The Topless Photo

[JaneTVFan]

Here are two pictures, one is obviously Lucille Ball. The other one, Kathleen Brady claims is also Lucille Ball. It's that artsy photo of a woman who is topless. I personally find nothing offensive about the photograph (even though I've edited it here), but nevertheless, I don't see the resemblance to Lucille Ball. Can someone explain why Kathleen Brady believes this woman is Lucille Ball?

[vedastone]

That may not be Lucy, but I can understand why someone would think it is her. The nose is identical, and the whole face profile line is very similar. The eyes could indeed be Lucy's, but it is hard to tell since she is squinting.

Actresses from that era often looked wildly different at different stages of their career, so it is not so outrageous to believe that someone would think this is (perhaps an earlier) photo of Lucy. I've seen stills from Joan Crawford's earliest movies and would never have guessed who it was.

To me, it looks like whoever that is could be transformed into Lucy's twin with the right makeup. But, come to think of it, she also looks a bit like Myrna Loy.

Maybe you could post the uncensored photo so we can get a better idea........ just kidding!.

[gidgetgrape]

Originally Posted by JaneTVFan

Can someone explain why Kathleen Brady believes this woman is Lucille Ball?

Because if she says that she'll sale more copies of her book.

[JaneTVFan]

I also noticed the similarity in the nose, though my impression was that the nose on the woman in the photo seems a bit more pointed on the end than Lucy's. Of course, it's very difficult to make these comparisons when all you have are two dimensional photos to compare. But what about the ear lobes? Lucille Ball had a nice set of ear lobes, which served her great for hanging those big, dangling earrings. But in that topless photo, the ear lobes seem tiny. And what about the cheek bones? Lucille Ball had great, very pronounced cheek bones. But I don't see them in this photo.

I do recognize that actresses from that period had widely varying looks through the years. And Lucille Ball was no exception to that. However, certain of her features were so distinctive, I've always been able to make her out in a photo. I've seen pictures of her as a teenager and could easily tell it was her. I've seen pictures of her from her early Goldwyn days, including ones where she's in the middle of a crowd of other Goldwyn Girls. And even in those pictures, I've always able to instantly pick Lucy out of the crowd. This topless photo, however, is the only adult photo allegedly of her that has ever left me scratching my head, trying to find a resemblance to the Lucy I'm familiar with. It just leaves me perplexed. Frankly, I find the woman in that photo kind of homely. So if it is Lucille Ball, who I think was one of the most beautiful women of all time, that photographer somehow managed to make a gorgeous woman look rather unattractive.

Originally Posted by vedastone

That may not be Lucy, but I can understand why someone would think it is her. The nose is identical, and the whole face profile line is very similar. The eyes could indeed be Lucy's, but it is hard to tell since she is squinting.

Actresses from that era often looked wildly different at different stages of their career, so it is not so outrageous to believe that someone would think this is (perhaps an earlier) photo of Lucy. I've seen stills from Joan Crawford's earliest movies and would never have guessed who it was.

To me, it looks like whoever that is could be transformed into Lucy's twin with the right makeup. But, come to think of it, she also looks a bit like Myrna Loy.

Maybe you could post the uncensored photo so we can get a better idea........ just kidding!.

[vedastone]

Jane -

I can see what you mean about the unattractiveness. You make good points about the earlobe and cheekbone but that pretty fuzzy photo apparently in bright sunlight makes it hard to tell what is really there.

Everybody has good and bad days, there are good and bad photos and photographers; makeup or lack of it influences our perception a lot.

The topless photo is fuzzy enough to leave me with the conclusion that I just can't tell. But since you have seen many more photos of Lucy than I, I will agree that in all likelihood it is not Lucy. I can't deny the resemblance though.

Thanks for bringing up an interesting topic.

[JaneTVFan]

I have to agree with you there. The lighting and angle make it impossible to tell for sure one way or the other. I didn't buy Kathleen Brady's book, mainly because, from glancing through it, it seemed to me more gossipy than a serious attempt to understand Lucille Ball -- almost to the level of a tabloid --and I tend not to like books like that. But because I didn't buy it, I dont' know whether she explains her evidence in establishing that this is indeed Lucille Ball, if there is any. I haven't heard that she did provide any, so I remain skeptical. Nevertheless, whatever the answer is, maybe too big a deal has been made over this photo because it's not the least bit sexual. It's just an artistic photo celebrating the female human form, which is a far different thing from a photo that's meant to be sexually stimulating.

Originally Posted by vedastone

Jane -

I can see what you mean about the unattractiveness. You make good points about the earlobe and cheekbone but that pretty fuzzy photo apparently in bright sunlight makes it hard to tell what is really there.

Everybody has good and bad days, there are good and bad photos and photographers; makeup or lack of it influences our perception a lot.

The topless photo is fuzzy enough to leave me with the conclusion that I just can't tell. But since you have seen many more photos of Lucy than I, I will agree that in all likelihood it is not Lucy. I can't deny the resemblance though.

Thanks for bringing up an interesting topic.

[Brian Damage]

Originally Posted by JaneTVFan

Here are two pictures, one is obviously Lucille Ball. The other one, Kathleen Brady claims is also Lucille Ball. It's that artsy photo of a woman who is topless. I personally find nothing offensive about the photograph (even though I've edited it here), but nevertheless, I don't see the resemblance to Lucille Ball. Can someone explain why Kathleen Brady believes this woman is Lucille Ball?

That is Lucy. No doubt about it. The profiles are EXACTLY the same. Who cares if she posed nude. From the sounds of it, that group did everything and anything with everyone and anyone. No big deal, but that's Lucy.

[Mikado]

well, I cant be as certain as Brian but, it deffinately looks like pics on the "BEAUTIFUL" thread of Lucy as a young model......also, I cant think of anyone else I know, besides Lucy, who did her eyebrows that way; but, the young model has the SAME eyes & brows......I'd say its at least an 80% chance that it is a pic of Lucy from the 1930s yup yup

[Ireneparalegal]

Brian.

Mikado, what's with the cow pic?

As I look at the ears of the topless woman, it appears to NOT match Lucy's ear. The lobe area is different and the topless woman's ear seems smaller.

[Brian Damage]

Originally Posted by Ireneparalegal

Brian.

Mikado, what's with the cow pic?

As I look at the ears of the topless woman, it appears to NOT match Lucy's ear. The lobe area is different and the topless woman's ear seems smaller.

Lucy must have had a lobe job. Kind of like the lube job I have on my car. I noticed Mikado's into the cow thing. It's funny and sort of an identity thing. yup yup

I think of Billy Boy Thornton's character in Sling Blade whenever I read that.

[Ireneparalegal]

Originally Posted by Brian Damage

Lucy must have had a lobe job. Kind of like the lube job I have on my car. I noticed Mikado's into the cow thing. It's funny and sort of an identity thing. yup yup

I think of Billy Boy Thornton's character in Sling Blade whenever I read that.

Lobe job... OMG Didn't see that one coming.


I am so out of the loop, as Janice would say. I never seen Slingblade and I have seen the and YUP YUP on the boards. I feel so left out.

[Mr. Television]

It does sort of look like Lucy. Not that their's anything wrong with that.

[Ireneparalegal]

The ladies like the woman in the topless photo came from an era where they sometimes all looked the same, the shaved eyebrows, painted on eyebrows, light skin and dark lips. Hell, that photo can be anyone. She somewhat resembles Jean Harlowe.

[Mikado]

I just found and old pic of Lucy with her head tilted the same way as yhe topless one and I'm 98% convinced now... Basically, to my eyes, the ears are identical...earlobes actually never stop growing (its fact, look it up), so the 45 yr old Lucy would have larger lobes than a 15-20 yr old

ps the cow seems to be nodding "yes" so, shes saying "yup yup" , to me

[Mr. Television]

Originally Posted by Mikado

I just found and old pic of Lucy with her head tilted the same way as yhe topless one and I'm 98% convinced now... Basically, to my eyes, the ears are identical...earlobes actually never stop growing (its fact, look it up), so the 45 yr old Lucy would have larger lobes than a 15-20 yr old

ps the cow seems to be nodding "yes" so, shes saying "yup yup" , to me

We got Mikey on the case. That's good detective work. It sure is an awful good resemblence to her.