Sybil Movie
Oct. 25th, 2006 04:29 pm![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png)
![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png)
I finally saw Sybil this weekend with my room mate who is also a multiple. I had read the book but never seen the film. I thought her acting was amazing! Me and my room mate both looked at each other in shock. If we hadn't known it was an actress I might have believed her. I was surprised since she's a singlet (as far as I know).
Besides from that the movie was good, although I don't understand why they made all the alters into children. That was very weird especially since a lot of them were either the same age as Sybil or older. In all reality I cant judge the movie alone because all the holes in the story I knew about since I read the book.
One question though, who was the guy? does anyone know? I knew of a few different guys in the book, but the love interest in the movie seemed like a combination of them and her best friend (who did not appear in the movie anyway).
Well this is just me ranting but I'd like to hear your opinions on this movie or the book.
Besides from that the movie was good, although I don't understand why they made all the alters into children. That was very weird especially since a lot of them were either the same age as Sybil or older. In all reality I cant judge the movie alone because all the holes in the story I knew about since I read the book.
One question though, who was the guy? does anyone know? I knew of a few different guys in the book, but the love interest in the movie seemed like a combination of them and her best friend (who did not appear in the movie anyway).
Well this is just me ranting but I'd like to hear your opinions on this movie or the book.
no subject
Date: 2006-10-26 06:07 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-10-26 09:23 am (UTC)The love interest was completely fake as was most of the film, and the book.
Sally Field played Sybil as a dowdy, unkempt, almost bag lady type. The bizarre behavior, the child alters, etc., were all contrived to fulfill audience expectations of a "mental patient". Little to nothing is known of the real Shirley Mason. We have received letters from people who knew her who confirm that her mother was very controlling and allowed her no freedom, but the more extreme incidents in book and film apparently did not happen. There is no evidence backing up the assertion that Shirley was too scarred inside to have children. What we did hear from one source was that Shirley, like Dr. Wilbur, was gay.
Another source told us that Shirley remained multiple all her life despite Wilbur's attempts to integrate her; in fact she said she was lonely and depressed without the others, whom she came to regard as a family.
Psychological historian Peter Swales is doing research on what really happened with Shirley Mason. The last we heard of him, he had actually put that on hold because he was also working on a project about Marilyn Monroe and some new information was uncovered about her recently.
no subject
Date: 2006-10-26 04:37 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-10-26 08:42 pm (UTC)Oh, so you do that too?
no subject
Date: 2006-10-26 11:15 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-10-27 03:37 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-10-27 04:18 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-10-27 05:44 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-10-27 12:17 pm (UTC)http://www.freedomscientific.com
Now, if we're lucky...Grin. But if this link doesn't work at all, do the Google thing and it'll come up as a sponsored link.
no subject
Date: 2006-10-26 04:40 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-10-27 03:37 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-10-27 07:40 am (UTC)Judging from the voluminous correspondence we've received over the last eleven years, I seriously suspect that the latter is frequently the case. Sybil, by virtue of the fact that there was almost no other literature on multiple personalities at the time, set the standard for both mental health professionals and their clients on what constituted proper behavior for a multiple. Even Truddi Chase& fit the profile, in their own way. It has become a meme, in the true sense of the word.
One reason we wrote the articles that formed the basis for our website was to conceive of and hopefully provide alternative examples.
no subject
Date: 2006-10-27 08:31 am (UTC)Maybe, for some yes, but not for everyone. I don't think she should be the standard because everyone is different and any standard there is too static; it wont work. I also think this is more aimed at people who are multiples because of abuse not those who are born that way.
Yes its fine to provide alternative examples but these shouldn't be the standard or norm either. I dont think its a good idea to go with only one way of thinking.
no subject
Date: 2006-10-26 02:46 pm (UTC)Prior to 1900, possession was the most frequent "diagnosis" for cases that might very well have been cases of multiplicity. Psychologically, we've only thought about personality and identity in those terms very recently (last 100 years or so) and before that everything was given supernatural reasons for occurring. If you read up on some stories of possession, particularly case studies of some witch burnings in the 16th and 17th centuries, you'll realize that all of the "symptoms" sounds a hell of a lot like multiplicity.
Some of us even have demons or inhuman soul-bonds and the like. Technically, that kind of multiplicity fits the very definition of possession.
Luc, et al
no subject
Date: 2006-10-27 03:39 am (UTC)