|
|
Post by Michael on Feb 3, 2023 14:11:38 GMT -5
As most who read my books know, it was a common belief among the Reporters that there was something going on between Lindbergh and Gow. Furthermore, it was common knowledge that CAL was paying a lot of attention to Marie Cummings prior to her hasty departure. Cummings was described as being "quite attractive" and Betty was also described as "attractive." Nothing mentioned one way or the other about Annette Copin. It should also be noted what Gow said to Garsson ( V1), as well as what Lewis recalled what Kelly told him about hearing Lindbergh threaten Gow on the night of the kidnapping ( V3). Last night while I was sleeping, as often happens to me, I remembered something I read in Berg. This morning I set out to search for it: They hired a small staff, including a plain-looking, red-haired nurse, who, Charles kidded, "lowers our standard." (Berg, p347).
I've attached two pictures of Gow below:   |
|
Joe
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 2,752
|
Post by Joe on Feb 4, 2023 7:12:03 GMT -5
I'd say it's a fair statement that Lindbergh indeed had an “eye for the ladies” at least following the time of his ‘girl meeting project’ or whatever he called it.. lol. I also recall raising an eyebrow at his offhand remark about Annette Copin in Berg, which I’m also pretty sure wouldn’t have had the same effect among most less-sensitive people in the early 1930’s.
What evidence is there though, besides what you refer to as a "common belief among the reporters" that there was actually something going on between Charles Lindbergh and Betty Gow? Could this have simply been a fabrication designed to create the kind of buzz that might then have been exploited at the first good opportunity, like an awkward photo of them together or simply some additional hearsay? I'd be far more inclined to think of their relationship as one of slight mutual distaste for each other, within the greater bounds of a very solid and trusting appreciation for each other’s level of expertise and competence.
From an excellent source, I know that Betty didn't care at all for Lindbergh often reprimanding her in raised and insulting tones if things around the nursery were not spic and span enough for him. At the same time here, it’s difficult for me not to think about the apparently scrubbed state of the nursery, as it was found following the kidnapping.
Not to digress here, so again, what actual evidence is there that Charles and Betty were an item on the side?
|
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Feb 4, 2023 9:26:08 GMT -5
I'd say it's a fair statement that Lindbergh indeed had an “eye for the ladies” at least following the time of his ‘girl meeting project’ or whatever he called it.. lol. I also recall raising an eyebrow at his offhand remark about Annette Copin in Berg, which I’m also pretty sure wouldn’t have had the same effect among most less-sensitive people in the early 1930’s. He's not referring to Copin in Berg. This occurred after they moved to England. What evidence is there though, besides what you refer to as a "common belief among the reporters" that there was actually something going on between Charles Lindbergh and Betty Gow? Could this have simply been a fabrication designed to create the kind of buzz that might then have been exploited at the first good opportunity, like an awkward photo of them together or simply some additional hearsay? I'd be far more inclined to think of their relationship as one of slight mutual distaste for each other, within the greater bounds of a very solid and trusting appreciation for each other’s level of expertise and competence. It's food for thought for anyone without bias. As with everything else, unless you happen to "like" the idea then no amount of evidence would suffice. In this case, it was a rumor among the Reporters and many seemed to have believed it. Since there were many reporters who had all kinds of interactions, its hard to know exactly what this was based on. Arthur Medford was a decent reporter, however, that doesn't mean everything he wrote about or said was correct. Adrian Lopez, in my opinion, was a notch above Medford, but again, we don't know exactly where all of this talk was coming from. Maybe there was an informant, maybe it was how the two were seen interacting with one another - who knows? If I had to guess, it was a combination of things, most likely with police sources leaking it to Reporters as well. From an excellent source, I know that Betty didn't care at all for Lindbergh often reprimanding her in raised and insulting tones if things around the nursery were not spic and span enough for him. At the same time here, it’s difficult for me not to think about the apparently scrubbed state of the nursery, as it was found following the kidnapping. Please give me your source so that I can completely demolish it. Next, interesting to see you suggest that Betty went into the nursery and cleaned it after the child was put to bed. |
|
Joe
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 2,752
|
Post by Joe on Feb 4, 2023 10:05:34 GMT -5
I'd say it's a fair statement that Lindbergh indeed had an “eye for the ladies” at least following the time of his ‘girl meeting project’ or whatever he called it.. lol. I also recall raising an eyebrow at his offhand remark about Annette Copin in Berg, which I’m also pretty sure wouldn’t have had the same effect among most less-sensitive people in the early 1930’s. He's not referring to Copin in Berg. This occurred after they moved to England. Fair enough. I recently went through Berg again from start to finish and do recall this Lindbergh quote, but my mistake if it wasn't Copin he was referring to. Right, Long Barn.. I just now reread that part.What evidence is there though, besides what you refer to as a "common belief among the reporters" that there was actually something going on between Charles Lindbergh and Betty Gow? Could this have simply been a fabrication designed to create the kind of buzz that might then have been exploited at the first good opportunity, like an awkward photo of them together or simply some additional hearsay? I'd be far more inclined to think of their relationship as one of slight mutual distaste for each other, within the greater bounds of a very solid and trusting appreciation for each other’s level of expertise and competence. It's food for thought for anyone without bias. As with everything else, unless you happen to "like" the idea then no amount of evidence would suffice. In this case, it was a rumor among the Reporters and many seemed to have believed it. Since there were many reporters who had all kinds of interactions, its hard to know exactly what this was based on. Arthur Medford was a decent reporter, however, that doesn't mean everything he wrote about or said was correct. Adrian Lopez, in my opinion, was a notch above Medford, but again, we don't know exactly where all of this talk was coming from. Maybe there was an informant, maybe it was how the two were seen interacting with one another - who knows? If I had to guess, it was a combination of things, most likely with police sources leaking it to Reporters as well. "Without bias" is the key term here. Where does, "if I had to guess" fit in here?
From an excellent source, I know that Betty didn't care at all for Lindbergh often reprimanding her in raised and insulting tones if things around the nursery were not spic and span enough for him. At the same time here, it’s difficult for me not to think about the apparently scrubbed state of the nursery, as it was found following the kidnapping. Please give me your source so that I can completely demolish it. Next, interesting to see you suggest that Betty went into the nursery and cleaned it after the child was put to bed. I will, but first tell me how you're going to destroy a source you may be entirely unaware of. And no, I'm not suggesting Betty did what you've concluded I said, that she cleaned the nursery after the child was put to bed. I simply mentioned what I actually said, as a means of referencing the standard of cleanliness that Lindbergh generally demanded in and around the nursery.
|
|
|
|
Post by Sherlock on Feb 5, 2023 6:56:23 GMT -5
Whether Lindbergh had an illicit relationship with Betty Gow is important and raises another question which has not received the attention it deserves. What was the attitude of the staff towards Charles Lindbergh?
Any boss/subordinate relationship is largely one of role playing. A servant may dislike the boss but has to maintain a positive, upbeat and cooperative facade if he/she wants to keep the job. This is not to suggest that CAL was hated by the servants - we just don’t know what they really thought of him.
We do however know more of Lindbergh’s personality. He was direct and brusque as evidenced by his sharp rebuke to Betty Gow : “Shut your mouth….” He was in today’s jargon “a control freak” with rigid attitudes to child rearing, mealtimes, bed times etc. It is tempting to conclude that this rigidity may have led to resentment among certain staff members.
A disgruntled staff member is more likely to “tell tales out of school” and may have unwittingly have revealed details of the Lindberghs’ comings and goings at Highfields.
Somehow I don’t see CAL as a “ladies man.” he was asocial, immature, gauche, dogmatic and hardly a barrel of laughs conversation-wise. The world’s oldest teenager.
|
|
Joe
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 2,752
|
Post by Joe on Feb 5, 2023 8:41:47 GMT -5
Whether Lindbergh had an illicit relationship with Betty Gow is important and raises another question which has not received the attention it deserves. What was the attitude of the staff towards Charles Lindbergh? Any boss/subordinate relationship is largely one of role playing. A servant may dislike the boss but has to maintain a positive, upbeat and cooperative facade if he/she wants to keep the job. This is not to suggest that CAL was hated by the servants - we just don’t know what they really thought of him. We do however know more of Lindbergh’s personality. He was direct and brusque as evidenced by his sharp rebuke to Betty Gow : “Shut your mouth….” He was in today’s jargon “a control freak” with rigid attitudes to child rearing, mealtimes, bed times etc. It is tempting to conclude that this rigidity may have led to resentment among certain staff members. A disgruntled staff member is more likely to “tell tales out of school” and may have unwittingly have revealed details of the Lindberghs’ comings and goings at Highfields. Somehow I don’t see CAL as a “ladies man.” he was asocial, immature, gauche, dogmatic and hardly a barrel of laughs conversation-wise. The world’s oldest teenager. Lol.. agreed that Lindbergh was no “ladies man,” although he did appear to have an eye for female attractiveness, which I believe would probably have also considered the potential genetic value of any woman he cast his eyes upon long enough. And I believe his relative inter-personal immaturity would have inspired him to make the comment he did about their choice of nurse for Charlie at Long Barn. At the same time, I see absolutely no sign of him ever having strayed or even considering straying beyond Anne Lindbergh, during this period and up to that before Anne's infidelity with her doctor, Dana Atchley and Charles's subsequent relationships with three German women. Regarding his relationship with staff at Highfields and Next Day Hill, Lindbergh’s generally perceived high reputation and status at this time, would have restricted any staff from commenting one way or another, and I’m sure none of them would have had to have been instructed to essentially keep any personal thoughts to themselves, for fear of the press having a field day, and/or termination. I believe that all Highfields and Next Day Hill staff would have positively appreciated and felt a significant level of personal pride within their positions.. essentially, that they had “arrived” and theirs was content for bragging rights. The further that staff were removed from Lindbergh’s direct influence and perhaps felt he “didn’t have any time" for their perceived lower positions though, I’d speculate is where we might find the most fertile ground for potential information leaks, deliberate or otherwise. Here’s an article written by Donald E. Keyhoe, (thanks Sue, for discovering this!) aviation article writer and manager of Lindbergh’s 48-state aerial tour, which seeks to portray their lives, four years after the famous flight and with Charlie then coming up to a year of age. Some here might be a little surprised by Keyhoe’s words and descriptions, which generally reflect those of Harold Nicholson’s positive observations and interactions with Lindbergh following Dwight Morrow’s death and the kidnapping. What seems very clear is the relative level of peace and security they felt they were living in at the Princeton farmhouse in 1931, based upon their distance from NYC and the constant hounding by the press. All in all, it appears to me that both Lindberghs were quite happy and content within their current station in life. www.saturdayeveningpost.com/reprints/lindbergh-four-years-after/ |
|
|
|
Post by IloveDFW on Feb 5, 2023 9:08:12 GMT -5
Whether Lindbergh had an illicit relationship with Betty Gow is important and raises another question which has not received the attention it deserves. What was the attitude of the staff towards Charles Lindbergh? Any boss/subordinate relationship is largely one of role playing. A servant may dislike the boss but has to maintain a positive, upbeat and cooperative facade if he/she wants to keep the job. This is not to suggest that CAL was hated by the servants - we just don’t know what they really thought of him. We do however know more of Lindbergh’s personality. He was direct and brusque as evidenced by his sharp rebuke to Betty Gow : “Shut your mouth….” He was in today’s jargon “a control freak” with rigid attitudes to child rearing, mealtimes, bed times etc. It is tempting to conclude that this rigidity may have led to resentment among certain staff members. A disgruntled staff member is more likely to “tell tales out of school” and may have unwittingly have revealed details of the Lindberghs’ comings and goings at Highfields. Somehow I don’t see CAL as a “ladies man.” he was asocial, immature, gauche, dogmatic and hardly a barrel of laughs conversation-wise. The world’s oldest teenager. Love your description of him! And it was spot on. |
|
