The Fatty Arbuckle case (1962)

Record Details:

Something wrong or inaccurate about this page? Let us Know!

Thanks for helping us continually improve the quality of the Lantern search engine for all of our users! We have millions of scanned pages, so user reports are incredibly helpful for us to identify places where we can improve and update the metadata.

Please describe the issue below, and click "Submit" to send your comments to our team! If you'd prefer, you can also send us an email to mhdl@commarts.wisc.edu with your comments.




We use Optical Character Recognition (OCR) during our scanning and processing workflow to make the content of each page searchable. You can view the automatically generated text below as well as copy and paste individual pieces of text to quote in your own work.

Text recognition is never 100% accurate. Many parts of the scanned page may not be reflected in the OCR text output, including: images, page layout, certain fonts or handwriting.

producers, "You have me at your own risk. The audience is liable to throw eggs at me on opening night." The producers weren't discouraged at all. The eggthrowing sounded like a great publicity gimmick for the opening. Arbuckle's very cynicism appealed to them. The play was Baby Mine, and Arbuckle was a stumbling bachelor who accidentally found himself with a baby to raise. The advance publicity was enormous, yet there were no protests. Arbuckle was heartened, but he feared opening night. He told the producers, "It's like waiting for a firecracker to go off after the fuse is lit." Many of Arbuckle's friends were in the audience opening night. Doris came in from the Coast and tried to help backstage. It only made her husband more nervous. It was a full house, with many curiosity seekers. The play went off well. Arbuckle and his close friends waited in Sardi's for the reviews. They were pretty good. Howard Barnes of the Tribune said Arbuckle had a fine sense of riming. There was no secret now that Arbuckle was starring in a play. Many critics alluded to the actor's brush with the law. But Arbuckle was satisfied. In fact he was proud of his performance. And he loved it. Yet his hopes had been dashed before. He believed that when the public read what he was doing there would be an outcry again. This time he was prepared for it. But John Sargent was right New York was a sophisticated city. No one cared what Arbuckle had been involved with. They were only interested in the play and how well he performed. One day, two, three passed and not one whoop or holler about immorality or hellfire and brimstone. Arbuckle was heartened. Crowds filled the theatre every night and, though it wasn't a very good play, it was drawing. After two weeks Arbuckle felt secure. It was amazing to him, a kind of miracle. The country was solidly against him and yet New York applauded him. This was the truth, and this was the way Arbuckle saw it, but gradually his advisors put a new hope in his heart 149