
Like I said in my previous postโand, this being the 871st entry into the broadcastellan journal, I might be excused for repeating myself or at least be expected to do so on occasionโโI readily admit to having a thing about anniversaries, however obscure.โ Now, there is nothing obscure about the one-hundredth birthday of one of Hollywoodโs most enduring screen iconsโMarilyn Monroe, to whose eightieth I devoted a blog entry two decades ago.
So much an icon (i.e., a devotional image) is Monroe that the endlessly reproduced sight of her lips has overshadowed the sound of the distinctive and, to me, equally enthralling coos and whispers emanating from them.
To this day, Monroeโs infrequent non-musical voice-only performances remain largely unheard or else are dismissed as not worth the bother of unearthing. And yet, regardless of the material Monroe was dealt with for recital, the sound of her voice on the air is itself an event. Broadcast though it was to the multitude, it has the capacity, when experienced with closed eyes and under cover of dark and duvet, to assume the for-your-ears-only confidentiality of a personal call or a confessional eavesdropped on clandestinely.ย ย
Monroeโs voice rendered a hot mike redundant. At once torrid and tender, it smolders rather than blazes.ย ย Carrying promises of pleasure and warmth, it has the charm of a lullaby sung on what could not be anything but a sleepless night of reverie.
Many such a night I spent as a teenage boy, alone in my room, listening toโand secretly performingโโDiamonds Are a Girlโs Best Friend,โ a song whose title would later be echoed by one of English classes I used to teach in the Bronx, an inevitably queerly slanted literature seminar Iย ย dubbed โBeyond Dogs and Diamonds: Portraits of American Friendships.โ
Whatever the Strasberg โMethodโ contributed to or detracted from her emoting on screen, Monroeโs voice, which also underwent some coaching, never lost the lure of a Lorelei. I mean, the mythological golden-haired seductress referenced by Anita Loos in Gentlemen Prefer Blondes: The Illuminating Diary of a Professional Lady (1925), a narrative whose fame was eclipsed by the technicolor and stereophonic treatment it received in 1953, despite the inevitable watering down to which the flapper chronicle was subjected.
It is no coincidence that Lorelei, the fabled temptress of my native Rhineland, first comes to mind when I think of Marilyn, whose voice is so familiar that we tend to call her to mind by the first of her professional names. After all, watching Monroeโs movies on German television in my youth, I did not actually get to hear Monroe. The sound reel featured Margot Leonard (1927โ2014), a much-in-demand voice-over artist who dubbed not only Marilyn Monroe but also lent her larynx to the likes of Kim Novak and Gracy Kelly.
I have already commented on the havoc German dubbing could wreak, The Prince and the Showgirl being a prime example. By turning Elsie, Monroeโs Deutsch-speaking character French-American, the German version mutes โ[w]hatever historical context there wasโ in the originalโ”the Balkan crisis leading to World War Iโโto โleave nothing but a fairytale.โ
Considering that the The Prince and the Showgirl is mostly that, anyway, I marvelled at the โpains the German film industry took during the late 1950s to change the background of this innocuous piece of popular culture so as to keep from those who came to see a bombshell any memories of bombs and shell shock.โ Muffled though the foreign intrigue became in Der Prinz und die Tรคnzerin, the lossโof which most viewers without access to the English-language version would have been unawareโwas well made up for by Leonard at her most Monroesque.
In Germany, Leonardโs voice became so closely associated with Monroe that, in 1982, on the twentieth anniversary of Monroeโs death, Leonard was called upon to resurrect the screen legend in a radio interview. Glued to the receiver that day for soundings of Marilyn, my teenaged self had the finger on the recording button, catching part of the telephone conversation with Leonard, whose name was hardly a household one like Monroeโs. When told by the interviewer that he had never seen her, Leonard sounded rather indignant.
All that second-hand exposure to Monroe on the air and on the small screen no doubt motivated my subsequent search for the real voices of Hollywood actors that eventually begot my study Immaterial Culture. It also led to brief foray into podcasting.
When I started blogging in the mid-noughties, still consumed with the subject matter of my 2004 doctoral thesis Etherized Victorians, for which broadcastellan was meant to serve as a sequel of sorts, I was keenly aware that my chosen subjectโat that time almost exclusively radiophonicโcould be rendered less arcane by recordings of the performances about which I wrote. I produced and narrated a series, short-lived though it was, of recordings featuring the on-air voices of legendary film actorsโincluding silent screen vampsโand exploring the sound-only world of radio drama into which they briefly breathed life at a time when their on-screen visibility was diminishing.
Since โThe Voice of Marilynโ contained copyrighted sound recordings, it was rejected for publication on my YouTube channel. In a wistfully reminiscent mood brought on by the centenary of Norma Jeanโs nativity, I am revisiting the short script of the podcast to reflect on a few instances of Monroeโs disembodiment on the airwaves.
Continue reading “Some Mike It Hot: Tuning in Marilyn Monroe on the Eve of Her One-Hundredth Birthday”




There would have been no soapโand no soap operasโif we didnโt have trepidations about not being quite fresh, anxieties that were over-ripe for commercial exploitation. In the US, tuners-in of the 1930s, โ40s and โ50s were constantly being alerted to the dangers of B-O, reminded to โLuxโ their โdainties,โ and told to gargle before putting their kissers to the test. Lest they could endure facing guilt by omission, listeners lathered up with products like White King toilet soap, the box tops of which they collected and sent in to broadcasters as ocular proof of their hygienic diligence, for which cumulative evidence they were duly awarded various prizes (or premiums).












