Driving home from Don Q at Miami City Ballet, I got to thinking about glamourous performers -- I mean, people like Ava Gardner, Rita Hayworth, Lena Horne -- women with serious beauty, of course, but who also draw the eye magnetically, exuding sexual allure, electricity, and the promise of something extraordinary about to happen. They're not demur, which doesn't mean they're not suble. They can stand out just by moving a hand, extending a foot, or glancing in your direction.

To be honest, I haven't seen this all that often on the ballet stage. I imagine that Alexandra Danilova had it. Reading Natalia's review of the ABT Swan Lake in Washington, I imagine that Veronika Part also has it.

Who else. Who are the truly glamourous ballet performers -- on stage -- today and of the past as well?

I'll start with Jennifer Kronenberg, Miami City Ballet.

I think of "glamour" as the ability to wear flaming red lipstick and exude sophistication. A holdover from my 1950s childhood, no doubt.

More along the lines of your definition, Veronika Part does have it.

Of the NYCB contingent, I'd nominate Jenifer Ringer and Sarah Mearns.

Can we include people who've left us? Because when I read this subject's title I immediately thought of Danilova.

Veronika Part, of course, but also her mentor and teacher in Leningrad-St. Petersburg, Inna Zubkovskaya. That woman was gorgeous even into her 70s.

Others today, beside Part? Defnitely Diana Vishneva. Possibly Japan's glamour-beauty Mizuka Ueno. Other have 'airs of glamour' though not (to me) necessarily drop-dead gorgeous faces: Semionova, Lopatkina, Alexandrova, Kowroski.

in the recent past (just retired or moved on to modern dance or character dancing): Silja Schandorff of Denmark or Sylvie Guillem of France.

Agree on Vishneva. She radiates glamour for me. Julie Kent on stage always has struck me as being glamorous in a very American sort of way(without stage makeup she looks very different!)

Going back a bit, Patricia McBride always looked very glamorous and sexy to me.

I think it has a lot to do with the eyes. Certainly Vishneva and McBride have large, almost oversized eyes, and this is very telling on the stage. Ringer has also been mentioned and she too has very expressive eyes.

Definitely, and sometimes looked like Lee Radziwill without the several husbands, etc.

But Sizova, as always, from the past (who was easily the prettiest as well as most great genius IMO) and also Aurelie Dupont now. I also think Makarova is sexy but not especially pretty.

Edited to add: Since 'Appalachian Spring' is sometimes called 'Ballet for Martha' (if only in the concert version of the score), I'll stretch a little because I want to add Matt Turney, who is ravishing as well as profound as the Pioneer Woman in the old movie. She is the smoky-gorgeous black woman, I was reminded of her because bart mentioned the glorious Lena Horne, almost my favourite thing. Turney fully embodies the part of that character that are immortal. She is like this unimaginable combination of holiness and glamour at the same time.

Great topic. From all reports, Danilova certainly had it. But glamor (I'll plump for the American spelling) has a special meaning and not all dancers who are beautiful, sexy, and/or charismatic are also glamorous. (bart describes the special nature of glamor very well.)

I would add Toumanova to the list, also.

In the more recent NYCB past I think Stephanie Saland & Nanette Glushak both had an aura of glamour - anyone remember them?

Well, maybe so, and I definitely agree, but ALL the ladies I listed had GLAMOUR (I'll plump for the glamorous spelling...) I also think Glamour can be cultivated, just like other areas of talent. Hollywood history is fully of glamorization--plain faces painted that reveal something they definitely don't have without the makeup. Now I do agree Ava Gardner and Lena Horne have it, and most people think Rita Hayworth has it, but I don't see it that much--too vulnerable. Kim Novak and Marilyn Monroe had it, and without makeup too. Dietrich and Garbo had it, with no effort put toward it even though the former put much...In ballet, American standards of glamour don't always apply, which is why I think Sizova is a rare exception, with Hollywood looks although Russian. Glamour usually implies a kind of gloss and bigness.

Carla Fracci's got tons of glam.

I don't have the book with me, but I remember one of the ballerina's interviewed in "Striking a Balance" described Pamela May this way, and I seem to remember red fingernails as well, but no mention of "dahling".

I've only seen photos of and brief films with Antoinette Sibley, but she exuded glamour in "The Turning Point". In the most recent issue of Dancing Times, there's an interview with Sibley which discloses not much new, but there is a stunning photo of her now at 70, much more beautiful than any I'd seen of her as a dancer. In it she looks radiant, not glamourous, though.

Glamour. What a rare quality nowadays. I guess the times have changed, and this old concept is rather hard to find. My grandmother always advocated for the glamorous image, no matter what her emotional state would be. It was some sort of a detachment, in which the external image ALWAYS needed to be at its best, no matter how old, how sick or whatever any other “how”. She went to bed every single night of her very long life with her head wrapped in rollers, and would declared that her hair needed to be in place in case death would strike in the middle of the night and she had to be dragged out of the house in front of strangers…bless her.

With this little story I just want to say that glamour, in my eyes, is a whole attitude in which external image plays a key factor. Makeup and sense of fashion are truly essentials, and while class/refinement is an additive, it is not always present- (e.g.-Mae West). Ditto with classical physical beauty -(Alexandra Danilova). Patrick is certainly very right about how possible it is to acquire glamour, a la Leslie Caron’s GIGI. I really believe that glamour has been the weapon many ladies have used in history when lacking beauty, many times with optimal results.

For what I’ve read in some of this ballet ladies of the past autobiographies, at some point they all seem to convey in the idea that they sensed that their public image was as important as that onstage, and according to this they projected themselves in the way that the ballerina was supposed to…extending their performance beyond the stage.

I get to see many dancers hanging around at my favorite Starbucks in South Beach, some of them well known among the ballet audience, and it seems to be a generalized “anti-glamour” attitude among the females…flip-flops, no makeup, ragged clothes etc. NOT THAT I’M AGAINST EVERYONE’S RIGHT TO WEAR WHATEVER THEY WANT, but even more than that…some of them make totally sure that they are as ordinary as the rest of us mortals…it is sort of an understatement.

I’m a firm believer of that Felia Doubrovska’s mantra about “walking like a ballerina, dressing like a ballerina”, and about the forgetting of that other one: “less is best”.

Interesting..., three of the ballerinas that I believe possess great glamour aren’t- (or weren’t)-traditionally pretty: Dame Alicia Markova, Dame Margot Fonteyn and Mme. Alonso.

Saland, emphatically! Glushak I saw only after she'd moved on to ABT, but yes, she had it, too.

Carla Fracci

Galina Ulanova

How about Maria Tallchief?

Not according to the American Heritage Dictionary online. Searching glamor brings up glamorous and glamorize, but not glamor. I was curious as to why Noah Webster hadn't changed this -our ending when he Americanized the spellings of colour, labour and the like. Did he not know the word? According to www.etymonline.com, glamour was popularized by the writings of Sir Walter Scott. Perhaps it hadn't gained a foothold on this side of the Atlantic during Webster's lifetime. Just a guess.

I'm learning a lot

One of the things I pick up from Cristian's post is that glamour doesn't come naturally or even easily. It takes effort and a set of priorities -- even a value system -- quite different from the one he describes at the Starbucks in Miami Beach.

If no one cares about it or wants to sacrifice it -- if it's thought to be false or superficial or whatever -- could we say that glamour is dead?

_____________________________

Few of us ever saw Alonso dancing. Most have had to rely on films shot in her 50s and eve 60s. In those films, she seems so exotic that I never even thought about her glamour. The attention to make-up, hair, and costume are definitely there. Can you tell us more about Alonso's glamour, as you experienced it or heard people talking about it? Atm711 and others who saw Alonso dance at ABT: it would be wonderful to hear your thoughts as well.

Reading Fonteyn's name in Cristian's post surprised me at first. (I don't know why.) Then I thought of some of the photos in Meredith Daneman's biography. Fonteyn in bathing suit and wide-brimmed hat on a beach in the south of France -- lying on a beach blanket next to Roland Petit -- standing arm and arm with her husband on a beach in the Bahamas -- incredibly chic in Cinderella's rags -- making all those fussy, overdecorated Royal Ballet costumes of the period look like they are the most elegant Diors or Balenciagas.

Then there's the photo taken near the end of her life on her run-down farm in Panama. She smiles gloriously as she sits on a wooden chair surrounded by dust, cattle, and dogs. She's wearing tailored slacks, a short-sleeve blouse, and trim walking shoes. A scarf is tied artfully around her neck. I want to meet this woman, to learn her life story, warm myself in that glow, learn her secret.

Fonteyn, definitely!

Strange, but I never thought of Alonso as glamorous---in her early career she exuded the dedication of a Nun--she was to be taken seriously. Danilova was wonderfully glamorous--and whenever she was seen offstage was impeccably dressed and coiffed.--as was Felia Doubrovska who I only saw teaching class and she always out-classed the Company Ballerinas who were taking her class To that list I would add Mia Slavenska, Toumanova and a dancer who seems to have been forgotten, Vera Nemtchinova.

For old-time, filmstar, glamour I'd go for Lorena Feijoo. I can just imagine her on one of the Ballets Russes whistle-stop tours, stepping down out of the train in the morning to be interviewed for the 87th time, in full make-up, a suit and heels and a gorgeous hat.

Bart, yes, I like some of Cristian's observations too, and to you and dirac, add that glamour is not always a matter of 'sexual allure', although it often--and perhaps usually--is. I'm not exactly in the mood to say this, but Suzanne Farrell is unquestionably glamorous, even if she does not wish to 'exude sex' (at least consciously). The reason is that she had glamour even when she 'wasn't on' and even when she was dancing rather passionlessly, which definitely did happen. She is not sexy as the Striptease Girl IMO, but she IS glamorous, even in that, which I think one of her weakest roles. The glamour comes partially from having this slightly freakishness of long-limbedness, of elongation, that would make her seem even taller than she was--the limbs projected length as in a Parmigianino and other Mannerist figures. I don't always like it, but when she was passionate, the arms could be especially violent and every time this got going, she was totally hypnotic. Her real-life persona can seem a bit schoolgirl, but that's beside the point (except to say that she wasn't always glamorous, and didn't usually seem so offstage). And if she didn't have the glamour to begin with, Balanchine drew it out with a Faustian will, just as effectively as Louis B. Mayer, in a less lofty way, got Judy Holliday to lose weight and Lana Turner to take on her early-nymphomaniac look.

The same for Fonteyn, who is utterly glamorous, beautiful, even though not with a body like Sizova which just throws off animal spirits with a carefree abandon that even upstaged Nureyev in that Corsaire film IMO (I've never seen THAT glamour-icon upstaged any other time. No wonder he wasn't exactly thrilled with sharing a flat with her...). Paul Parish once mentioned how much the young Fonteyn resembled the queen of England when still a princess. Yes. And the queen of England is glamorous. Anyone who has seen her in person knows that middle-cult wardrobe is a clever disguise--it's not easy to inhabit a lot of palaces these days, and she knows how to turn on the Royal Glamour quite as well as she uses that amusing 'royal wave' thing.

Edited to add: I believe that was Harry Cohn for Judy Holliday and Mayer for Turner. Sorry, I'd forgotten who was so hateful to Judy.

re: Mme. Alonso. atm...it is so interesting what you said about her. Truth is, you got to see a totally different persona than me...you got to see the young ballerina. I only knew the myth, the blind diva...the older lady who would show up at the theater escorted by two guys on each side to guide her-(due to her blindness)-her neck all wrapped up in layers of pearls, huge shades, long head scarfs and heavy make up while making her grand entrance walking with her hyperextended feel. The whole thing was very glamorous. http://www.ballet.co.uk/images/cuba_ballet...o_chair_600.jpg
Also, the very last ballets that she danced well into the 90's, were strange creations of her own that primarly focused in female characters greater than life. It was sort of like she was trying to portray her own life onstage trough Maria Callas, Cassiopeia, Cleopatra and some others. The ballets were just a vehicle to show her being carried from side to side in extravagant costumes and makeup. They looked all more or less like this.
http://portal.unesco.org/fr/files/9855/105...so-biog-250.jpg
Of course, we all loved them.
It's interesting nobody has mentioned Dame Markova...
http://www.jamd.com/image/g/3279028

For me it divides up between glamour and charm. Glamour is a bit idle and entitled and charm is always inventing.

Leslie Caron I would not think of glamourous, but of having a certain charm, at least in Daddy Long Legs, American in Paris and Lilli. I agree with Patrick that Rita Hayworth had some vulnerability that checked her glamour. In "Lady from Shanghai" Welles seems to want to make turn it up full blast and then selfishly deromanticize it.

At New York City Ballet Roma Sosenko was always all out charm, and Irma Nioradze in Don Quixote in Berkeley last fall seemed 3/5 glamour and 2/5 charm, each element using the other for some of its effect. Suzanne Farrell I would think of as having a cool and sly charm.

Cristian--we certainly gave two very different views of Alonso and I am sure they are both correct. As to the other Alicia-----I think a person (whether male or female) to be considered glamorous should have some sex appeal. While Dame Markova had many fine attributes---this was not one of them.

Oh, yes!

Somehow, I'm reminded of the lines from Antony and Cleopatra:



Perhaps "allure" IS rather a strong word. However, wouldn't you say there has to be some self-awareness of sexuality and a willingness to use it? I didn't find this with Farrell, who I saw most often before the break with Balanchine. Was it something that became more overt after her experiences in Europe and her return to NYCB, when I saw her less often?


Absolutely fascinating - -and completely new to me. Cristian, if you have time between work and school and performances you HAVE to write a memoir of that time.

An interesting distinction. I can certainly think of glamourous types in my life who were entirely without charm. But, as you suggest, the ones you remember were capable of projecting both. Thanks for the memory of Roma Sosenko. She's currently ballet mistress at Miami and is acknowledged by everyone to be doing an amazing job.

I have to agree with atm711 on this one. It may be because there are so many video inteviews with the elderly, impeccably groomed, surprisingly refined Markova. Whatever "glamour" is, it ain't genteel. On the other hand, if you've seen photos of Markova as a child star in France, she definitely had possibilities when she was young.

I have a question about glamour as it applies to ballet particularly. Are there particular balletic skills that give the impression of "glamour" (and/or charm) on stage. Do the dancers mentioned above have similarities as to body type -- or the way they move. The dancers I'm thinking of were multi-talented, but each of them had the ability to give weight to their movements -- and to command close attention.

I'm thinking of things like the creamy push of an arm to arabesque -- the perfectly controlled lifting of the extended leg to the side while the unsupported body stands secure and serene -- self-confidence and variety in the use of eyes -- mastery of epaulement -- hands that are expressive but never fussy. Even in allegro, these dancers project the qualities of concentration that other dancers usually muster only in adagio.

Oh, good heavens yes there has to be 'some self-awareness of sexuality', which IMO she had IN SPADES, but I don't think there has to be a 'willingness to use it', which she most certainly would not, at least overtly or casually. I saw her more in the 70s-80s period, but by then it could show without management intrusion, of course. On the other hand, I can't speak much for the period in which you saw her, having seen only one performance toward the end of that period, but this may also have to do with our separate perceptions of what signifies 'sexuality' as well. This was a self-possessed sexuality if there ever was one, like Garbo's maybe, although I prefer Martha Graham's or Marlene Dietrich's approach if I do say so me-self. There is also one picture of her as a child of maybe 11, and she is already just exuding sensuality all over the place, I think it's one leaning to the side on her elbow, I forget now. So by now that makes at least two of us who see her that way.

"Self-possessed" and "Garbo" definitely ring a bell, Patrick. Diamonds comes to mind: she made the woman into a fascinating, enigmatic character. On the other hand, it didn't work with Tzigane, for me at least.

Tamara Karsavina and Anna Pavlova. I'm surprised they haven't been mentioned.
Tanny LeClercq is another very glamorous star from the past.

Totally agree, she is amazing in 'Diamonds', and while musical in 'Tzigane', it also needs someone a little more worldly, just as does the Striptease Girl.

I've never thought of Pavlova or Karsavina as glamourous. Kschessinska, yes, but the other two looked too innocent to me, while Kschessinska looks born to drip with jewels.

I did think about Pavlova. The thing is that for some reason I tend to associate "glamour" with some sort of aesthetic language, in which a very obvious made up image plays the biggest role, with no room for simplicity. In that Makarova's interview to Sir Frederick Ashton they talk about Pavlova, and how elegant and sophisticated did she look on and off stage. On the other side, I didn't think about sexual appeal as an essential part of it. In fact, I use the word many times to refer to other things besides people-(e.g-atmosphere, decoration, ambiance, etc...)

Tanaquil LeClerq is the most glamorous ballerina I've ever seen. There's nobody out there to match her past or present.

I started watching NYCB after she left the company. Photos -- especially those taken by Jerome Robbins -- convey some of her beauty (inner as much as outer) and charisma. The film of Afternoon of a Faun, with d'Amboise, is a stunner. At one point her eye is drawn to her own image in the mirror. She pauses, turns her head, and looks into the mirror. She seems hypnotized as she gazes at her reflection. I have often thought: "A lot of men would KILL at get a beautiful woman to look at them that way." Talk about magnetic !!

Makarovafan -- do didn't mention .... Makarova! What can you tell us about her?

I've been following this thread with interest, and have written and erased a few responses, because I'm not sure that my 'definition' of glamor matches the dictionary or the definitions I've seen here. I'm still not sure what I think about it, but did have a couple of thoughts to add.

I do think that glamor is not strictly 'natural,' while elegance can be. (that is, I don't see examples in nature of glamorous animals, while I do see elegant ones) I think glamor has an element of self-awareness in it, that elegance might not, and perhaps that is the crux of it for me -- glamor is, in some way, intentional. It is the product of intervention -- you have to do something to yourself to achieve it. I don't think it's innate, although I have heard people refer to 'unconscious glamor,' so perhaps to achieve it while attempting something else.

Of course, I could be drawing a semantic distinction that means something only to me.

This is the opening paragraph of a recent article on Sylvie Guillem by Debra Craine in the Times:

"Sylvie Guillem is unbelievably elegant but she hasn't made the slightest effort. Her face is scrubbed free of make-up, her long auburn hair is tied back with casual aplomb, and she's dressed like a truck driver. Scruffy and natural - is this how ballerinas are supposed to look? Yet there has always been something extraordinary about this glamorous French artist, and no matter how much she downplays it, her innate charisma can't help but assert itself."

And, for those of you who follow the ballroom dance world, Juliet McMains book on the industry is titled "Glamour Addiction."

Tzigane is one of my favorite pieces of dance on video, and Farrell is so perfect in it – a very American girl doing a dazzling riff on the theme of Gypsy Fire. (And sexy too – she knows what she’s doing with that look over the shoulder.) Off topic, of course.



I agree – glamor is to some degree self-willed. As has been noted above, a woman can be beautiful, charming, or elegant (or a combination of all three) and still not be glamorous. I think some of the examples named in this thread are wonderfully beautiful and appealing women, but I still wouldn’t describe them as a glamorous. It’s a tricky thing.

I should note also that although this topic refers only to women, men can be glamorous, too.

Well, yes...animals can't change the way they look unlike humans...Still, when I read about it, one came to my mind instantly as a glamorous one
http://www.wonderfulinfo.com/amazing/wpeacock/pic01.gif
vs. an elegant one...
http://cache.virtualtourist.com/15192-Whit...-Whitehorse.jpg

Oh, dear, cubanmiamiboy, now you’re confusing me.

That’s a stunning peacock, although you wouldn’t think them so glamorous if you happened to live next door to one. They’re noisy.

This makes a very effective case for a glamorous creature brought to us by mother nature!

Very good, I agree on both, and earlier today had meant to say that I think horses are naturally the most glamorous of all animals, except cats can definitely be too. But peacocks, definitely, and even more so, Birds of Paradise and Lyrebirds. They have evolved these plumages which is like putting on makeup very slowly, as in eons.

Ravishing as that peacock is, however, I don’t think it detracts from sandik’s original point, which was that glamor is to a considerable degree a contrivance. (I think one of the word’s older meanings relates to magic, casting a spell, which is what glamorous human beings can certainly do.)

But isn't that what plumage evolution is all about, although perhaps more often in the male in the lower animals, casting a spell to charm the mate?

And even more than that. Earlier I mentioned that Glamour doesn't, in my vision, always equals refined verbal skills , or sometimes even class . I've read about examples of very glamorous creatures who were considered rather vulgar but still visually fascinating -( hey, and sometimes even that vulgarity, if wisely acknowledged and well worked out would even become an additive instead of a subtracting factor, IMO. e.g-some old Hollywood actresses, and I'm sure Patrick knows a lot about this...Aren't they sort of peacocks themselves...?)

You read my mind, kid. I saw Lana Turner in 1982 at Bloomingdale's signing her hideously written unrefined-verbal-skill autobiography, and it was as if the whole room were filled with Technicolor--without the benefit of film, as in the NBC, Proud as a Peacock. She had her hairdresser-escort Eric Root dye his hair to match hers exactly, and wore an extreme black point d'esprit dress. It was a kind of total exoticism that she'd spent her life cultivating, and yes, there are few Hollywood actresses more vulgar than she. I'll admit it was impressive, and glamour was certainly Lana's best asset once she got it going. And this is a perfect example of glamour purely in the service of vanity.

On the other hand, Deborah Kerr has been written of as 'wearing her glamour so easily', and I agree that she is also glamorous, but not vulgar at all. However, she had a glossy look that was not always used for purposes of vanity, so I think most don't think of her as especially glamorous, but I do.

The main thing we've discovered about glamour is that we have strong feelings about what the definition is and these feelings are interestingly rather hardened.

True, in a sense, but glamorous human being has to work at it a little harder than a peacock displaying the feathers he was born with. The peacock's just doing what birds do (although I see your point).



I think that's a bit harsh. I never much cared for her, but Turner was bred to be glamorous by her studio from a very young age and was never encouraged to do or be more than that. Glamor was her job.

And her book has a few good things in it, too.

I think of Asylmuratova as a glamorous dancer, with such a dramatic face, although I never saw her in person.

This is glamour...
http://symonsez.files.wordpress.com/2008/11/maewest.jpg

Indeed it is, this was a genius in my book ....

Yes. I also had this impression a day or so ago when I saw a clip from The Leaves are Fading. In that contemporary dress, with her dark hair up, she reminded me of Fonteyn. The way she moved her head and used her eyes, too. I have nothing specific to pin this feeling on. Just and impression.

About the white peacock. I can't decide whether this extraordnary bird is indeed glamours. But she sure is stunning. Like someone from the Ziegfield Follies.

Re: Mae West. There seem to be elements of self-parody -- or even self-delusion -- in her film image. Can "glamour" coexist with that?

The peacock reminded me of Sally Rand. Although I don 't know if Rand ever appeared in the Follies...

I think there's self-parody, but not self-delusion. This was an intelligent woman, who had written plays and gotten arrested for them, only to be inspired with what she saw in jail and write about that. Wrote scripts, had big power in Hollywood. I am sure she would say she was glamorous, and she ought to know.

Glamour, glamour...
http://www.smh.com.au/ffximage/2006/10/26/...eb__300x257.jpg
http://www.ballet.co.uk/images/dvd/russes/..._makeup_500.jpg

I don't think vulnerability should automatically disqualify someone (Hayworth should still count); if that's the case then Veronika Part wouldn't be considered glamorous. She strikes me as someone both vulnerable and sensitive, which only adds to her appeal. Are we looking at someone's stage or screen persona or off stage/screen as well? There are those who project a very glamorous image on stage but I can't imagine them walking around in a fur coat and sunglasses. Then there are those capable of both--Anna Netrebko, Irina Dvorovenko.

Good point, and to dirac's and my discussion about Lana Turner, I should add that Bette Davis praised her work as an actress in 'Cass Timberlane' and at least one other early picture I can't recall, but said that 'Lana was different from the rest of us, in that she was concerned with her image both onscreen and off. The rest of us were just doing our jobs and working to do our roles professionally within the films' (not good memory of the exact quote, and 20 years since I had that book). I always picked that up about her, and that's why seeing her in person was exactly the same as seeing her onscreen--it still looked like you were looking at a film, and I've never seen anything like this; certainly seeing Garbo in an old scruffy coat tromping about the East Side was not like looking at a film. I found her unique in this way and disappointing in other ways as a result of this--she had little sense of humour about herself (which I think points to extreme vanity), which her galpal Ava Gardner had in profusion, as did Dietrich. But I can easily see Hayworth as being perceived as glamorous too. Agree that some have it only onstage and onscreen, and some have it onstage and off. The queen of England has it all the time, as I see it. I think part of glamour for a long time has had to do with publicity and developing of singular images, so that while some glamour can also be 'secret glamour', as it were, and very obvious to any onlooker just by its irresistible magnetism, much of it has to do with knowing who the person is and the way a myth has been built around her--which doesn't mean it's purely artificial either, because this can then be built into the art as well, integrated into it, even though it was inserted from without. This is what I think happened to some degree with Suzanne Farrell, although she was born with that extraordinary body.

Oh, definitely Lana..!
http://s3.amazonaws.com/findagrave/photos/..._1023138229.jpg