Path: news.nzbot.com!not-for-mail
NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 17 Oct 2018 15:03:16 -0500
Newsgroups: alt.binaries.pictures.erotica.vintage
Subject: Re: retrowavelength - Egnor or Blondell ?
From: retrowavelength <retrowavelength@yahoo.com>
References: <2hm9sdpp5e4j0q99imfv0d4ukk3d69e5r9@4ax.com> <m_WdnebkCeXEjFjGnZ2dnUU7-evNnZ2d@giganews.com> <euccsdh9jjp9fo6cqb3u34t8bsg4d53quq@4ax.com>
User-Agent: Xnews/5.04.25
Message-ID: <Io6dndWAysEZCFrGnZ2dnUU7-dudnZ2d@giganews.com>
Date: Wed, 17 Oct 2018 15:03:16 -0500
Lines: 52
X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com
X-Trace: sv3-hG34m+Y2CIMDjXiIQBHJ3RhEHxvLCLXKK9+hQc3DID6Aav6Zh1GBTmNLZWHJMb+iOC03pEbxWUoTkAB!f9CEt9LLjzCKmiKj3yxMH+/7SLmQ3y3cBauirjyMGrxrxKcQgGa5Fwz6zvks/k5d33ZOMMs28M4=
X-Complaints-To: abuse@giganews.com
X-DMCA-Notifications: http://www.giganews.com/info/dmca.html
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: 3049
X-Received-Bytes: 3230
X-Received-Body-CRC: 3196470815
Xref: news.nzbot.com alt.binaries.pictures.erotica.vintage:16201
> 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
>
>
Understood. There was pushback by some former(?) members that Joan had done
nude modeling and all of those nudies found were pretty grainy looking so
that positive ID was "iffy." Some suggested there was more resemblance to
Egnor (the one in the 2K photo set).
--rwl
|
|