Page 1 of 5 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 49

Thread: Once Upon A Time... In The Valley

  1. #1
    Administrator Ian Jane's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Queens, NYC
    Posts
    59,347

    Once Upon A Time... In The Valley

    Ashley from the Rialto Report produced and co-hosts this podcast series about the Traci Lords story.

    Info here:

    https://www.therialtoreport.com/2020/07/14/traci-lords/

    Gave the first two episodes a listen yesterday, good stuff.

    Available pretty much wherever you get your podcasts (I found it on spotify).
    Rock! Shock! Pop!

  2. #2
    Administrator Ian Jane's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Queens, NYC
    Posts
    59,347
    Episode 4 is out now. A lot of the clips are from Rialto Report interviews, I believe, but this is still a pretty interesting listen due to the context provided.
    Rock! Shock! Pop!

  3. #3
    like a hole in the head Toyboy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    1,491
    Man, I feel like they should've called this series "Traci Lords is a Lying Whore" because that really seems like the agenda that Anolik and West are pushing.

    They claim to be presenting all sides but I've made it through the first three episodes and there is a decisive slant, painting a rosy picture of the XXX industry and leaning very hard on the idea that other performers such as Ginger Lynn and Christy Canyon were only a few years older than Lords and had very few problems. They even go so far as to play the clip of Tom Byron saying "Hey, I was a kid too. I was only 21". There's a big difference between 21 and 16. Even the gap between 18 and 16 is pretty significant but there's a lot of talk about how Traci seemed like a full on adult. They also go out their way to mock her in the 2nd episode, focusing on her use of quotes around "coke" in the excerpt from her memoir where she outlines her first experience at the Jim South Agency. That particular part felt out and out mean.

    I'm not saying Lords was/is squeaky clean or that some of her claims aren't possibly exaggerated or even false but I just get the sense that this show is more about West and his cohorts wanting to present a pro-porn industry hatchet job on somebody who flew the coop and brought shame to people who maybe have some dark, unresolved issues. I've heard maybe two dozen Rialto Report interviews and half the time I come away feeling like I've been listening to a person with Stockholm Syndrome "I'm fine. I'm fine. My life is full addiction, abuse and mental instability but I'm okay." Lords is someone who walked away and said "I'm not okay". Again, I know she's not always reliable but I don't know how many of these other people who remained in the industry are either. I'd like to hear at least one of them come clean and reveal that maybe they didn't always benefit in a healthy way from their choices.
    Now everyone can have a complete KRULL lifestyle.

  4. #4
    Administrator Ian Jane's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Queens, NYC
    Posts
    59,347
    You make some fair points and yeah, though I think your first sentence there is a bit hyperbolic. The Stockholm Syndrome thing though, Iv'e noticed that before too, but I'm going to reserve judgement until the series is over. If nothing else, I find it interesting - there are so many grey areas here that we'll probably never know who is telling the truth here and it really is impossible to know who to trust.

    There's an interesting article here with Anolik.

    https://www.vanityfair.com/style/202...solved-mystery
    Rock! Shock! Pop!

  5. #5
    I'll have to give this a listen. I remember a Rialto Report with Colleen Brennan where she said (to paraphrase) that it was obvious to people in the industry that she was underage if they bothered to look (including herself). Nobody cared back then, I think they were happy to exploit her until she started losing them money when her titles were removed from distribution and then they could play the victim ('Oh no, I was tricked into screwing a 15 year old, poor me. Still, I got to screw a 15 year old...'). So many blind eyes were turned it makes me wonder if masturbation really does impact your eyesight.

    I don't believe that Lords had any kind of agenda or game plan to completely take out the competition when she hit 18, I don't think she became a smart business person overnight. It was and still is an industry that's built upon people fucking each other over literally and metaphorically who do what they have to for survival. No one comes out of it smelling of roses, not then, not now. If society's views on the exploitation of the vulnerable hadn't changed this would still be going on where there's money to be made. Now it's only the rich and powerful that still think they can get away with it.
    I'm bitter, I'm twisted, James Joyce is fucking my sister.

  6. #6
    Administrator Ian Jane's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Queens, NYC
    Posts
    59,347
    Honestly, I think the only one who knows the truth is Lords, and she's not really talking.
    Rock! Shock! Pop!

  7. #7
    MCMLXXX Matt H.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Location
    Burlington, ON
    Posts
    4,058
    Quote Originally Posted by Toyboy View Post
    Man, I feel like they should've called this series "Traci Lords is a Lying Whore" because that really seems like the agenda that Anolik and West are pushing.

    They claim to be presenting all sides but I've made it through the first three episodes and there is a decisive slant, painting a rosy picture of the XXX industry and leaning very hard on the idea that other performers such as Ginger Lynn and Christy Canyon were only a few years older than Lords and had very few problems. They even go so far as to play the clip of Tom Byron saying "Hey, I was a kid too. I was only 21". There's a big difference between 21 and 16. Even the gap between 18 and 16 is pretty significant but there's a lot of talk about how Traci seemed like a full on adult. They also go out their way to mock her in the 2nd episode, focusing on her use of quotes around "coke" in the excerpt from her memoir where she outlines her first experience at the Jim South Agency. That particular part felt out and out mean.

    I'm not saying Lords was/is squeaky clean or that some of her claims aren't possibly exaggerated or even false but I just get the sense that this show is more about West and his cohorts wanting to present a pro-porn industry hatchet job on somebody who flew the coop and brought shame to people who maybe have some dark, unresolved issues. I've heard maybe two dozen Rialto Report interviews and half the time I come away feeling like I've been listening to a person with Stockholm Syndrome "I'm fine. I'm fine. My life is full addiction, abuse and mental instability but I'm okay." Lords is someone who walked away and said "I'm not okay". Again, I know she's not always reliable but I don't know how many of these other people who remained in the industry are either. I'd like to hear at least one of them come clean and reveal that maybe they didn't always benefit in a healthy way from their choices.
    Your posts are always insightful. I wish you posted more often.
    Why would anybody watch a scum show like Videodrome? Why did you watch it, Max?

  8. #8
    MCMLXXX Matt H.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Location
    Burlington, ON
    Posts
    4,058
    Quote Originally Posted by agent999 View Post
    No one comes out of it smelling of roses, not then, not now.
    Definitely more of a fishy smell.
    Why would anybody watch a scum show like Videodrome? Why did you watch it, Max?

  9. #9
    Administrator Ian Jane's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Queens, NYC
    Posts
    59,347
    Episode 5 is out now.
    Rock! Shock! Pop!

  10. #10
    like a hole in the head Toyboy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    1,491
    This podcast is a mess. It just occurred to me that it's subtitled "A Real-Life Noir". Combining that inappropriate and confusing denotation with the sloppy attempts at foreshadowing("Be sure to remember that Traci had a passport!") and cliffhanger endings to each episode I get the sense that Anolik and West are positioning this series as a "true crime" narrative, trying to expose some hidden truth, something that I think they're incapable of doing given the circumstances. It makes sense for them to couch the subject of their program in a way that will appeal to a broad range of listeners given that the True Crime genre is incredibly popular in the podcast world but I don't think it suits the material. With True Crime you need a villain at the core of your story and personally it's difficult for me to see Lords as being that. Again, I'm not saying she was purely a victim but if the way you're going to present the duplicitous and wicked nature of this person is by telling stories about how she declined to attend Ginger Lynn's after-parties or that she stretched the truth in her memoirs - something 99% of anyone who sets out to write an autobiography will do - then you're really grasping at straws. Seems like they would have been better off simply telling Lords' story as accurately as they could - it's fascinating as is - without strictly setting out to take her down as a liar and a snitch.

    As Ian said, nobody knows the whole truth except Lords and if she's not going to take part (I honestly don't recall if in the first episode they address whether or not she was approached although I'm sure West and April Hall have probably reached out to her for a Rialto Report interview) then I think it would've helped Anolik and West's credibility and given some objectivity to the show if they had sought out people who knew Traci outside the industry. Instead they rely heavily on interviews done for the Rialto Report and new interviews from which we only hear from people who either had a problem with Lords back in the 80's or are in a position, like Tom Byron, where the last thing they want to do is implicate themselves in any way. Given West's association with Golden Age performers and his reputation as a chronicler and ambassador for the XXX industry I doubt that he'd want to push his subjects into uncomfortable territory. He and Anolik lob softballs and seem happy with any answers they're given. Their personal banter is annoying as hell and the cutesy way West explains terminology such as DP is tiresome, and even unnecessary when the interviewees go so far as to explain what the terms mean themselves.

    With all that said, I will keep listening because I'm a glutton for punishment and I am curious to see how they wrap it all up, although I have my suspicions that it will end with a thud.
    Now everyone can have a complete KRULL lifestyle.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •