April 29th, 2009
Channeling Jim Bailey
  by Brooks Peters

Perhaps the most thrillingly embarrassing thing that ever happened to me was the night I went to the Waldorf-Astoria with my then “girlfriend” Barbara to see the legendary Jim Bailey perform. No one has ever equaled his uncanny impersonation skills. To see him step out as Judy Garland or Barbra Streisand or even the inimitable Phyllis Diller was to see a brilliant and vastly entertaining master at work. (Photo, above, borrowed from Jim’s own website. You can link to it here.)

The year was 1973 and I was a sweet sixteen, never been kissed, budding theatre buff about to leave home for prep school for the first time. Barbara had promised to take me out and celebrate my departure and I insisted we go hear Jim Bailey. How had I even heard of him? I must have seen him on the Merv Griffin Show or perhaps Ed Sullivan’s. I was in awe of his artistry and quite taken with his off-stage looks.

Poor Barbara! The evening was a disaster. I ordered about half-a-dozen Bloody Marys (young people were never carded in fancy bars back then) and got wildly drunk. I flirted shamelessly with Jim Bailey from my tiny front-row seat and when the lights came down, we were invited backstage. Barbara didn’t want to go. She thought he was “creepy”. So she waited out front, and was immediately presented with the bill. Unfortunately it was for $50 (neither of us had factored in the price of admission) and she didn’t have enough cash to cover it. This was in the days before teenagers carried credit cards. I had to call my father out on Long Island and he drove all the way into the city at midnight to rescue us.

Imagine Dad’s surprise when he finally arrived at the Peacock Alley Cafe and found his youngest son sitting in the dressing room of a drag queen, singing show tunes, and discussing make-up tips! Jim Bailey, unflappable as he was charming, could not have been more diplomatic. (I think he might have fancied my Dad, who back then was as handsome as Mayor Lindsay). Jim smoothed things over and we were sent on our merry, giggling way, autographed programs in hand. I never saw or spoke to Barbara again.

In honor of that priceless memory, here’s my latest YouTube recommendation: Jim Bailey in his/her prime. Why can’t TV (pardon the pun) be this good today?

Remember you can click on “Tubes” at right in the Themes section and find all my video finds.

April 27th, 2009
Twin Peaks
  by Brooks Peters

Lost amid the rapturous attention paid to the deaths of Bea Arthur and Marilyn Cooper recently was an obituary in the New York Times for another feminine role model: Catherine di Montezemolo, doyenne of fashion and society. Sister of Jeanne Murray Vanderbilt, Catherine was perhaps less known outside her own circle, but she left an imprint among her friends and colleagues. I interviewed her for Quest back in 1988. Here’s an excerpt that in no way does her justice but might remind a few of you out there of what a talented and delightful woman she was. I’m calling it Twin Peaks here simply because I was always amused that the name Montezemolo means “twin mountains”. But when you think about it, Cathy and her husband, Alessandro, were “twin peaks” of a sort. Of talent and grace. She died on Wednesday, April 22nd, at 83 years old. (Photo, below, courtesy of DPC/NY Social Diary).

Elegant Simplicity

Back when Catherine di Montezemolo was just starting out as an editor at Vogue, Diana Vreeland called her into her office for a dressing down. The legendary editor laid out the fashion spread Cathy had compiled and yelled, “This is so boring! Everything is so boring! This model looks like an Australian singer. That one looks like she belongs to the P.T.A.!” Shaking Cathy by the shoulders, D.V. intoned, “Don’t you understand — this is Show Biz!”

It was a lesson Catherine di Montezemolo has never forgotten. “A lot of people were terrorized by her,” Catherine says. “Diana could drive you up a wall, and she did, but she always had an extraordinary sense of humor.” Diana’s advice, however, stuck in Cathy’s mind throughout her long and varied career working at Vogue, Harper’s Bazaar, House & Garden, and later as fashion director of Lord & Taylor. Indeed, it’s an allusion to show biz that Catherine uses to explain why she’s still working hard as a fashion designer. “It’s like the smell of greasepaint for an actor,” she says.

Catherine di Montezemolo grew up in Manhattan as Cathy Murray, one of seven children from a prominent Irish-American family. [Her sister Jeanne would later achieve fame on her own as the wife of Alfred Vanderbilt III.] Her father was a commissioner of the Port Authority and held a seat on the New York Stock Exchange. The Murray clan spent a good deal of time at their 65-acre ocean-side estate in Southampton, residing in “a huge barn of a home” that had once housed cattle and horses. It was a fantasy playground for the five girls and two boys. Besides swimming, tennis, and horseback riding, there was roller-skating in the abandoned chicken coop behind the barn and ice-skating on the front lawn whenever it froze over in winter. During the Thirties, Cathy’s father built a beach house on the ocean that she especially cherished because she used to ride her bicycle on its roof.

Back in those days, Southampton was much different than it is today. “There were a lot less people and lots more land. We used to have hunts and horse shows,” Cathy says. “We would ride across people’s property like they do in England without any thought of private property.” Life, however, was not an endless succession of fun and games. Cathy’s father died in 1937, and the beach house was demolished when a brutal hurricane tore across Long Island the following year. “There wasn’t even a splinter left,” she says, when the storm finally ended.

A proper Irish-Catholic, Cathy attended the Holy Child Convent School in Suffern, New York — an unlikely environment for an aspiring fashion designer. But Cathy combed through copies of Vogue her mother forwarded and cut out pictures of dresses she thought were beautiful. In 1945, while still a teenager, she landed a job as a rover at Vogue, working as Sally Kirkland’s assistant. “I used to run and pick up boxes of clothes and bring them to the studios,” she recalls. “It was a wonderful training ground for me.”

During the next thirty years, as she rose through the ranks at Vogue, Cathy worked with the world’s best photographers and models. Diana Vreeland sent her on a shoot in Greece with Richard Avedon and Jean Shrimpton for a feature they called “The Shrimp at Sea.” She also flew to Hawaii with Jean and another great beauty, Penelope Tree — a job she remembers as “a bit touchy” because the photographer David Bailey had been the lover of both.


Catherine quickly developed an eye for the unexpected. That, after all, is what Diana Vreeland wanted. “Diana loved to break the rules,” Cathy says. “For her to like something, it had to have a twist, a quirk, a squirt of lemon.” A case in point was Lauren Hutton. “I remember I went to a showing downtown, and I saw this girl floating around who didn’t look like anybody. She had a space between her teeth, and was absolutely beautiful. I said, ‘Come up tomorrow to the magazine because we’re having a run-through.’ The next day she appeared at the office, and Diana spotted her right away.” Lauren went on to become the country’s top model, and a popular film star.

While many of her co-workers enjoyed the jet-set lifestyle that came with working at Vogue, Cathy preferred going home at night to her husband, Marchese Alessandro di Montezemolo. She credits the longevity of their marriage to their being “great friends” and sharing common interests. “We enjoy each other’s company,” she says. Introduced at a party in honor of Patrick and Dolores Guinness, below, the couple were married in May 1960, and immediately afterward built a house on a stretch of property in Southampton not far from the barn in which Cathy was brought up.

To Catherine, Alessandro was a dashingly handsome romantic figure, an internationally acclaimed horseman and polo player who had served with the Italian cavalry. Alessandro for his part was impressed by Cathy’s beauty, charm and boundless energy. In 1974, a change in jobs for Alessandro prompted the di Montezemolos to move to Milan. Cathy left Vogue and secured a position as European editor of Harper’s Bazaar. At the same time, she launched a line of clothing called “Noi” with her friend Jack Bodi.

When Catherine and Alessandro returned to the States (where he became chairman and CEO of Marsh & McLennan, Inc., the international brokerage firm), Geraldine Stutz (below) of Bendel’s suggested that Cathy create a collection of quality sleepwear for the store. The idea took off. Soon twelve other stores, including Saks and Bergdorf’s, carried the label, but the novice designer found herself getting in over her head.

“The problem was that I was doing everything myself,” she says. “The selling, shipping, fighting with contractors, buying the fabrics.” Running the operation as a cottage industry out of the maid’s room in her United Nations Plaza apartment, Cathy often worked until two in the morning, shipping out orders. Alessandro told her, “Either you get a partner, or forget it.”

Just at that moment, Lord & Taylor stepped in and offered Cathy a job as vice-president and fashion director. It was an especially exciting period for her, one that she compares to her earlier days at Vogue. In a store, as in a magazine, she says, “you have to be an editor, because you have to constantly look ahead and be selective.” But Lord & Taylor was an ongoing challenge. “The store point of view was a very definite one. You didn’t get funky and wild, you had to put yourself in the position of the customer and not wander off.”

In 1986, Cathy resigned from Lord & Taylor and revived her business as a designer of at-home clothes. She and Alessandro sold the UN Plaza space and bought a pied a terre just off Beekman Place. This time around she is avoiding the pitfalls of the past. “For the moment I’m selling to people directly,” she says. One of her first clients was, not surprisingly, her old boss Diana Vreeland. “But that,” Cathy is quick to point out, ” is purely “a labor of love.”

April 24th, 2009
Face to Face
  by Brooks Peters

Just a week ago, in a whimsical act of self-promotion, I joined Facebook, a little late to the party, hoping to let old friends and business associates know that yes, I am still alive, and to alert them to this blog. It’s been a fascinating and revealing experience. First of all, I had no idea that so many people I know are using Facebook and that they would be happy to hear from me. I had set up a MySpace page a couple of years ago, primarily to plug my bookstore, and about three people contacted me, including Randy Jones, one of the members of the Village People, which thrilled me. But in just a handful of days on Facebook, I now have 120 “friends” (and counting, like that sign in Manhattan ticking off the national debt) and have reconnected with people from all aspects of my past: grade school, Choate, Yale, my singing group the S.O.B’s and long-lost jobs. I even reconnected with one of my favorite counselors from Camp Becket whom I haven’t talked to since I was 14. It’s all a bit overwhelming and exhilarating. The experience is sort of like a giant group grope. I might have gone overboard on Earth Day, the day of my birthday, because I was sending messages to people I don’t even know. But I’m sure that is par for the course when one first joins.

Was it wise to “poke” Brian, a waiter I used to know at the old Moondance Diner when I worked at Quest? I’m sure I was just one of his regular customers and am now no more than a footnote buried in his psyche, even if I remember the exact cut of the apron he used to wear. And why did I search for John Guare, a favorite teacher I’d had at Yale? Could it have been the irony of his now-ubiquitous catchphrase “Six Degrees of Separation”? If anyone is over the implications of that apt phrase it must be John. Likewise, why did I ignore that old flame of mine from 20 years ago? Was it because I wanted him to remember me just as I was and not as I’ve become? There seems to be too much emphasis in the comments posted to the “Wall” (at least in the short-run) on how one looks, or to be more precise, in how one looks the same. We cling to our vain identities just as others cling to their memories of them. I’m glad to hear some people feel I haven’t changed a bit. But at the same time I want them to know that I am not the same person I used to be, that my once-effulgent voice is shot, my shoulder continually hurts, and I can no longer wrap my legs around my neck and jokingly call myself “the human pencil sharpener” as I used to do at dull parties as an ice-breaker in college. I am a very different person today and yet not the same different person to the various friends I’ve re-made.

Plus there’s the “absent friends” problem, the ones without faces on Facebook. While I was zealously seeking out friends to add to my members’ list, I dug up my current phone book which I haven’t glanced at in ages (cell phones make such things obsolete). What struck me instantly was how many friends I’ve still got listed in there who sadly are no longer with us. I’d been extremely negligent in updating my address book and removing or crossing out names of those who had died. Perhaps it was sheer stubbornness on my part — or guilty denial. Why is Jed Mattes still there, my former literary agent who died in 2003? Crossing him out would be like admitting I’d X-ed him out of my life before he died. And acquaintances such as Khalil Rizk, Peter Cain, Robert Woolley or Charles Henri Ford? Surely I can’t have forgotten they’d “passed on” — an expression that I like only a smidgen more than “passed.” But there they are, still scribbled in ink in my little leather book. Then there’s Sarah Pettit, my former editor at Out, who was such an inspiration to me. Clearly, in her case, I was just not willing to finally let go. I think she’d insist on my getting a new address book.

It amuses me to think what these friends would have thought of Facebook and other instant communication devices, especially this new-fangled fad Twitter, which seems to be the final death knell of letter writing as an art form. (In the future a writer won’t be called “a man of letters” but “a man of tweets”.) Some would disdain Facebook. Some ignore it. Others, such as the great gadabout George Trescher or my dear friend Brother Jonathan, a Franciscan monk and playwright who died quite a while back, would have cherished it. I wish, like in the days of Houdini, there were some way of sending messages to these lost friends. I’d “add” them to my list even if they could not “confirm” we were friends, or better yet, answer back.

Next Page »