|
|
Post by Partridge on May 28, 2023 16:23:54 GMT -5
High Society, February 1979  
|
|
|
|
Post by RobGNYC on May 28, 2023 16:47:24 GMT -5
Either a typo or she misspoke. Linda wasn’t 14 when she left home—17 or 18 I think.
|
|
|
|
Post by Tony on May 28, 2023 19:56:20 GMT -5
That confused me too. I wondered if maybe she briefly ran away from home at 14 and then returned. I did not consider her move to California running away from home because she was an adult at that time.
Putting all these articles together, there is so much contradiction... almost like the Bible.
|
|
|
|
Post by eddiejinnj on May 29, 2023 8:15:35 GMT -5
Linda has not always been the best historian re: her memory. She might have, like the Boss said, briefly ran away at 14 but she of course had to have come back as she did graduate Catalina HS. The Bible was written by people who were culturally influenced and based on what was written down in various sources overs years of time. I love the pic of her at the top of the article. I have never seen it before. She has such light in her eyes. eddiejinnj
|
|
|
|
Post by Dianna on May 29, 2023 14:34:50 GMT -5
That article, IMO does not sound Like Linda.
|
|
|
|
Post by RobGNYC on May 29, 2023 15:49:46 GMT -5
That article, IMO does not sound Like Linda. Three possible reasons: 1. "I know when I'm on the road for a long time I adopt male attitudes, real rock-'n'-roll attitudes...I come back home talking like a trucker." (TIME Magazine cover story 1977) 2. "...she was quick, perhaps too quick, to discuss the details of her personal life ('I wouldn't say open--I was compulsive...')." ("Rolling Stone" cover story October 19, 1978) 3. She tailored her answers to "High Society," which managed to get some version of "sensual"/"sexual" four times in the first paragraph. Why would she give an interview to this magazine (and why would Peter ok it)? Especially in 1979, when the last thing she needed was more publicity (I almost said "exposure"). Was it in part because HS was the first men's magazine with a woman publisher (Gloria Leonard in 1977)? Whatever persuaded her, this is a long way from her excellent "Playboy" interview. |
|
|
|
Post by eddiejinnj on May 31, 2023 20:06:37 GMT -5
Actually, I do remember seeing that pic before. I think she was quite open about the pitfalls of stardom and her loneliness. I can understand how she felt how enclosed her world was being on tour for so long with many of the same people ( just being objective and not saying anything bad about her inner circle).
|
|
|
|
Post by Partridge on Jun 1, 2023 0:16:42 GMT -5
Do you think it's possible that this interview was done one or two years earlier and was just now being published? Nothing in that interview, other than one of the pictures, screams late 1978 or 1979. It did say the interview as conducted at her Malibu home.
|
|
|
|
Post by RobGNYC on Jun 1, 2023 6:27:50 GMT -5
Do you think it's possible that this interview was done one or two years earlier and was just now being published? Nothing in that interview, other than one of the pictures, screams late 1978 or 1979. It did say the interview as conducted at her Malibu home. Linda says “I’m almost 33 years old.” That would put it at late 1978-early 1979. |
|
|
|
Post by Partridge on Jun 1, 2023 12:18:21 GMT -5
Linda says “I’m almost 33 years old.” That would put it at late 1978-early 1979. I hate being wrong, but hey it happens. |
|
|
|
Post by eddiejinnj on Jun 1, 2023 15:26:13 GMT -5
I thought I was wrong once but I was mistaken. Couldn't resist that old joke, lol eddiejinnj
|
|
|
|
Post by Partridge on Jun 7, 2023 1:49:43 GMT -5
I love the pic of her at the top of the article. I have never seen it before. She has such light in her eyes. eddiejinnj It appears to be a mirror image of the photo used in the TIME Magazine article. One of my peeves is reversed photographs. |
|
|
|
Post by eddiejinnj on Jun 7, 2023 8:47:55 GMT -5
They used a reverse photo for the Capitol years cover. It was never a favorite pic of mine. I guess it was the hairstyle. eddiejinnj
|
|
