Davis believed Crawford had worked against her and later said so, extensively and emphatically. This is documented.
No independent witness has been documented as corroborating the specific campaign Davis alleged. This is also documented, in the negative sense that no such evidence has surfaced.
Crawford later presented the Oscar to Bancroft in New York, completing the proxy function. This is documented.
Everything else—the inner lives of the people involved, the telephone calls that may or may not have been made, the specific quality of the expression on Crawford’s face as she stood at the microphone, the precise degree to which the voting outcome was or was not influenced by anything other than the voters’ assessments of the nominated performances—exists in the territory between evidence and interpretation, which is where most of the most compelling parts of this story live.
—
THE RIVALRY IN RETROSPECT: A FAIR ACCOUNTING
Crawford and Davis were contemporaries who occupied overlapping professional and commercial spaces in an industry that did not create much room for either of them to exist independently of comparison with the other. This structural proximity created conditions for friction regardless of their personal dispositions toward each other.
Davis had two Academy Awards before *Baby Jane*; Crawford had one. Davis had a reputation for theatrical intensity and intellectual seriousness about her craft; Crawford had a reputation for technical precision and instinctive commercial appeal. Davis worked primarily at one studio for most of her peak career; Crawford moved between studios more frequently and diversified her image more deliberately. These are differences in approach and in the institutional support each woman received, not simply differences in quality.