Louise Brooks - Getting it wrong again and again

There is all kinds of  misinformation about Louise Brooks and her films. Some of it goes way back, to the 1920s, and some of it is only a few days old. There are factual errors, like getting a date wrong or misidentifying a character in a film, and there is "fake news" - like the photoshopped nudes in which some idiot has placed Brooks' head on someone else's body. Despite it being kinda pathetic and rather obvious, those images still circulate on eBay and Facebook. . . . Just last week I noticed a picture postcard of Clara Bow on eBay which was identified as Louise Brooks, despite the postcard being labelled as Clara Bow! 

For as long as I have been reading about / researching / collecting material about Louise Brooks, I have come across instances of mistaken information about the actress. Perhaps the most famous example is her being credited with a role in The Public Enemy (1931). That belief lingered for decades, and at one time was repeated in the New York Times.

Recently, while looking at some newly digitized vintage newspapers, I came across an instance where the same newspaper got it wrong again and again and again - at least three times and over a period of a few years. I am referring to the Banner-Herald from Athens, Georgia. This first example dates from March 23, 1927, at the time Love Em and Leave Em was showing at the local Palace theater. The captioned picture on the left identified as being Evelyn Brent ain't; and who know who is the women in the advertisement for the film on the right. Perhaps the same beret-wearing actress?

This next example from the Banner-Herald dates from just a few month's later, specifically August 2, 1927. Rolled Stockings was showing at the Palace, and the local newspaper managed to find a flapper-looking type and identify her as Louise Brooks. Which it ain't.

I can't figure out why this happened. Didn't the Banner-Herald have a picture of Louise Brooks on hand which they could use? Or did all youthful, flapper-type actresses look alike to the layout department? Or was the image substituted deliberately? This last example dates from May 17, 1928, at the time A Girl in Every Port was showing at the Palace. And again, an incorrect image is used.

If anyone knows who the incorrectly attributed actresses are, I would appreciate hearing about it. They do seem familiar. . . . Please post a comment.

This blog is authored by Thomas Gladysz, Director of the Louise Brooks Society (www.pandorasbox.com). Original contents copyright © 2022. Further use prohibited.