Re: “Ladies’ voices give pleasure.”
anonymous
July 15 2009, 17:37:58 UTC
It might be fun to watch and listen to some of the operas first. When you see and hear how other artists get her, Showalter's unworthy appraisal will be overwhelmed, and then when you do read, you can read with fresh eyes. I would start at the beginning with 3Lives (aloud). She has to be read aloud! That's where the humor is.
It's comical because on the back of my Vintage paperback there's a quote by Donald Sutherland that says: "Gertrude Stein uses the simplest possible words, the common words used by everybody, and a version of the most popular phrasing, to express the most complicated thing..."
I think it's exactly the opposite. She uses the strongest possible language to say the simplest things (and her use of exaggeration is how we measure her authorial confidence and get how funny she is). Here's the first line from The Good Anna:
"The tradesmen of Bridgepoint learned to dread the sound of 'Miss Mathilda', for with that name the good Anna always conquered."
Translation: she would bargain the shopkeepers down in their prices. And can't you just hear Anna, having instilled the dread in the tradesmen in the first place, taking her time, making small talk, giving them every chance, trying to keep a straight face before dropping the boom of the code word "Miss Mathilda" on them one more time, and conquering yet again.
Stein's playing and wagering everything on the play, that there will be others, many others, who will want to play along with her. She's not particularly subtle about her intentions. She uses the word "funny" on the first page twice; she mentions a row of dominoes that a child knocks over, evokes a full house, stray dogs and cats--there's a sense of controlled mayhem. She's already in her Parisian salon dissecting life and art. It just doesn't exist yet. But with her first publication she's clearing the path to get there--to conquer.
It's almost as if Sutherland wanted to compliment Stein because he knew she was special, wasn't exactly sure about what he had read, maybe because of her boldness and originality, thought of what he might like people to say about his work, and then said that, even though it wasn't applicable. You'll see. A lot of what people have written about her is total malarkey. When you read her, I can already tell, you'll get it in a snap. And then I guess I'd recommend the Autobiography of Alice B. Toklas. If you're still having fun, there's lots more where that came from and you can fill in.
Honestly, what Showalter said is like some comments you hear about Beckett or Bob Dylan. She can't tune in to the wavelength so she assumes it's not there. Hence my original comment about the pity for her and I guess her students and readers. But luckily you called her on it, Karen. That's how good your instincts and instrument are. You're running with the wolves, little sister, and it's a great pleasure to see you do so.
It's comical because on the back of my Vintage paperback there's a quote by Donald Sutherland that says: "Gertrude Stein uses the simplest possible words, the common words used by everybody, and a version of the most popular phrasing, to express the most complicated thing..."
I think it's exactly the opposite. She uses the strongest possible language to say the simplest things (and her use of exaggeration is how we measure her authorial confidence and get how funny she is). Here's the first line from The Good Anna:
"The tradesmen of Bridgepoint learned to dread the sound of 'Miss Mathilda', for with that name the good Anna always conquered."
Translation: she would bargain the shopkeepers down in their prices. And can't you just hear Anna, having instilled the dread in the tradesmen in the first place, taking her time, making small talk, giving them every chance, trying to keep a straight face before dropping the boom of the code word "Miss Mathilda" on them one more time, and conquering yet again.
Stein's playing and wagering everything on the play, that there will be others, many others, who will want to play along with her. She's not particularly subtle about her intentions. She uses the word "funny" on the first page twice; she mentions a row of dominoes that a child knocks over, evokes a full house, stray dogs and cats--there's a sense of controlled mayhem. She's already in her Parisian salon dissecting life and art. It just doesn't exist yet. But with her first publication she's clearing the path to get there--to conquer.
It's almost as if Sutherland wanted to compliment Stein because he knew she was special, wasn't exactly sure about what he had read, maybe because of her boldness and originality, thought of what he might like people to say about his work, and then said that, even though it wasn't applicable. You'll see. A lot of what people have written about her is total malarkey. When you read her, I can already tell, you'll get it in a snap. And then I guess I'd recommend the Autobiography of Alice B. Toklas. If you're still having fun, there's lots more where that came from and you can fill in.
Honestly, what Showalter said is like some comments you hear about Beckett or Bob Dylan. She can't tune in to the wavelength so she assumes it's not there. Hence my original comment about the pity for her and I guess her students and readers. But luckily you called her on it, Karen. That's how good your instincts and instrument are. You're running with the wolves, little sister, and it's a great pleasure to see you do so.
Reply
Have a wonderful weekend!
Reply
Reply
Leave a comment