12wonderY
I’ve been reading my entire shelf of Grace S. Richmond books this calendar year. I should have started this thread at the beginning. Oh well.
Her typical main characters are doctors and clergy (modeled from her husband and father respectively?)
Back to back though this month, Foursquare and High Fences feature writers. I abandoned Foursquare (published 1922) because the main character was so broken. I will return later to read the resolution.
I’m entirely enjoying the latter (published 1930), as it is upbeat and very witty. It has multiple reflections on identity and writing styles.
I wish I knew more about her life and how much is autobiographical.
Her typical main characters are doctors and clergy (modeled from her husband and father respectively?)
Back to back though this month, Foursquare and High Fences feature writers. I abandoned Foursquare (published 1922) because the main character was so broken. I will return later to read the resolution.
I’m entirely enjoying the latter (published 1930), as it is upbeat and very witty. It has multiple reflections on identity and writing styles.
I wish I knew more about her life and how much is autobiographical.
22wonderY
Grant Overton wrote The Women Who Make Our Novels in 1918, with short chapters about 32 novelists of the day. It’s a disappointing book, as he uses much of the space to gush and to list titles that are again listed at the end of the chapter. He provides few biographical details and a very poor analysis of the appeal of the authors to their readers.
Of course, this was published about midway in Richmond’s career.
He asserts that her characters are not “types” though they definitely are. He also praises the “emotionalism” she expresses that most of us repress, to our detriment. What a silly statement.
I will explore the book further and compare his analyses of some other authors I enjoy.
The best I can say is he mentions a few short stories published only in the Ladies’ Home Journal that I had missed knowing about.
Of course, this was published about midway in Richmond’s career.
He asserts that her characters are not “types” though they definitely are. He also praises the “emotionalism” she expresses that most of us repress, to our detriment. What a silly statement.
I will explore the book further and compare his analyses of some other authors I enjoy.
The best I can say is he mentions a few short stories published only in the Ladies’ Home Journal that I had missed knowing about.
3merrystar
I have never heard of this author and am intrigued you have a whole shelf by her; at least some of her books seem to be available on OpenLibrary. Any suggestions on the best book to try first?
42wonderY
>3 merrystar: Sure! Glad you are interested and still coming to this corner of LT.
For the season, On Christmas Day in the Morning. And it’s very short.
For most memorable character, Red Pepper Burns
I’ve been rating them more critically this year in my regular reading thread, but that might be a long slog to find them.
For the season, On Christmas Day in the Morning. And it’s very short.
For most memorable character, Red Pepper Burns
I’ve been rating them more critically this year in my regular reading thread, but that might be a long slog to find them.
5merrystar
>4 2wonderY: I like books that qualify as 'tattered', but have mostly read the better-known ones, so I enjoy all of your posts about authors and books I haven't heard about. I'll try the Christmas story first :)
