Talk:Edie Sedgwick/Archives/2013

Copy Vio

A long article by Patrick J. Webster called "In The Factory: Dylan and Warhol's World" in the anthology "All Across The Telegraph: A Bob Dylan Handbook", edited by Michael Gray and Jon Bauldie (Sidgwick & Jackson, 1987), makes the case that the subject of Like A Rolling Stone was Warhol's actress Edie Sedgwick and the diplomat was Andy Warhol.

In his book "The Philosophy of Andy Warhol" (Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, 1975) Warhol recalled people suggesting to him that the song included an attack on him:

"I'd get answers like "I hear he [Dylan] feels you destroyed Edie" or "Listen to Like A Rolling Stone - I think you're the diplomat on the chrome horse, man." I didn't know exactly what they meant by that - I never listened to the words of songs - but I got the tenor of what people were saying, that Dylan didn't like me, that he blamed me for Edie's drugs."

Whatever the truth of it, the song is a very good match for Edie's life up to then!

• Note: this article is mostly an exact copy of the Edie Sedgwick bio on the myspace.com fansite (http://groups.myspace.com/ediesedgwick/). However, looking at the edit history of this article shows it was built up over time in multiple edits, so I think that either the Myspace article is copied from wikipedia, or the same author wrote both. Therefore I have not tagged it as a copyvio, however, that remains a possibility. Thatcher131 20:22, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

NPOV tag

I'm wary of the neutrality of this article. The tone, amongst other things, is all over the place; other than the fact it's poorly cited, the section describing her years with Bob Dylan and Co. seems to delve into a long winded critique/rebuttal of the latest film portrayal of Ms. Sedgwick's life that doesn't belong here (at least in not such detail). Qjuad 02:41, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

Photographs?

Could someone find photographs of Edie Sedgwick that are suitable for use here? There are a few here, but I don't know if they are public domaine or not: http://amanoutoftime.livejournal.com/600411.html?mode=reply

Google search images (but take care, search is by name only and is occasional trace of other individuals) https://www.google.com.au/search?q=edie+sedgwick&hl=en&tbo=d&rlz=1C1RNPN_enAU411AU411&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ei=5fLtUMi9KqOImQXX94HIBw&ved=0CAcQ_AUoAA&biw=1024&bih=677 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Laurencebeck (talk • contribs) 22:59, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

Questionable line

"She first gained enormous popularity due to online communities such as [1], [2], among others." -- I moved this questionable line here because (A) It appears to be an ad, (B) There's no cite for this claim, (C) Sedgwick is not "enormously popular" now, and her level of popularity was probably about the same in the 1960's and 1970's. If you want to put this back in the article please provide reliable cites for this info. -- 201.51.231.176 07:35, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

Filmography

I don't know how to format this, sorry. But many of the links under Filmography are false-- misdirected or just broken.

Major Edits

I changed a bit on the Edie Sedgwick article because it's directly copied & pasted from the warholstars.org bio page on Edie. It's a good page but, it's basically an opinion of Edie. Overall, this article seems a bit weird in it's styling.

I also changed the Filmography section because it didn't have a lot of the films Edie appeared in and the redirects weren't correct.

I'd edit/rewrite more but, I'm unsure how to properly credit sources and references. I tried to remain as neutral and factual as possible so, when I finally figure out how to credit sources, I hope to rewrite this page a bit more.

Pinkadelica 04:39, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

Neutrality Dispute

I've noticed that this article has been in dispute since Feb of '07. If no one has a problem with it, I'd like to rewrite it. Most of it is copied straight from the Warholstars.org page so I think a complete rewrite is in order. I've got plenty of sources, so if no one objects, I'll rewrite this sometime in the next 30 days. Pinkadelica 06:19, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

Just a quick check since there hasn't been any talk page activity in quite some time, is there still a POV concern with this article? Shell ^babelfish 23:20, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

Not sure where to add this

Edie's in the musical based on Ultra Violet's auto biography. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.246.109.6 (talk) 00:27, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

Factory Girl Movie

Are there any informed opinions from people who knew Warhol, Sedgewick and Dylan as to how accurate or inaccurate the movie "Factory Girl" is? I was hoping to find some opinions on the film because it seems to be more of a sharply biased condemnation of Andy Warhol than anything else. Was it a propaganda film made by the "I hate Andy Warhol fan club" or is it something we could reference with confidence in mixed conversation? Does information about the film belong in her biography or would it be best to put it on the page for "Factory Girl"? 98.211.129.152 (talk) 04:48, 29 December 2008 (UTC)

As long as Factory Girl is mentioned and linked to in this article (which it is), information about the film belongs in the article for the film. As for the film's accuracy, you could probably find some relatively informed opinions by following the links under "References" and "External links" over at that article. Bear in mind that any information you add to a Wikipedia article should have a footnote to a reliable source; see WP:V and WP:RS. --Fullobeans (talk) 15:23, 29 December 2008 (UTC)

Edie Factory Girl, the book by David Dalton and Nat Finkelstein

David Dalton is a former assistant of Warhol. Books by Dalton before this one include A Year in the Life of Andy Warhol. The sources used in Edie Factory Girl are mainly former “Warholites” - Gerard Malanga, Billy Name, Ultra Violet, Bibbe Hansen, and others. (Finkelstein is credited as the book's photojournalist.)

A comparison of this book with the film that has an almost identical name is found in the article “Factory Girl.” The section points to “considerable” differences, deals with controversies, and contrasts the book, an account of the actress as part of the Factory set, with the film, a story about one character and her relationships with two others. R Waldo WCU (talk) 04:28, 15 March 2009 (UTC)68.84.216.26 (talk) 04:23, 15 March 2009 (UTC)

Recent edits

I recently added some new material to this article and subsequently began adding inline citations, mostly referencing Jean Stein's book on Edie. Unfortunately, for reasons I don't understand, the citations I added did not save to the page, so I will work on replacing these ASAP. More unfortunately, however, much of the material I added regarding Edie's early life and her years in New York were subsequently removed - twice - by another (unsigned) editor.

I object to this action and strongly dispute the reasons given by that person for the deletion of much of that material. i.e. that it was "...too trivial..." and that Edie is merely "... notable for her association with Warhol, not her brother's suicide...".

Like any biographical article on Wikipedia, I assume that the aim is to provide a comprehensive and reasonably authoritative overview of its subject. Whilst it is self-evident that Edie is best known for her meteoric career as a Warhol 'superstar', that observation does not of itself justify the exclusion/excision of other parts of her life story. I would argue that there is ample evidence from Stein's biography alone that Edie's dysfunctional upbringing forged the unique personality that made her so compelling to her peers, yet also left her effectively incapable of dealing with 'normal' life. Likewise, I believe that an exploration of the deeply troubled psychology of her immediate family -- especially her abusive father and her passive-aggressive, enabling mother -- helps to explain why apparently privileged, talented, beautiful young people like Edie and her brothers developed the self-destructive tendencies that led to their tragic and untimely deaths.

I intend to restore the material was removed, with appropriate citations. I would suggest that the proper course for anyone who has an issue with this would be to present their objections in a reasoned manner in *this* forum, rather than simply vandalising substantial contributions by another editor without prior consultation. Dunks (talk) 14:57, 23 May 2010 (UTC)

Barbiturate level

".48mg%" makes no sense, neither medically, nor in layman's terms. Chemicals in the body are measured by micrograms (or milligrams) per liter of blood, or per unit of mass in tissue. This needs clarification. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.23.6.71 (talk) 15:34, 13 June 2010 (UTC)

Madonna

On the Deeper and Deeper page it says Madonna portrays Edie in the music video. Certainly this could be added to the list of portrayls.66.252.163.190 (talk) 06:02, 9 October 2010 (UTC)

Early life rift requesting citation and/or additional information

The penultimate paragraph's final sentence in Edie Sedgwick#Family background and early life abruptly reveals:

"At this point there was apparently a serious rift between Edie's parents and her mother left the country with Edie, intending to take her to stay with a noble family in Austria but this arrangement was terminated almost immediately and Edie and her mother reportedly returned to the United States within 48 hours."

This sentence appears on an island. The maddening obscurity employed here is striking given how drastic the measured response. The nature of the rift, name of the Austrian nobles willing on short notice to act as sudden guardian, or how the arrangement was so quickly scuppered is inexplicably neither explained nor sourced; at least one of these would improve the article for the curious reader as its vague referencing is, admittedly, a peculiarly frustrating read. --eYeDEF (talk) 22:22, 20 February 2011 (UTC)

I have removed the sentence. If you find content that confuses you or doesn't make sense, feel free to edit or remove it yourself. Pinkadelica^♣ 22:35, 20 February 2011 (UTC)

Although opaque, the added info is intriguing as it is informative and deserves to be left in, as such in undid your edit. Was hoping someone more familiar might give at least extemporaneous explanation. Should this not happen, I will follow up and research a proper reference as my time permits.--Ydef (talk) 23:26, 20 February 2011 (UTC)

I actually am familiar with the subject which is why I removed the sentence. Being familiar with the subject and the book from which this particular content was taken from, I can assure that the way it is presented is how it is presented in the book - that Edie went to Austria with her mother to stay with "a noble family from Vienna" and that there was "a big blow up" between Edie and her father shortly after they arrived. In short, not enough detail is given in the source to flesh it out. If I thought it a notable event or thought additional details would be helpful, I wouldn't have simply removed the sentence. Additionally, far too much trivial content from Edie: An American Biography is being repeated here so something has to give. This article should be a jumping-off point about the subject, not a recap of every anecdote told in Edie. If you would like to do additional research about this particular event in hopes of finding more details to help those curious readers out there, I wish you luck as there is a limited amount of information regarding Edie's life in print. Pinkadelica^♣ 00:34, 21 February 2011 (UTC)

The bridge between Edie's withdrawal from St. Timothy's School,1959, Maryland and the entry into Silver Hill Hospital, Connecticut, 1962, may not be noticed in a Wikipedia page but it is unsatisfyingly incomplete even so in Edie: An American Biography (Plimpton, Stein). The daughter's education needed to be completed (following St. Timothy's) and a decision was to place her in a European 'finishing school' - not in Switzerland as might be expected but in an equivalant form in Austria.

In Vienna with the family looming over Edie, in what is clearly a demonstration of the father's deranged bent upon his daughter, he threatened to separate from the family if Edie did not return to America. There is no explanation for that and as Pinkadelica^♣ says, "not enough information is given" in the Plimpton/Stein book. The mother was devastated and had to agree.

While Edie should have been out in the world relating to her own contemporaries in the real world and learning about it, how it worked, her father troweled her into an exclusive sanitarium.

From there to a State institution, Westchester County, NY and from there to Cambridge, Mass.

The Vienna bridge, however fleeting, accumulatively adds to the picture of this family. --Laurencebeck (talk) 10:28, 2 December 2012 (UTC)

1982 George Plimpton book, EDIE, should be used as definitive source

To solve the various complaints about neutrality and verifiability above, use the famous, and well written, EDIE, as definitive source for a rewrite. Written thirty years ago while all the eye witnesses were still alive, underwritten by George Plimpton, who was as familiar with Sedgwick's society world as he was with Warhol's scene, it can't be improved on in 2012. Profhum (talk) 05:56, 7 November 2012 (UTC)

Edie is already being used as a source for the article because there aren't many reliable sources about Sedgwick's life. Also, the NPOV discussion took place in 2007. The article has since been rewritten. Pinkadelica^♣ 08:58, 7 November 2012 (UTC)

"Heiress"?

Two editors (or one editor with an unstable IP) (User:31.199.244.145 and User talk:93.44.168.205) are wanting to remove the characterization "heiress" from the lede. The conversation so far, in the form of edit summaries, has been:

• Remove term, summary "everyone is heir of someone..." (User talk:93.44.168.205)
• Restore term, summary " "heiress" is commonly used and understood to mean "her dad/family was rich" and that's the meaning here." (User:Herostratus)
• Remove term, summary "Still, is 'having a rich dad' a 'quality' that should appear in the first line of a bio? It is not an occupation nor an activity." (User:31.199.244.145)

So here we are. So let's talk about this.

First of all, the term heiress. I looked this up, and unless the reference is to genetic inheritance (unlikely), then there are two main meanings for "heiress":

• A legal meaning: a female person who is named as a beneficiary a given will.
• A common meaning: a rich woman who has inherited her wealth.

And here's the particulars:

• Wiktionary, the free dictionary, gives the meaning of "a woman who stands to inherit", with "inherit" having various meanings, the important ones here being "To receive (property or a title etc), by legal succession or bequest after the previous owner's death" or "To receive a characteristic from one's ancestors by genetic transmission."
• Wikipedia, the online encyclopedia, at Heiress gives a definition of "A female beneficiary of an inheritance" wit: that link beginning "A beneficiary (also, in trust law, cestui que use) in the broadest sense is a natural person or other legal entity who receives money or other benefits from a benefactor".
• Dictionary.com gives "a woman who inherits or has a right of inheritance, especially a woman who has inherited or will inherit considerable wealth."
• Thefreedictionary.com gives several definitions, all similar: "A woman who is an heir, especially to great wealth", "a woman who inherits or expects to inherit great wealth", "(Law) Property law a female heir", "a woman who inherits or has a right of inheritance, esp. one who inherits great wealth", and (from their thesaurus) "heiress - a female heir" drilling down to "inheritress, inheritrix, heir, heritor, inheritor - a person who is entitled by law or by the terms of a will to inherit the estate of another".
• Merriam-Webster online gives "a girl or woman who is an heir; especially : a girl or woman who inherits a large amount of money" and "a woman who is an heir especially to great wealth"

OK. So it looks like "heiress" has two main meanings, a legal one ("beneficiary") and a common one ("female scion of a wealthy family").

Well what do you think was the intended meaning here? Maybe a reader will be of the mind "OK, heiress, someone who inherits. 'Inherit' means 'to derive (existing functionality) from a superclass' and is a characteristic of computer programs, so Edie Sedgwick must be a computer program" so we need to guard against that too. Or maybe the meaning was just "inherited her characteristics from her biological parents. In that case, calling her an "heiress" would be similar to calling her a "mammal" or "carbon-based life form", which we can suppose most readers can infer, and so it would be redundant.

Well what do you think is the meaning conveyed, dear reader? If we're at a party and I say "Did you know that Julia Louis-Dreyfus is an heiress?" (she is, you know) and you reply "Oh, she inherited genetic characteristics from both her parents, like every other human? So what?" you know what will happen? Pretty soon you won't be invited to any more parties. Well please don't act that way here either, kthx. Any person facile with English idiom understands which meaning is conveyed here.

OK, then the objection "[I]s 'having a rich dad' a 'quality' that should appear in the first line of a bio? It is not an occupation nor an activity".

Well I'd say say so. Well for one thing Sedgwick didn't really have an occupation, nor an activity beyond just being Edie Sedgwick. Is her class background and her ability to live in material comfort with no need for a job or career (or husband) relevant enough to allude to in the lede? Well yeah I'd say so. She was a rich girl and knowing that is an important part of getting a handle on her.

If we delete "heiress" we leaving just "actress, socialite and fashion model". She wasn't really an actress nor famous as an actress. Her films played a very limited run, and if you're just being yourself with no script (not sure how often that was the case, though) it's not really acting just because someone is pointing a camera at you. People point cameras at me all the time (home movies) but that doesn't make me an "actor", nor would I be an "actor" for encyclopedic purposes if I appeared in community theater productions as a hobby, which is about the level we're talking about here. As to "model", it's not clear that she did much professional modeling and any rate wasn't a famous professional model; she had a fashion sense and had personal notoriety and charisma so people copied her style, but that doesn't make her a model. "Socialite" of course is open to the same objection as "heiress" -- most everybody has at least one acquaintance, and talking to them is socializing, so most everybody is a "socialite" I guess.

So what was she? We're kind of left with "Edith Minturn "Edie" Sedgwick (April 20, 1943 – November 16, 1971) was a carbon-based life form and mammal, who..." which I think leaves something to be desired. Let's not be pedantic paper-shufflers here and so let's restore "heiress" to the lede. Herostratus (talk) 15:46, 23 September 2013 (UTC)

She seems to have been a celebutante before the term was coined. But see, e.g., the opening sentence of Paris Hilton. Sedgwick was famous for being rich and famous. Fat&Happy (talk) 17:10, 23 September 2013 (UTC)

Right. Hilton is describe as an "heiress". If it's a term we want to avoid generally (which is possible), we probably ought to have a bigger discussion about that. Meanwhile, no further discussion occurring, I'm restoring the term. Herostratus (talk) 13:07, 3 October 2013 (UTC)