Saturday, 2 October 2010

Oh my Goodness!


One of my contacts posted this on Yahoo Answers and I just had to share.

It's Shirley Temple singing... I don't know what film it's from, but it's

Oh...my...Goodness!

22 comments:

  1. Shirley Temple is 'where' I got my name 'from.' She asked her father, to make a 'promise' to her, to tell the truth. She asked him to 'promise,' 'honorbright,' to tell the truth. So, my goodness!

    ReplyDelete
  2. Too cute. Thanks for sharing, Okei. I wish I was well informed on my Shirley Temple movies. I have seen a lot of them, but to know exactly which one this song from would require too much research for my early morning, not-yet-caffeinated brain to handle right now. Have a great day ~ Blessings!

    ReplyDelete
  3. A special person lived in that little head. She lived her entire life, sweet and kind and positive. It didn't 'ruin her.'

    ReplyDelete
  4. You too, Kathy!

    She still lives, bless her.

    "She began her screen career in 1932 at the age of three, and, in 1934, skyrocketed to superstardom"

    ReplyDelete
  5. She was an ambassador for a number of years.

    ReplyDelete
  6. I thing the Movie is: Poor Little Rich Girl. Year:1936

    and the song is: oh my Goodness !!!!

    thanks okie

    ReplyDelete
  7. Thanks Lin! I really need to go back and watch some of these oldies one day, and indeed, why don't they make movies like that anymore?

    It's also curious how the countries represented are all arch-enemies of America at this time (or soon to be anyway), so I'm speculating this film had a hidden message for peace. Not that it succeeded, but can you imagine a children's film nowadays in which Iranian, Cuban, Chinese and Russian dolls were cuddled. Somehow I don't think so. But the flip-side of this, is that perhaps the film's message could be considered subversively promoting a policy of appeasement.

    Not to read too much into a tiny scene of a movie I haven't seen or anything, lol.
    Thanks again for the details!

    ReplyDelete
  8. A wise man once said, if you want to know what your government is planning, look at the toys your children are playing with.

    ReplyDelete
  9. LOL! Are you referring to computer "shoot-em-up" games?

    But watching this movie, you would hardly imagine a world war was around the corner.

    Not having watched it though... it's amazing how Erskine Childers predicted the First World War back at the turn of the century in his book "Riddle of the Sands".

    ReplyDelete
  10. Well, back when we were cold-waring it, I told everyone I knew we were going to become friends with Russia. People thought I was nuts and asked me 'why on earth, I could come to such a conclusion,' when Reagan was publicly insulting and threatening them. I knew we were because suddenly there were Russian cabbage patch dolls, Russian pbs weddings and folk dancing programs, etc., showing their 'good heart.'

    ReplyDelete
  11. Kudos to you... each time America was thinking of invading somewhere I kept thinking to myself, "can't happen, they'll find a way to sort it out"... but the desire was never there to talk and work it out... kudos to you for reading the desire... it says a lot as you say! If we imagine a place to be peaceful with regard to us, it's much more likely to actually be so... well, I guess German appeasement might have been an exception?

    ReplyDelete
  12. The strings were pulled both ways on German appeasement, if I am 'catching your drift.' Could you be more specific before I respond??

    ReplyDelete
  13. Well, it'd be interesting to see how children's films in Germany portrayed the West. I think maybe the appeasement was both-ways, and yet war still happened. In that sense, it seems to be an exception. There does seem to have been a genuine desire for peace among people on both sides.

    On the other hand, and I'm speculating, perhaps Hollywood had strong links and therefore affection for Germany because a lot of the people working in Hollywood were of German origin? Googling this, there does seem to be evidence of this, though the website is hardly neutral. :)
    http://www.german-way.com/cinema/germans-in-hollywood.html

    I just came upon this, that shows that my "reading signs of peace" in this film may indeed have been intentional!

    http://www.clas.ufl.edu/users/jshoaf/Jdolls/jdollwestern/photos/shirley.html


    A good overview of the Friendship Doll story can be found in the following two articles:A Gift of Friendship - originally published in American Girl magazineThe Friendship Dolls - originally published in Look Japan magazine

    So why did war happen anyway? Maybe Hollywood is not representative of the country as a whole after all, and the children's toys don't tell the whole story. If there's anything I've learnt during my lifetime, it's that when a war machine gets going, it's very difficult to stop its progress because it starts driving the economy. It really amazed me that each time a war looked imminent, the stock market would react positively, not negatively. And so it has always been. Conversely, I wouldn't be surprised if America's intended pull-out from Afghanistan in late 2011 is accompanied by a "second dip" of the current recession.

    ReplyDelete
  14. And don't you think this scene is prophetic in that the German doll is put back in the same position (intransigent), the Russian doll... falls over! (defeated or won over by love) And the Japanese doll... shifts (change of perspective), and the final doll which I mistook as a Swiss doll because of her "heidi heidi" is actually a black doll, well it spells the final "Oh My Goodness", so perhaps it sounds a warning for a time to come when humanity "wakes up"... :^)

    ReplyDelete
  15. So many links. I'll come back later when life is easier again. I have links from various people all opened in pages all over my computer. I am lagging behind. I won't forgetcha.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Sorry the links aren't really important actually, just there in case you wanted to read more. The "Friendship Doll" link is fascinating though, how America introduced protectionist laws not allowing Japanese to enter the country, so seeing these laws were hurtful, Dr. Sidney Gulick in 1927 started a friendship doll initiative, where children in the US sent thousands of dolls to Japan. :^) And then Japan responded in kind!!

    ReplyDelete
  17. Hmmm....that is very interesting. I did not know that. As a friend just said, I will sleep upon it.

    The whole thing with Germany is the financial interests that 'backed' Hitler also backed the creation of the state of Israel. Coincidence? I think not.

    ReplyDelete
  18. Okie......... If you have a moment you might take a look at this article pulled from
    JUMP CUT
    A REVIEW OF CONTEMPORARY MEDIA

    although it doesn't break down this particular movie........it is an overview of shirley temple movies ...... most of which where made to ease the public's mind over the depression they were experiencing. Much of the content was also intended to put forth political idea's such as the wealthy needed to be protected, for they would be the ones to get us out of the depression. This particular look at fox films, the depression and hollywood's charge to make people happy..... might give a different insite into the dolls of different nationalities set out for us to see.
    Keep in mind this is obviously a personal essay....... but it does shed a different light (perspective) on what was happening in hollywood and a little of how hollywood and politics of the time worked together.

    Partial quote:
    "noting that the industry she (shirley temple) worked in was possibly more exposed to influences emanating from society, and in particular from its economic base, than any other. To the disruption of production, distribution and consumption shared by all industries one must add the intense economically determined ideological pressures that bore upon an industry whose commodities were emotions and ideas
    .
    POLITICIANS DIRECTLY CHARGED HOLLYWOOD WITH THE TASK OF "CHEERING AMERICANS UP;"

    and such studio ideologues as Jack Warner and Louis B. Mayer gloried in their new roles as shapers of public attitudes.


    But far more significant pressures arose out of the grim economic histories of the major studios which saw all of them by 1936 come under the financial control of either Morgan or Rockefeller financial interests (F. D. Klingender, Money behind the Screen, 1937). In addition to rendering films more formulaic and innocuous, is domination drew Hollywood into a lackeying relation to the most conservative canons of capitalist ideology. It is not my intention to recount this history, but rather to assess its effects upon the content of Shirley’s films and her public persona."


    http://www.ejumpcut.org/archive/onlinessays/JC02folder/shirleytemple.html

    ReplyDelete
  19. Thanks Lin... still to read it thoroughly, but this passage struck out...

    "One is reminded of Marx’s acute observation that money, considered in its relation to the work that produces it, has a repressive and censoring role.

    ...charity appears as love and initiative as work. Both love and work are abstracted from all social and psychological realities. They have no causes; they are unmotivated. They appear in Shirley merely as prodigious innate capacities, something like Merlin’s wisdom or Lancelot’s strength; and they are magical in their powers—they can transform reality and spontaneously create well-being and happiness."

    You know how on the one hand, the governments of the West are strapped for cash and cutting back on everything they can, cutting back on arts funding as "not useful", getting rid of youth programmes, even re-structuring the police... but this article reminds me of an idea I had that really the problem with the capitalist model, especially during recessions, is the 5-10% necessarily unemployed, and perhaps on benefit from the government. What the capitalist model lacks is a 5-10% volunteering sector specifically adapted and designed for these people to work in or not as they choose, which operates on a "voluntarily turn up for the day and help" basis, not weighed down by bureaucracy, nor discriminating against age or disability. I wouldn't want this to be compulsory for people to receive benefit, but I'm sure it'd reduce crime and make people feel valued as contributors to society. There are lots of people on the streets, and perhaps some prefer that to working, and maybe even some need to be paid not to work, lol! But the problem I see is how so often the worker isn't boss, the worker isn't working out of charity or love as the quote above said, because the worker is often the slave of the "system", the slave of money.

    I've still never read Marx, but despite the failure of Marxism, I'm sure he had some good ideas which merit consideration today.

    ReplyDelete
  20. "because the worker is often the slave of the "system", the slave of money."

    Sadly this is very true Okie ..... We have been well conditioned to function within this monetary system and breaking some of that conditioning is confusing and a little frightening.

    Yes....somewhere along the line if we wish to evolve, we are going to have to stop fighting each other, and wake up, as you have so wisely suggested in a previous post.



    Blessings dear okie

    ReplyDelete