alt.binaries.pictures.erotica.vintagePrev. Next
Re: retrowavelength - Egnor or Blondell ?
JJ (jj@aol.com) 2018/10/16 12:57

Path: news.nzbot.com!not-for-mail
NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 16 Oct 2018 13:56:43 -0500
From: JJ <jj@aol.com>
Newsgroups: alt.binaries.pictures.erotica.vintage
Subject: Re: retrowavelength - Egnor or Blondell ?
Date: Tue, 16 Oct 2018 14:57:24 -0400
Message-ID: <euccsdh9jjp9fo6cqb3u34t8bsg4d53quq@4ax.com>
References: <2hm9sdpp5e4j0q99imfv0d4ukk3d69e5r9@4ax.com> <m_WdnebkCeXEjFjGnZ2dnUU7-evNnZ2d@giganews.com>
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.93/32.576 English (American)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Antivirus: Avast (VPS 181016-8, 10/16/2018), Outbound message
X-Antivirus-Status: Clean
Lines: 44
X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com
NNTP-Posting-Host: 24.246.249.246
X-Trace: sv3-Stk7H/RaLa5Uhd7gurHs8UCu5i+PjOpqq2Wms4zF6CVLkofJ3g3mqKx6xIRJ5uCA+rwE8ZWcZl6UQO1!AOjr7NxdXnTSwrnUtzneaYb7vTrKfW00Vmb4htHedx3slsLVfuE5nycTqFbqzP7xjil4HM4EP4Um!XIZKgY0Uvjli7DWLQcTERdIwDA==
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly
X-Postfilter: 1.3.40
X-Original-Bytes: 2846
X-Received-Bytes: 2937
X-Received-Body-CRC: 2610617624
Xref: news.nzbot.com alt.binaries.pictures.erotica.vintage:16196

On Mon, 15 Oct 2018 17:14:49 -0500, retrowavelength
<retrowavelength@yahoo.com> wrote:

>> I can't respond specifically to the various pix i posted re: they are
>> Dagmar aka Virginia Ruth Egnor OR Joan Blondell.
>>
>> The Joan Blondell pix were gathered together from multiple sources and
>> as noted, most if not all denote Joan Blondell as the model.
>>
>> I believe them all to be of Joan Blondell, from looking at them in
>> comparison to Dagmar.  Since many of the Blondell pix are from early
>> years in showbiz (1920s and 1930s) and may or may not be Blondell.
>>
>> ---
>> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
>> https://www.avast.com/antivirus
>>
>>
>
>Hi, JJ!
>
>Thanks for these posts. They raise some interesting questions and I admit
>that following today's post I am not as sure about "the Dagmars" as I had
>been shown previously. Clearly, Joan Blondell is not TV's Dagmar/Egnor. But
>it seems we are still up in the air as to:
>- are the claimed Joan Blondell nudes really Joan Blondell, TV's
>Dagmar/Egnor, or someone else?
>- is the Set 2K model TV's Dagmar/Egnor or is someone else?
>- was there maybe more than one Ruth Egnor?
>
>Well, one of the things we do here is try to make sense of the confusion
>from the past! Fun!
>
>--rwl


Thanks for your post.
After posting some additional info on Joan Blondell inc. her movie
history and background, I'm more certain that all of the pix I posted
of Blondell ARE in fact Joan Blondell, especially the early ones from
30s, etc.
I'm less certain that they could be Dagmar aka Ruth Egnor.
-JJ


Follow-ups:1234
Next Prev. Article List         Favorite