Paulette Goddard was married at 16, but not to Chaplin. She married and divorced Edgar James in the same year, and did not meet Chaplin until she was 21.

Mildred Harris was 16 when she met Chaplin. They became romantic when she was 17, and married when she was 17. (Of interest, Robinson simply refers to Mildred’s non-pregnancy as a “false alarm”. Felischman seems to characterize it as more of a trap. Robinson does say, though, “For her part, Mildred seems to have made knowing use of her golden hair, blue eyes and flirtatious prattle. She was presumably not discouraged by her mother….” p.245)

Lita Grey had a part in The Kid when she was twelve. She and Chaplin married four years later.

Oona O’Neill was 17 when they met, and they waited until she was 18 to get married so that they would not need parental consent.

Edna Purviance was 19 or 20 when she first met Chaplin. She was living on her own in San Francisco, and had had at least one serious love affair before Chaplin.

Another interesting aspect in the Robinson bio is Chaplin’s infatuation, when he was 19, with a girl named Hetty Kelly, who was 15. It was brief, and possibly ended by Hetty’s mother, but it left a mark on Chaplin. Robinson implies that Chaplin’s interest in younger women/girls may have been linked to Hetty Kelly. Just speculation, but of the affair, Chaplin said, ‘What happened was the inevitable. After all, the episode was but a childish infatuation to her, but to me it was the beginning of a spiritual development, a reaching out for beauty.’

SIR CHARLIE got four starred reviews, but Horn Book didn’t even review it in the Magazine. PW put it on their best books list (they normally only pick three longer nonfiction books so they are very selective). It’s likely Booklist will best it, meaning four stars, two lists, putting it decidedly middle of the pack in terms of a critical reception.

Yes, this post has a lot of comments, but most of them are Jonathan and me debating with Mark and William jumping in a few times as well:) All I can say is that I appreciate greatly the chance to have this conversation with others thinking hard about this book.

(Highest? City Dog, Country Frog. Highest non-picture/poetry is, not surprisingly, One Crazy Summer.)

Also, I think it’s interesting that you consider those who find this book “flawed” the minority–I feel like I’ve seen much more negativity than love for this book. Again, I guess it’s all about perspective.

This book is highly praised which is why I finally decided to give my contrary and decidedly minority view. So far there seems to be only a few of us on this minority plank so why not let us have our say?

Perhaps my reservations are all trees, but for me the forest is indeed flawed:)