could be someone who knows Linda, possibly a friend or publicist. If he knows Linda, and is authorized to speak on her behalf, then what? If he is a publicist or a friend and knows for a fact her birth name is Linda Maria and not Maria Linda, that should be the end of the discussion. He doesn't need to know every minute detail about Linda's life. He may be a fan and totally wrong. Or maybe totally right.
Wikipedia: again, you can add to or edit Linda's Wikpedia entry. If it's anything major, you'll have to provide the documentation of your claim for it to stand. One's say so isn't proof. It's heresay and won't stand. If you have proof Linda's birth name is Maria Linda, you'd have to submit that proof but a magazine article doesn't qualify as proof. A court record might but with court records showing both Maria Linda and Linda M., that makes that avenue very murky at best. An old driver's license would possibly qualify for the documentation since a birth certificate is out of the question. But, Wikipedia does not have a policeman blocking or locking content. You just have to have the facts to back what you claim, as otherwise, the only changes you can make are minor ones.
I would have settled this once and for all by getting a copy of Linda's birth certificate. Requirements vary from state to state. In Arizona, you must be related to the person whose birth certificate you are requesting or have some important legal reason to obtain it. I have no legal standing, so the birth certificate idea is off the table.
A birth certificate would've settled the matter, but so too would be asking Linda - if someone could get the chance to ask her at any of the few public appearances she'll be making or asking a close family member or friend. Perferably recorded, as there would still be doubters either way and it would still be hearsay based on someone's say so.
But her birth name was Maria Linda Ronstadt. So Wikipedia is wrong, bullshit, or whatever.
I prefer hearsay, but as solid proof can't be provided that Linda was christened Maria Linda, that's hearsay as well, and being the skeptic I am, until solid proof comes along showing that she was indeed christened Maria Linda, I'll stick with Linda Maria for now.
|
|
|
Post by TP on Sept 26, 2014 20:33:56 GMT -5
what reason would Linda have had for signing an autograph book "Maria Linda Ronstadt"?
|
|
|
Post by philly on Sept 26, 2014 20:51:01 GMT -5
I'd like to ask Linda what her birthname was. Also why her parents chose her first and middle name, I'd find that interesting. And does she consider her own "Maria" to be of Germanic or Spanish origins (or neither).
|
|
|
Post by sliderocker on Sept 26, 2014 21:32:30 GMT -5
what reason would Linda have had for signing an autograph book "Maria Linda Ronstadt"? Unless there was a photo of the person who got the autograph with Linda and/or the handwriting was verified as coming from Linda's hand, it would still be hearsay for anyone who wasn't there and therefore, still not proof. Most people do not sign their first and middle names (with their last name) together on anything (excepting legal documents). Either one or the other but not both. Again, the only way I could see this mattered settled one way or the other would be asking Linda herself or a family member, preferably with the reply caught on audio or video where there can be no doubt. I've got to admit this is a most curious issue and I'd like to know the answer. I don't want to say those who say she was born Maria Linda are wrong as they may be quite right but short of asking Linda or a family member, I don't think there's a way to resolve the question.
|
|
|
Post by POP80 on Sept 27, 2014 16:34:55 GMT -5
"Young reader". That is exactly who this book seems to be geared to. Reading the intro and looking at that happy cover photo it appears sweet and appreciative. The publisher is a self-publishing entity. Reminds me of one of the paperbacks from the early 1980s. Will buy it as a gift for a friends daughter who is 14 and plays acoustic guitar.
Charlotte--I agree with you. I just got my copy and it does look like a pre-teen kind of book. The photos are also blurred for the most part, but it's OK as a brief overview of Linda's career. My overall advice is "save your pennies."
|
|
|
Post by Guest on Sept 27, 2014 19:14:14 GMT -5
As of last year even John Boylan didn't know the answer to that question but he may know it by now. Why not just ask the author why he thinks he is correct? He must have researched it and has the answer.
Linda must prefer the name Linda as that is the name she answers to and made famous regardless of Maria, which is actually a family name as her grandfather also had the name Maria. Don't Mexicans and possibly Catholics frequently use their middle names?
|
|
|
Post by Guest on Sept 27, 2014 19:19:09 GMT -5
Nicholas Joseph "Nick" Clooney (born January 13, 1934) is an American journalist, anchorman, and television host. He is the brother of singers Rosemary Clooney and Betty Clooney and father of actor and film director George Clooney
|
|
|
Post by Tony on Sept 27, 2014 21:25:14 GMT -5
Just to muddy the waters, the local Tucson paper listed her name as Linda Marie Ronstadt for her debutante ball.
|
|
|
Post by Dianna on Sept 27, 2014 21:33:55 GMT -5
As of last year even John Boylan didn't know the answer to that question but he may know it by now. Why not just ask the author why he thinks he is correct? He must have researched it and has the answer. Linda must prefer the name Linda as that is the name she answers to and made famous regardless of Maria, which is actually a family name as her grandfather also had the name Maria. Don't Mexicans and possibly Catholics frequently use their middle names? Ha! I'm both and I don't have a middle name. that sucks! I think in mexico they for example. my mom's cousins' kids.. born in mexico.. one goes by.. martin- manuel.(first and middle) I always refer to him as martin manuel and not just martin or manuel.. same with his sister.. marilupe.. short for maria guadeloupe , So it isn;t always used or I'm not sure about the middle name being used more frequently.. it's the same as here.. I think.... . but anglos used hyphenation in the olden days too.. betty sue.
|
|
|
Post by sliderocker on Sept 28, 2014 0:16:08 GMT -5
Just to muddy the waters, the local Tucson paper listed her name as Linda Marie Ronstadt for her debutante ball. And just to muddy the waters a little bit more, I noticed earlier today before going into work that as a songwriter, BMI has Linda listed as Maria Linda Ronstadt. BMI lists writers by last name, first name, middle name. That would support the idea Linda's given name is Maria Linda, although I'd swear BMI did list it previously as Ronstadt, Linda Maria.
|
|
|
Post by sliderocker on Sept 28, 2014 0:26:33 GMT -5
As of last year even John Boylan didn't know the answer to that question but he may know it by now. Why not just ask the author why he thinks he is correct? He must have researched it and has the answer. Linda must prefer the name Linda as that is the name she answers to and made famous regardless of Maria, which is actually a family name as her grandfather also had the name Maria. Don't Mexicans and possibly Catholics frequently use their middle names? From what I gather from reviews, it's a fluff/hack book, put together from other sources, so asking the author why he thinks Maria Linda is the correct way Linda's name is written out probably wouldn't answer the question. The most accurate source would still be asking Linda or a a close family member.
|
|
|
Post by POP80 on Sept 28, 2014 7:56:29 GMT -5
As a reminder, Linda's sister's name is Gretchen, but she uses the nickname Suzy, so perhaps that's her middle name?
|
|
|
Post by Partridge as guest on Sept 28, 2014 10:42:15 GMT -5
As of last year even John Boylan didn't know the answer to that question but he may know it by now. Why not just ask the author why he thinks he is correct? He must have researched it and has the answer. Linda must prefer the name Linda as that is the name she answers to and made famous regardless of Maria, which is actually a family name as her grandfather also had the name Maria. Don't Mexicans and possibly Catholics frequently use their middle names? From what I gather from reviews, it's a fluff/hack book, put together from other sources, so asking the author why he thinks Maria Linda is the correct way Linda's name is written out probably wouldn't answer the question. The most accurate source would still be asking Linda or a a close family member. I don't think it's fair to call it a hack book. As for being fluff, it does cover Linda's career from start to "finish." It could have been deeper and more detailed, but as he told me, the book was originally commissioned to be a "young reader" book and they wanted him to keep it at about 100 pages. Ultimately he had differences with them and decided to self-publish.
I talked to him and I know his source for this name information- a source I would consider unimpeachable. It is what you in your own words have called the most accurate source.
Hasn't anyone else here read the book? Without that, there can be no real discussion of it, only us bickering over trivial details like the name, which was one line in the book.
|
|
|
Post by Richard W on Sept 28, 2014 19:11:54 GMT -5
Don't have it but will get it so whatever opinions I have about it will have some validity.
|
|
|
Post by sliderocker on Sept 29, 2014 1:03:43 GMT -5
]I don't think it's fair to call it a hack book. As for being fluff, it does cover Linda's career from start to "finish." It could have been deeper and more detailed, but as he told me, the book was originally commissioned to be a "young reader" book and they wanted him to keep it at about 100 pages. Ultimately he had differences with them and decided to self-publish. It may not be fair to refer to it as a hack book but people are entitled to their opinions, even the ones we disagree with. At 138 pages, it sounds like a razor thin book, not enough to cover Linda's 68 years and five decades long career. She deserves an in-depth, more thorough biography, although I think I did see a reference to the book that it was meant to complement Linda's own book, to fill in some of the things she left out of her book. [/p] I talked to him and I know his source for this name information- a source I would consider unimpeachable. It is what you in your own words have called the most accurate source. [/i][/b] On the Linda Maria/Maria Linda issue, I'm starting to think it may be Maria Linda after seeing her BMI listing but one of the reasons I'm such a hardcase skeptic about the issue is sources have never been named regarding this controversy that I'm aware of. On the one hand, we have court documents (listing her name as both Maria Linda and Linda Maria), BMI listing it as Maria Linda and one 60s article that listed it that way. On the other, we also had the two Capitol albums, the Tuscon newspaper that Tony referred to, and I think someone once posted a photo copy of a car title that showed her name as Ronstadt Linda M. But, another reason I'm skeptical is because of knowing how all too easy B.S. has been passed around over the years on other artists that went unchallenged and ended up being regarded as the truth, even though it was still B.S. Once people have their minds made up about certain things, you almost never can get them to believe otherwise. Don't try to confuse them with facts - they know what they know. As for the unimpeachable source, I would assume that to be Bobby Kimmel since I believe it's said he wrote the forward for the book but whoever the source is, were they documented/named in the book as the source? A named source is more believable than an unnamed source. [/p] Hasn't anyone else here read the book? Without that, there can be no real discussion of it, only us bickering over trivial details like the name, which was one line in the book.
[/i][/b] I disagree with you, very respectfully, on that notion, that there can be no discussion of the book. I'm a holdout as a potential buyer as again, what you and others have to say about the book influence whether or not I'll buy the book. I buy a lot of biographies but I don't usually buy them the moment they come out. I wait to see what others have to say about it, and I prefer to see what people who actually bought the book think of it, compared to what critics think. If I see more negatives than positives, that's not a good sign. I only see one review on Amazon but have heard from some others locally who bought the book who didn't like it. That's not enough to make me buy it or not buy it but discussions like these pique my curiosity and give me more of a reason to buy the book.
|
|
|
Post by moon on Sept 29, 2014 7:48:42 GMT -5
Not that this proves anything!!! On a you tube video with LR singing with the Mccarrigle (Sp) Sisters, one the sisters called her Linda Marie
|
|
|
Post by Kevin Green on Oct 4, 2014 7:29:41 GMT -5
I don't think it's fair to call it a hack book. As for being fluff, it does cover Linda's career from start to "finish." It could have been deeper and more detailed, but as he told me, the book was originally commissioned to be a "young reader" book and they wanted him to keep it at about 100 pages. Ultimately he had differences with them and decided to self-publish.
I talked to him and I know his source for this name information- a source I would consider unimpeachable. It is what you in your own words have called the most accurate source.
Hasn't anyone else here read the book? Without that, there can be no real discussion of it, only us bickering over trivial details like the name, which was one line in the book.
I got the book! Received it Wednesday and have read most of it. I think it is a well done. It covers her career and reports on areas that Linda overlooked or fluffed over. It filled in a lot of holes.
There is little or no "dirt" or inside information which we all want to find out a little about, especially if done honestly and with respect. I am a Completist and feel this book, along with Linda's own book, give us a really good career overview. On a literary level, the writing is concise, clean and well written. This is no hack job. A good overview by someone who either knows her or did a lot of homework.
Would have spent more money if there was a deluxe printed edition with better printing to see the photos crisp. I give the book 4 stars and recommend it.
|
|
|
Post by charlotte on Oct 4, 2014 9:56:15 GMT -5
Got it. Read it. I'm with Kevin on this. There is an emphasis on Linda's remarkable and unprecedented, at the time, commerical success. Often these days many hard core are so focused on her artistry that the broad overwhelming popularity of Linda, that did not subside until the 90s, is given a back seat. For some younger than I, 54 yrs, it may be a revelation that before the dreadfully untalented Madonna and the big voiced Whitney Houston Linda was as popular and certainly more musically important than any other female performer. The book could have certainly used better production. My binding is completely bent out of shape. There is no poetic feeling or beautiful literary flourishes as in her own memoir but the glory years are indeed celebrated. I don't care for the references to her, in a few passages,as a diva or difficult, as it rings sexist to me since there is no validation - simply tossed out as clichés. Nice to see Tony acknowledged as well as Doreen , another devoted online advocate of all things Linda.
I will definitely pass it on to my fourteen year old guitar playing friend - who wants to be an "alternative artist" -whatever that is. Lol
|
|
|
Post by moon on Oct 4, 2014 12:14:29 GMT -5
Thanks for all the input about the book. Personally I will pass on buying as it sounds like there is nothing new to learn from it. Regarding some of the comments about LR being such a phenomenon in her time: for some reason that is easy to forget about her. Iwent through her discography on wiki sometime ago and got reacquainted with all she recorded and then it really hit me what again how amazing her work is
|
|
|
Post by Belle on Oct 4, 2014 14:31:41 GMT -5
Sometimes people (or their families) prefer their given middle name over the first, and use that as their primary name throughout their life instead. I have been called by my middle name since day 1, but legal documents (birth cert, social security, passport etc... show me having a different first name--which I am never called, and don't respond to lol.
This may also be the case with Linda.
|
|