Wednesday, October 30, 2019

TV: Truth in television?

Truth.  So many pursue it, even more obscure it.


3 JESS

We kept thinking about that last week.  We especially thought about it Thursday while watching WILL AND GRACE.




We weren't surprised about the havoc Debra Messing was creating on the set.  We weren't surprised and we warned about it ("NBC has a hateful bitch problem on their hands").   Just like we warned, before it happened, that Charlie Sheen would implode:


We're not sure what's going to kill the show first, the loss of a lead-in to hand  viewers to them or the fact that Sheen's offscreen antics may no longer have the buffer of Denise Richards. Probably not a good idea to build a "family sitcom" (no matter how leering) around a man more famous in the nineties as a client of Heidi Fleiss than for anything he did onscreen. In fact his rap sheet is far more impressive than his filmography. Let's just deal with the most recent "hits:" Arrested for assault in 1996, arrested for battery in 1997, hospitalized for an overdose in 1998 and fresh off probation as the decade began, Sheen's colorful, not so distant past may have blotted away memories of the zombie walk through performances of Major League II, Terminal Velocity, The Arrival and the lot but they didn't make him a good actor.
How much does CBS want to get behind this show now that Swinging Sheen is single again? How much are they willing to stake the network's future on it? There are grumblings that the wrong show was moved to Wednesdays (Still Standing) and concern that one new tabloid headline could make the trash seem far less funny. We'd say those are good concerns and possibly the answer here would have been to never have put this crap on the air.
And while considering that, we'd add a question of our own: How much does CBS hate women? That's the question we're left with after watching Two and a Half Men.





So we weren't really surprised -- months ago -- when we heard from people with the show that Debra was out of control as we had maintained.  Last Thursday, Rebecca noted there was obvious tension between Megan Mullally  and Debra in their one scene together.  Their one scene.  Grasp that.


But what we found more shocking was the pregnancy.  Grace is pregnant again.  Again?



Yes, season eight.  One of the all time worst storylines ever.


We get it.  Debra Messing has ballooned and then some.  You can't hide her girth any more than you can hide her thinning hair (we cringe anytime she parts in the middle and creates that deep valley of visible skin).  There aren't a lot of things you can do with that.




When the actress was actually pregnant years ago, the show had hide her belly, create a storyline where she ate constantly and then wrote her out of an episode.




That was actually better for the show than the Grace pregnancy storyline.  Who can forget, for example, Jack graduating from nursing school.  The whole episode, Grace was supposedly asleep in her bedroom.  While Will crafted Jack's speech (using an old play Will had written in college as source material), they forgot to wake up Grace.  Something they remembered at the ceremony.  It was a hilarious episode with many laughs.  And best of all: No Grace.




Many have argued over the years that the program should have been entitled KAREN AND JACK.  Megan and Sean Hayes are the icing on the cake for most episodes.  But Will (Eric McCormack) has been a valuable player in the show in numerous ways.  Eric McCormack




Debra?  She's always been the parsley, take her away and no one notices.  




We wrote about WILL & GRACE during its original run -- we wrote about it numerous times.  This isn't the first time Debra's caused problems.  In 2005, she was causing problems.



Debra thought she had a career as a movie star just around the corner.  Like her character Grace, she mistook herself for Julia Roberts and even the fact that THE WEDDING DATE bombed in 2005 couldn't dissuade her.  She just knew she was bound to be a movie star.  And, this is where the problem came in, she just knew it was all the big laughs she was getting for Grace's outfits that were hurting her chances at a movie career.  No, dear, it was the fact that you were 42 -- a little old (a lot old) to become a movie star.  For a reference point, much was made in 1992 when Sharon Stone became a movie star off of BASIC INSTINCT.  No one, industry insiders noted over and over, became a star 'that old.'  Sharon was only 34 at the time.



But plot point aside, did anyone stop to point out that Lucille Ball focused on being a clown on I Love Lucy? People didn't love Lucy because she wore designer clothes, they loved her because she was funny.

Part of what made Grace so funny was her outlandish style. Her fashion choices reflected that she didn't have it all together so, when she got off a mean spirited barb, it was funny because she was such a mess. Now days, Grace often just comes off as bitchy. The same sort of lines once spoken by wacky Grace sailed right over home plate, but with Fashion Grace saying them, they leave an after taste.



I LOVE LUCY.  Lucille Ball.  A true TV star.  America loved her, America still loves her.  Lucille Ball, in films in the 30s and 40s and 50s, could be very glamorous and exotic.  She was often a leading actress in films, a leading lady.  She was not, however, a movie star.  TV was the format on which she became a star.  And she did it by making us laugh, not by making us 'ooooh'  and 'aaaah' over her fashion choices.



Being a TV star wasn't enough for Debra.  She had no appreciation.  As Maria McKee sings, "Why wasn't I more grateful, Tell me why wasn't I more grateful, when life was sweet."



Debra tried to be anything but Grace in the years that followed the 2008 conclusion of WILL & GRACE.  She tried being THE STARTER WIFE and was a full fledged failure in that show (she's no Jennifer Aniston).  Ten episodes and USA didn't want to see any more of it.  In 2012, she tried to be the more glamorous and more successfully romantic character on SMASH.  The producers didn't think it worked.  The producers didn't think she worked.  Which is why the second season found her with so little to do and the producers added one young character after another.  Now we praised Debra for this role (and we stand by that).  But, yet again, she was trying to be something other than funny.  Next up was THE MYSTERIES OF LAURA.  Again, not a comedy though it did have a comedic element.  Again, we praised her and, also, we praised the show.  The second season struggle but the first season was solid (and that includes Debra).  But America didn't buy her in this role either and this was her third low rated series that viewers really avoided.



Three strikes and you're out.  Or, rather, as Tina Turner sang, you're "back where you started."  So that's when Debra's happy to be a part of a sitcom again (or at least willing to cash the checks) and we get the WILL & GRACE reboot.



We knew there was going to be trouble.  Debra is fat and she's balding and she was only returning to a sitcom because it was the only work she could get.  Add in that she now fancied herself 'political.'  This is the bitch -- we use the term with all consideration -- remember who was a TV star as Bully Boy Bush went to war on Iraq.  A war that still goes on, by the way.  And our 'political' Debra never said "boo."  Not one word was spoken by Debra.  2008 rolled around and Hillary Clinton was hit with the most vicious sexist attacks.  If you were reading this site back then (or checked the archives after the fact), you know that we defended Hillary against sexism.  Hell, we defended Sarah Palin, Cynthia McKinney and Rose Clemente against sexism.  Sexism is outrageous and needs to be called out.  Debra?  She didn't say boo.  But in 2015, she was all about calling out sexism -- real and imagined -- if it was about Hillary.  She herself was sexist in her attacks on Susan Sarandon and, of course, didn't know what she was talking about -- confusing foreign countries with US colleges, for example).  And since then she's considered herself 'political.'



She is not.



She is partisan.



There is a difference.



Two movie stars were political in the 70s.  Jane Fonda and Vanessa Redgrave.  Both are incredible actresses (and, as we often note, Jane gave the best performance in a film -- actor or actress -- when she made KLUTE.  Both were political -- speaking out against racism, speaking out against war, speaking out against sexism.  Jane spent her downtime on the set making calls on various political issues.  She didn't proselytize to the crew or other actors.  Vanessa, by contrast, liked to speak with other actors and crew members about the issues, she would invite them to join her for evening teaching sessions, etc.  Jane denies this but others believe it's true: When they worked on JULIA, Jane felt she saw a glimpse of what she could have been and didn't like it.  She didn't want to be the person who was always talking politics to people, spending every moment of the day trying to persuade people because they were basically hostages -- both of the film set and of her own fame -- and knowing that most were pretty much set in their belief system already.  (Shirley MacLaine has always been similar -- about her politics and about her spirituality.  If someone -- cast or crew -- is interested, she'll gladly enter into a conversation but she's not going to try to hard sell anyone on her beliefs.)



Debra isn't political.  She's partisan.  And, check her non-stop Twitter feed, she's obsessed with Donald Trump.  Everything he says, does or Tweets, she feels, requires an immediate response from her.  Everything.  If her Twitter feed is annoying -- and it is -- imagine having to work with her.



She's a DNC talking point explosion.  She's not smart enough to work on issues because that would require actual thought.  So she just spits out whatever others say and pretends she's informed.  She can't have a fun day, she can't have a laugh, she's suffers from a Christ complex (and she's Jewish) and we knew this was going to end badly (which is why we warned it all that time ago).  She storms around the set, a knuckle dragging hothead, always ready to explode and bend your ear about Trump.



He's not that important.  Seriously, people, get a life.  If we do what's needed, he can be voted out in 13 months.  Obsessing over him not only lets him steal your joy, it lets him steal your power.  We work on real issues.  We don't have time for the Trump hysteria -- our lives actually matter to us.



We feel for those who have to work with Debra -- including those who've called to say, "You don't know how right you were."



That's the truth about Debra (and the trouble with her).  And the trouble with Grace?  That they've given her another pregnancy storyline.  The nation breathed a collective sigh of relief on

September 28, 2017 when Karen emerged from a drug induced fugue and we learned that the plot of season 8 was all her dream -- Will and Grace had not really married their partners that year, they had not gone on to have children.  If you missed the hideous ending of season eight (and the end of the series originally) you can refer to our real time piece.




Grace's pregnancy was bad in real time.  After the series ended, it only got worse.  Season eight ended with the end of Will and Grace, they were no longer friends.  Her pregnancy made Princess Grace a bit of prig and a bit of a problem.  So the friendship ended.  The show then flash forwarded to both their kids in college and Will and Grace bumping into one another and deciding to have a coffee because that's what shallow-no-longer-best-friends do.  It was a gob of spit hurled at the viewers.



And now the 'geniuses' have decided to make Grace pregnant again as the show is ending.  The e-mails came flooding in starting Thursday night.  Yes, many noted the problems between Megan and Debra; however, most were about Grace's pregnancy and whether we should all be concerned considering how the show ended last time?



We should.



Truth was swirling around last week with the release of TOUCHED BY THE SUN.  This is Carly Simon's second memoir and it focuses on her friendship with Jacqueline Kennedy Onassis.  We highly recommend the book.  It's well written and it's fascinating.  Our key observation?  Carly goes deeper here than she did in BOYS IN THE TREES and that's really saying something (we loved BOYS IN THE TREES).  That may be due to the fact that Jackie is the focus.  Sometimes we're far more personal when we're writing about someone else.  But all writing is autobiography.  Anais Nin said, "Truth is something which can't be told in a few words. Those who simplify the universe only reduce the expansion of its meaning. Dreams are necessary to life."




Truth and dreams come flooding out of Carly's book.




Truth popped up somewhat on CNN last week when Mayor Pete's campaign was discussed.




No, Pete is not a shoe-in.  The issues that CNN noted were already noted several day before, in the Monday, October 21st snapshot.





With one of us already having noted the same issues, we were surprised they didn't go further.



As noted in that snapshot, Pete could win.  We are not saying he couldn't.  We are saying it's a harder haul than the press has been implying.



The CNN report dealt with the issue of Pete being gay and the problem some men have with that.  There's another issue though.  It's about relating.



If Pete wants to be president, you have to wonder why he and his spouse have not adopted.  We're not joking.  Military combat does not make you a 'man' (even if Pete had seen combat, which he didn't -- Tulsi Gabbard's the only one running who could be considered a combat veteran).  Most American voters see you as an adult if you have kids.  And that's called truth -- whether or not you choose to pursue it.







Roundtable

Jim: Roundtable time.  Remember our e-mail address is thethirdestatesundayreview@yahoo.com.  Participating in our roundtable are  The Third Estate Sunday Review's Dona, Ty, Jess, Ava, and me, Jim;  Betty of Thomas Friedman Is a Great Man;  and C.I. of The Common Ills and The Third Estate Sunday Review.  Betty's kids did the illustration. You are reading a rush transcript.




Roundtable



Jim: This is a quick roundtable.  In the Tuesday "Iraq snapshot," C.I. responded to the death of Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi -- to e-mails about his death.   We're not going to have a piece on that, or we're not planning to at present.  I thought that was a topic -- one of many -- we could discuss in this roundtable.




Jess: I don't see why.  I think C.I. said it all.  We're not talking a hero here.  We're not talking anyone who made lives better.  How did you word it, C.I.?




C.I.: He managed to tap into rage and resentment.  And what did he do with that?  He harnessed it into violence. I don't see him as a revolutionary.  I don't see any grand vision to improve lives.  I just see him as a thug who harmed many, many people and whose end goals included stripping women of their rights.  I don't see him as an important figure in life or in death.




Dona: I would agree with C.I.'s take, like Jess did, and I'm honestly confused as to why we're calling a roundtable due to this topic.  Jim.  That was directed to you.




Jim: I just found the snapshot interesting and I thought it was worth exploring further.




Ava: Well C.I. and I did speak Sunday evening about this and wondered if there was a media piece in it.  The most we could think of is Donald Trump.  The media is much more underwhelmed by this death than by Osama bin Laden's and is that a story?  Maybe.  Butit's also true that bin Laden is supposed to be the person behind the 9/11 attacks -- attacks on US soil.  That would make him a bigger concern to the US press.




Betty: Meaning this is a man that's not really on the radar for most Americans or most US media outlets.




Jim: But would it be different if Barack was still president when this happened?




Betty: I'm sure it would be.  Maybe not a lot different.  But, yes, the media would be doing victory laps for Barack.  In some form or another.




Jim: But you think it would be differently?




Betty: Yes, but not significantly.  I don't think this would be wall-to-wall.  I do think the tone, however, would be different -- it would be more respectable and less questioning.  And, let me be clear, I don't think we need that.  I think we need a media that always questions.  But I hope the second Donald leaves the White House, the media doesn't fall back into submission.




Ty: That's a real issue for me.  There are a few things the media is doing currently that I would love to applaud.  But I didn't see them do that when Barack was president or when Bully Boy Bush occupied the White House.  I don't support a rule for Donald and then a rule for everyone else.  Has the media morphed into a stronger presence?  I'm not sure.  And the Russia nonsense doesn't help make the case that it has.




Dona: I would absolutely agree with that.  They showed no skepticism there even though the whole was nonsense or farce.  It wasted our lives, it kept us from focusing on real issues -- as a country, it did.  I know no one participating bought into the crap.




Jim: In part because the shift against Russia began under Barack and C.I. wrote a long piece on how that was happening back in 2015.  So we were predisposed to question nonsense charges if they involved Russia.




Jess: Well, I understand what Ty's talking about, but I don't think we need to wait to see if the media's changed -- wait for Donald to be out of the White House.  I would argue that it clearly hasn't changed and would point to the press' nonsense regarding Hunter Biden.  What he did was wrong.  It was unethical.  And yet, from Anderson Cooper to every other media pipsqueak, we hear that he did nothing wrong.  Yes, he did.  As C.I. has repeatedly pointed out, it is one thing to say that Hunter did nothing illegal as far as we know and in saying that he did nothing wrong.  With just what is already publicly known, he did something wrong.  Unethical is wrong.  Sarah Chayes gets it.  Why does she get it when others don't?




Ty: A very good question and I was really shocked by how Sarah was treated when she was on NPR's MORNING EDITION.  I can't remember who she spoke with --


C.I.: David Green.


Ty: Thank you. He was a disappointment.  His whole attitude was a disappointment.  It was like, 'Okay, she's a famous journalist who was with PBS so we have to interview her but notice how I detach and put up a wall when normally I would be all over with 'So good to talkto you' and 'I see'."  It was embarrassing.  He treated her like she had small pox.  Why?  Because he didn't want to break from the pack on Hunter Biden.



Jim: I give Sarah huge credit for breaking from the pack.  Who's the other one?  C.I., we were talking about him.




C.I.: Jonathan Turley.




Jim: Yep.  And, Jess, you're right.  If this was really a new stage for the press, they'd be going after Hunter.  This is not about the press growing or morphing, this is just about them hating Donald Trump.




Dona: Can I bring up a point here?  The press is its usual timid self.  It's not going to change.  This is about hating Donald Trump and that's really become a sick obsession for so many.  Donald Trump will hopefully be out of the White House after 2020.  But even if he isn't, this hatred is rather surprising when you consider that Barack set the record for deportations, that Barack said he would end the Iraq War and he didn't, it continues.  Go down the list.  You're unhappy with Donald?  Guess what?  I was unhappy with Barack.  And I was not obsessed with him nor am I obsessed with Donald.




Betty: I loved C.I.'s point about don't let him steal your joy or your power.  I really cannot believe how many people have become raving lunatics and turned their entire lives over to real time response to Donald Trump.  Talk about letting someone steal your power.  And, let me add one more point, people really need to read Ava and C.I.'s piece this week.  It's really important and gets to real and serious issue.




Jess: Iraq.  I want to point out that Barack did exactly what he told the press he would do -- which was pull troops out of Iraq and then send them back in.  He didn't say that in his campaign speeches.  But he did say it privately to two NEW YORK TIMES reporters who refused to put it in the article they wrote.  C.I. found it in the transcript and here we did an article on it.  That was 2007.  We weren't psychics.  We just did the job -- the job THE NEW YORK TIMES should have done.  The job others should have done.  The press is going to change?  Not a chance.  They were useless in 2007 and are useless today.  They sell lies.  They wanted the war to continue -- I'm not talking about the two reporters, I am saying the paper -- so, in 2007, they didn't report what Barack told the paper.  They just lie and lie over and over.




Betty: Over and over and always.




Jim: It really is something, to look around the web today and wonder what happened.  Mary what was her name?  Pretending she gave a damn about the Iraqi people. Maryscott O'Connor.




Ava: She's a nut job.  She's morphed into an online beggar.  She's one of those idiots who attacked Hillary in 2008.  Remember all the sexist attacks in 2008? Yes, she was part of it.  And she stated that if Hillary got the nomination, in 2008, she would not vote for her.  Then in 2016, she's a Hillary groupie.  F**k her.  I did not support Hillary in 2016 but I share the scars of her 2008 supporters and I have no problem with those who continued to support her in 2016.  I do have a huge problem with those, like MaryBigBullyScott, who trashed her over and over in 2008 and then wanted to show up in the very mild 2016 and pretend Hillary was the victim of sexist attacks.  MaryScott's a lot of things, mainly vulgar.  I have no respect for her.  Beg some more, Maryscott, beg some more, I need a good laugh.

Betty: Just to add, I agree with Ava.  Those who called out the sexism of 2008? If they supported her in in 2016 or didn't, I do support them regardless.  But these Janet Come Latelys who did nothing in 2008 but show up in 2016 and pretend to care about sexism?  I have no use for them.  I don't take them seriously.  If you care about sexism, I don't know how you could have stayed silent -- or taken part in it -- in 2008.

Jim: Good point.  We're going to go ahead and wrap up.  You are reading a rough transcript.  Thank you to Ava and C.I. for taking notes.  Our e-mail address?  We're actually going to just move to common_ills@yahoo.com for new e-mails.  If you're already writing us at the old one, you can continue.  Trina's locked out of her e-mail currently so she's moving over to common_ills@yahoo.com and announcing that today.




So you think you know the classics

Forget fourth graders, are you smarter than a liberal arts major?  Test your knowledge this go round and find out.

library


Yes, you liked it, so it's back.  Below you will find the opening paragraph or paragraphs to five classic books.  Can you identify them?

Wait, we'll make it easier for you.

After the five excerpts, there are six possible books that the five can be from.

Can you match them up?

Openings:


1) "You do see, don't you, that she's got to be killed?"




2) No live organism can continue for long to exist sanely under conditions of absolute reality; even larks and katydids are supposed, by some, to dream. Hill house, not sane, stood by itself against its hills, holding darkness within; it had stood so for 80 years and might for 80 more. Within, walls continued upright, bricks met neatly, floors were firm, and doors sensibly shut; silence lay steadily against the wood and stone of Hill House, and whatever walked there, walked alone.


3) The recitations were over for the day.  It was the first week in November and it had rained about every day the entire week; now freezing temperature added to the discomfiture of the dismal season.  The lingering equinoctial whirled the last clinging yellow leaves from the trees on the campus and strewed them over the deserted paths, while from the leaden sky fluttering snow-white flakes gave an unexpected touch of winter to the scene.

4) Some voyages have their inception in the blueprint of a dream, some in the urgency of contradicting a dream.  Lillian's recurrent dream of a ship that could not reach the water, that sailed laboriously, pushed by her with great effort, through city streets, had determined her course toward the sea, as if she would give this ship, once and for all, its proper sea bed.


5) As a child, on the Red River Plantation where he was born, Little Augie was not required to chop cotton or work in the rice swamp like the other boys of his age.  He was considered too frail for hard labor.  Instead it became his duty to mind the cows when they grazed in the clover fields and to lead the horses to the watering-place.



A) Pauline Hopkins' OF ONE BLOOD: ON THE HIDDEN SELF


B) Arna Bontemps' GOD SENDS SUNDAY


C) Shirley Jackson's THE HAUNTING OF HILL HOUSE


D) Anais Nin's SEDUCTION OF THE MINOTAUR


E) Agatha Christie's APPOINTMENT WITH DEATH


F) Amanda McKittrick Ros' IRENE IDDELSLEIGH



So how did you do?

Not sure?

Need to check or maybe to cheat?

Fine, the key is below.


1) E

2) C

3) A

4) D

5) B


"So you think you know the classics"
"So you think you know the classics"
"So you think you know the classics"
"So You Think You Know The Classics"




The 60th anniversary of CITIES OF THE INTERIOR


शोध परिणाम
  1. The enemy of a love is never outside. It's not a man or a woman. It's what we lack in ourselves. - Anaïs Nin




Sixty years ago, Anais Nin's CITIES OF THE INTERIOR was published.  This volume collected her novels for the first time.  Philip K. Jason explained in the intro to the 1973 volume ANAIS NIN READER:

Although Anais Nin has been a published writer for four decades, her work has been given serious critical attention only in recent years.  One reason for the recognition of Nin's work having been so long delayed is its unconventional nature.  The art of Anais Nin cuts across traditional literary categories.  She combines poetic lyricism with an extended fable, blurring the distinction between poetry and prose.  Her writings are presented to us both as separate, self-contained compositions and as part of a continuous work-in-progress; moreover, they hover in that contemporary no-man's-land between autobiography and fiction.  Finally, she is a truly international writer whose work belongs to no one national literature. 


Anais Nin wrote novels, novellas, short stories, the prose poem HOUSE OF INCEST, erotica and is famous for her diaries and journals.  Of her own writing, Anais explained in NOVEL OF THE FUTURE, "In fiction I dwell on the pursuit of the hidden self.  I give much importance to the Walter Mitty in all of us, to our dreams and fantasies, because I am convinced of their importance, their influence, and their revolutionary character.  What may seem unreal or invented in my writing is the natural outcome of dramatizing the conflict between the conscious and unconscious self.  What we are accustomed to accepting as familiar is the external appearance of reality.  The external story is what I consider unreal."


CITIES OF THE INTERIOR gathers Anais' five novels: LADDERS TO FIRE, CHILDREN OF THE ALBATROSS, THE FOUR-CHAMBERED HEART, A SPY IN THE HOUSE OF LOVE and SEDUCTION OF THE MINOTAUR (SOLAR BAROQUE in the first collection -- it was expanded when re-published in 1961).  In 2013, the collection was finally made available in digital formatFANTASTIC FICTION notes, "Using spare but powerful prose, Nin reveals a psychological truth about women and relationships that goes beyond the personal and into the universal, providing a 'mirror' in which readers can see clearly see aspects of their own selves."  A SPY IN THE HOUSE OF LOVE had sold well for AVON PAPERBACKS but most of Nin's work, including the original CITIES OF THE INTERIOR, was either self-published or released by small publishers.  That sixty years later, we're still talking about CITIES OF THE INTERIOR goes to how groundbreaking the five collected novels remain


  1. In Anaïs Nin’s Cities of the Interior, the female characters represent her many selves and who she wishes to be, while her male characters represent her experiences with lovers & what she admires in them. These also overlap because of her bisexuality.
  2. Correlations to her reality in Cities of The Interior; Anais Nïn: Lillian June Miller: Sabina Henry Miller: Jay I’ve decoded it. Slightly fictionalized, but definitely inspired.





SWALLOW PRESS pull-quotes Rebecca West ("Real and unmistakable genius"), THE ATLANTIC ("She explores relationships on a level to which few contemporary novelists penetrate"), Daniel Stern ("A prose/poetry dream, a lyrical celebration of the inner life and the images it evokes") and Karl Shapiro ("Beautiful, rare novels").  Those influenced by Anais include Carly Simon, Jim Morrison, Alice Walker, James Leo Herlihy, Gore Vidal, Judy Chicago, Barbara Kraft, Daina Chaviano, Wendy Guerra, Steven Reigns, Sharon Spencer, Anna Balakian, Anna Kavan



Upon its release in 1959, CITIES OF THE INTERIOR was reviewed by Edwin Fancher in THE VILLAGE VOICE who noted the novels "depict the interferences to life, the blocks and distortions to growth, and try to go to the neurotic core of their characters." In Volume Six 1955 - 1966 of THE DIARY OF ANAIS NIN, Nin writes:


The five novels are out in one volume, CITIES OF THE INTERIOR.  I read at the Becks' Living Theatre.  I read the Party Scene at the end of LADDERS TO FIRE.  There was an opening at the Guggenheim Museum the same night, which put my friends in a terrible spot, but they all came,  faithfully, warmed up the hall, no defections!  One person came with a two-month-old baby, who cried until I began to read.  There was a parrot in the entrance hallway which had to be covered.  They serve coffee and sell books.  Good atmosphere. 

That was sixty years ago.  Two years later, in 1961, Alan Swallow's SWALLOW PRESS would begin publishing Nin's work


In "The New Woman," Anais Nin explains:

Why one writes is a question I can answer easily, having so often asked it of myself.  I believe one writes because one has to create a world in which one can live.  I could not live in any of the worlds offered to me -- the world of my parents, the world of war, the world of politics.  I had to create a world of my own, like a climate, a country, an atmosphere in which I could breathe, reign, and recreate myself when destroyed by living.  That I believe is the reason for every work of art.




  1. "I must be a mermaid, I have no fear of depth and a great fear of shallow living" ~ Anais Nin For Photographed by Styled by Makeup by Hair by







Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 Unported License.
 
Poll1 { display:none; }