Category Archives: John Brooke

by

Book review: Little Women An Annotated Edition, edited by Daniel Shealy

I am delighted when Gabrielle Donnelly, author of The Little Women Letters (see previous post) offered to review this wonderful new edition of Little Women. Ed.

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

560 LW Shealy1There are two ways to read Daniel Shealy’s new annotated version of Little Women (Belknap Press, $35.00): the sensible way and the irresistible way. The sensible way is to open at the beginning, and read through to the end, checking the footnotes as you go. That is the sensible way.

Every detail you could ever want

The irresistible way, is to open at the beginning … read the first couple of footnotes … realize that this book will tell you every single thing that you have ever wondered about in the background to Little Women … and proceed on a wild treasure hunt of March family trivia that will take you zig-zagging across the text until your head spins.

  • Was the town where the Marches lived really based on Concord? (No – although there are similarities between the Marches’ house and Hillside, the Alcotts’ house when the daughters were teenagers, the house in the book is quite specifically located in a ‘suburb’ of Boston while the more rural Concord is 18 miles away.)
  • What really were pickled limes? (Precisely what they sounded like, and, inexplicably, hugely popular with nineteenth century schoolchildren).
  • What was the game called ‘Rarey’ that Laurie played with his horse while Amy sketched him? (Not a game at all, interestingly: there was famous horse whisperer of the time called John Rarey, whom apparently Laurie was emulating).
  • Did May Alcott, the real life inspiration for Amy March, ever really sleep with a clothes pin on her nose? (Yes, and was less than delighted to have had this fact immortalized in print).

Many ways to read

The bad thing about reading the book the irresistible way is that it will leave you dazed and giddy, with your mind stuffed with far too much information properly to process. The good thing is that, after you have suitably sown your Alcottian wild oats, you will then have the time to go back and read the book the sensible way to see what you’ve missed.

For the fan and the scholar

Quite simply, the book is the Little Women lover’s dream come true. It’s physically imposing, with pages that are nine inches wide and divided into two columns: the text of the book runs through the two inner columns, while the outer are devoted to the footnotes. And what footnotes they are. There is something in them for everyone, from the neophyte who needs to have it explained that that beloved Alcottian adjective ‘decided’ means ‘determined’ in modern English, to scholars of all levels, of literature, of history, of women’s studies, of social studies, and of just plain fun.

Pages 246-247 - the footnotes are in red, the book text in black. The exquisite design of this book is exemplified through the choice of type (note the lovely drop cap at the beginning of the chapter) and the quality of the paper. From Little Women: An Annotated Edition by Louisa May Alcott and edited by Daniel Shealy. Copyright © 2013 by the President and Fellows of Harvard College. Used by permission. All rights reserved.

Pages 246-247 – the footnotes are in red, the book text in black. The exquisite design of this book is exemplified through the choice of type (note the lovely drop cap at the beginning of the chapter) and the quality of the paper.
From Little Women: An Annotated Edition by Louisa May Alcott and edited by Daniel Shealy. Copyright © 2013 by the President and Fellows of Harvard College. Used by permission. All rights reserved.

Serious facts, fun trivia

Information comes trivial and weighty, and the skill with which all of it is woven around the text is exemplary.

A chance comment of Marmee’s that she doesn’t want the girls to ‘delve like slaves,’ leads to a concise, but full, outline of the antislavery movement.

Similarly, the information that Meg’s husband John Brooke went to fight in the Civil War and was wounded – although we are told that the real life John Bridge Pratt did not go to fight at all – provides an opportunity for some sobering paragraphs on the ‘horrific’ human cost of the War on the population in general.

Louisa and her alter ego, Jo

Louisa’s real-life literary career is recounted alongside Jo March’s fictional one; and no less meticulousness is given to detailing the various fashionable fineries with which all sisters adorn themselves throughout the book. Louisa’s views on marriage are expounded, as are her views on women’s emancipation; Bronson Alcott’s philosophy is given its due airing, as is a history of salt cellars, a recipe for beef tea, and a completely delightful anecdote which I had never heard before, about a visit to Boston by the then Prince of Wales in 1860, during the course of which he captured the heart of Louisa and a friend by winking to them flirtatiously as he passed by in a carriage.

Classic illustrations through the ages

Pages 336-337 features a delightful depiction of Amy, foot stuck in plaster; illustration by Frank Merrill, 1880 version. From Little Women: An Annotated Edition by Louisa May Alcott and edited by Daniel Shealy. Copyright © 2013 by the President and Fellows of Harvard College. Used by permission. All rights reserved.

Pages 336-337 features a delightful depiction of Amy, foot stuck in plaster; illustration by Frank Merrill, 1880 version.
From Little Women: An Annotated Edition by Louisa May Alcott and edited by Daniel Shealy. Copyright © 2013 by the President and Fellows of Harvard College. Used by permission. All rights reserved.

Nor are the treasures of this book confined to its words. Running through the pages is a veritable wealth of illustrations, ranging from historical photographs of Louisa, her family, and the time she lived in, to book illustrations from different editions of Little Women, to stills from the various movies.

You will flick from Norman Rockwell’s no-nonsense depictions from 1937, to Frank Merrill’s elegant pen and ink figures from 1880 (my personal favorite is of Jo wearing glasses and addressing the Pickwick Society), to the sweetly wistful sisters of Barbara Cooney from 1955.

You will find stills of Katharine Hepburn as Jo in 1933, Christian Bale as Laurie in 1994, and a lavishly made-up Elizabeth Taylor as Amy in 1949.

Picture, pictures and more pictures

Along the way you will chance on other joys – the warmly welcoming interiors of the magnificent Orchard House museum in Concord, a Victorian mourning locket, an old playbill, a group of early suffragettes, or sometimes, just because it’s pretty, an illustration of a sweet pea or a dahlia. Amy would approve wholeheartedly.

Totally worth it

This book is not a casual purchase: priced at $35.00 and weighing in at a whopping 4.2 pounds, it is not something you’ll be slipping into your basket on the spur of the moment. But for the person in your life who loves or could learn to love Louisa May Alcott, and who you think deserves a special treat – be it your daughter, your best friend or even (why not?) yourself – it is worth each penny of cost and each ounce of weight several times over.

Gabrielle Donnelly is the author of the novel The Little Women Letters, published by Touchstone.

Click to Tweet & Share: Gabrielle Donnelly (The Little Women Letters) reviews the new annotated Little Women, edited by Daniel Shealy http://wp.me/p125Rp-1sC

Are you passionate about Louisa May Alcott too?
Send an email to louisamayalcottismypassion@gmail.com
to subscribe, and never miss a post!
Facebook Louisa May Alcott is My Passion
More About Louisa on Twitter

Susan’s ebook, “Game Changer” is now available From the Garret – download for free!

by

“The March Sisters at Christmas:” So, what did you think?

I went into this movie preparing to hate it. I don’t watch Lifetime and am not a huge fan of “chick flicks” (with the exception of “Pretty Woman” – Richard Gere <sigh> :-)

I am also wary of fan fiction surrounding Little Women although The Little Women Letters by Gabrielle Donnelly and March by Geraldine Brooks were both terrific.

However, “The March Sisters at Christmas” proved to be a very pleasant surprise. Here’s what made it work for me:

Chemistry

These four women were very appealing. Many of my favorite scenes featured the four sisters together. Kudos to director John Stimpson for choosing the right people and creating a real sisterhood that was so key to the original story of Little Women. I also loved the chemistry between Jo and Teddy (and liked the fact that Laurie was known as Teddy). My only complaint was that he was a little too much in the beef cake department. :-)

Twists and turns

I liked the way the movie was not literally faithful to the book but was faithful in spirit.  All the different twists in the movie made perfect sense. Amy as a theatrical rather than an artist worked for me (and coincidentally, she was also portrayed that way in The Little Women Letters) – it brought in both the theatrics from the story and Amy’s artist temperament.

Jo was perfect. My husband at one point said that Jo was “annoying” and she was in the original story – abrasive and bossy, but also generous and kindhearted.

Meg was almost overly motherly, especially towards Beth; I liked the fact that it wasn’t certain at first between Meg and John and that there was another man in the mix.

Beth is a hard character to bring to the 21st century and at times the other sisters seemed to treat her as if she needed therapy because she lacked ambition and confidence. I was glad to see the kindness that is Beth’s most sterling quality brought forth with the Christmas presents.

Plot twists

I loved the brewing feud between Jo and Amy, playing itself out with an “evil” tweet! It wasn’t evident right away how Amy would get her revenge (I thought she was going to cut the power in the house and cause Jo to lose her story) and her injury from the water heater which brought Jo to her senses worked for me.

The writing

I appreciated the fact that the writer(s) had actually studied the book and remained faithful to it while at the same time showing some imagination in how the story would play out in current time. It again confirmed what all us Little Women fans know – that this story is universal.

What didn’t work

What didn’t quite work for me was how Jo and Teddy’s relationship worked out. It seemed like two weeks was not nearly enough time for Teddy to get over Jo and fall in love with Amy. But that’s TV for you! I also felt that Jo’s relationship with Marcus Bhaer was rushed and underdeveloped. Still, I liked the fact that he was the one holding back rather than Jo.

The verdict?

I really enjoyed “The March Sisters at Christmas” and was very pleasantly surprised. It was a lot of fun to watch (especially spotting the scenes from my hometown. And yes, I spotted all the Concord scenes too!).

You can catch “The March Sisters at Christmas” again today at 5pm on Lifetime. I have it on my DVR.

So, what did you think?
Click to Tweet & Share: “The March Sisters at Christmas:” So, what did you think? http://wp.me/p125Rp-1jn

Are you passionate about Louisa May Alcott too?
Send an email to louisamayalcottismypassion@gmail.com
to subscribe, and never miss a post!
Facebook Louisa May Alcott is My Passion
More About Louisa on Twitter

Susan’s ebook, “Game Changer” is now available From the Garret – download for free!

by

Little Women on the stage – a Concord Players’ tradition

Julius and Nancy Gluck

This past Saturday I had the pleasure of seeing the Concord Players‘ historic production of Little Women with one of you! Nancy Gluck of the Silver Threads blog along with her lovely husband were spending the weekend in Concord (she is preparing a 5-part series on Louisa May Alcott for her adult education class). We thought it would be most appropriate to meet for the first time while seeing Little Women and we had a wonderful time kabitzing.

Louisa May Alcott and her sister Anna helped found the Concord Players (once known as the Concord Dramatic Union) in 1856; when introducing the play, Michael Govang (John Brooke) referred to Louisa as their “patron saint.”

Bronson Alcott Pratt portraying Mr. March in 1932 in Concord’s production of Little Women.

Since 1932, the Concord Players have staged Little Women every ten years (with the exception of 1942, because of the war). It began in 1932 as a way to celebrate the 100th anniversary of Louisa’s birth. Two cast members were direct descendants of Anna – Louisa Alcott Kussin (Meg) and Bronson Alcott Pratt (Father).

This year marks the 100th anniversary of Orchard House as a museum, making this year’s production historic.

A direct descendant of the family was in the ensemble (Louisa Alcott Yamartino) who is co-owner of fritz & gigi, The Children’s Shop in Concord with her sister, Karen. According to the program, “the business is run by a third generation of the family and is celebrating 75 years in business this year.” Louisa is the great, great, granddaughter of Anna.

The play was written by a local, David Fielding Smith, and features Jo acting as both narrator and character. The quick pacing and energetic performances made this play a joy to watch.

Beth and Jo at the seashore.

Casting on the  most part was perfect. Nicole Dunn took the part of Jo and perfectly embodied Jo’s spirit. I truly could feel Jo’s love for her sisters, her buoyancy and joy for life and writing, and the desperation when Amy fell through the ice, and Beth caught scarlet fever. The scene between her and Beth at the seashore brought tears to my eyes.

It is interesting to note that Dunn had never read Little Women although she had seen the 1994 film (read an interview with her here). She was Jo and I will forever think of her whenever I read Little Women.

David N. Rogers took the part of Laurie. I wasn’t quite sure about him until the pivotal scene between Laurie and Jo when Jo tells her boy that she doesn’t love him. Here Rogers shown, exploding with deeply felt passion.

Marmee reads a letter from Father to the girls.

Jan Turnquist, the executive director of Orchard House, revived her role as Marmee. Jan is such an integral part of Louisa’s continuing legacy that it seemed very fitting to have her there as Marmee.

Kimberly Rochette‘s Meg and Amelie Lasker‘s Beth were both perfect. My only disappointment was the choice for Amy (Molly Weinberg) as the portrayal was somewhat two-dimensional. I had a hard time accepting the actress especially when Amy became an adult. There was no chemistry between her and Laurie.

I wish the part of Professor Bhaer had been larger because the actor, Julio Gomez, was terrific. Michael Govang was very good as John Brooke and Marcella Fischer provided comic relief as Aunt March.

Knowing how connected the Concord Players is with town, Louisa’s ancestors and her history made this production extra special.

Nancy secured us seats in the third row giving me a perfect position to capture the play on film. Enjoy the slide show!

This slideshow requires JavaScript.

The Concord Players also produced a promotional video with background and scenes:

Are you passionate about Louisa May Alcott too?
Send an email to louisamayalcottismypassion@gmail.com
to subscribe, and never miss a post!
Facebook Louisa May Alcott is My Passion
More About Louisa on Twitter

by

Meet the real Meg March

Ever wonder about the woman who inspired the character of Meg March?

About Meg

In Little Women, Meg is the oldest of the March sisters and in all respects, the most mainstream member of the family. She is pretty, dutiful and virtuous, almost old for her age.

Fancy dress

Meg’s major flaw is her yearning for material wealth now that her family is poor. She is cured of this desire when she visits her wealthy friends Sallie Gardiner and the Moffat girls and indulges in the shallow life of the well-to-do. All dolled up for a party, she faces the disapproval of Laurie and recognizes the hollowness of vanity and the value of simpler living.

Meg marries a man as virtuous as herself – hard-working poor John Brooke. They have two children and create a loving home; Meg lives the life of the quintessential 19th century Victorian woman.

Based upon Louisa May Alcott’s oldest sister Anna Alcott Pratt, Meg is prettier but her real-life counterpart was more interesting.

Getting to know you

Born on March 16, 1831 and the eldest of the Alcott sisters, Anna was the most studied baby in history. Her philosopher-educator father Bronson, eager to prove his theory about the divine nature of children, observed her in a scientific way, recording her physical, emotional, intellectual and spiritual development in the minutest fashion.

Pleasing her father

Infant Anna, always eager to please, picked up on this vibe; her mother Abba noted that Anna “seems as if she is conscious of his observations, and were desirous of furnishing him with an item for his record.” (The Alcotts As I Knew Them, Clara Gowing, p. 43).

Love of acting

Anna inherited her father’s peaceful nature with such a retiring manner that “no one meeting her casually would ever imagine the amount of sentiment and romance in her nature.” (Gowing, p. 107). She loved the theatre and could have been an accomplished actress had she the ambition (partial deafness later in life made acting very difficult though she never lost of love of it).

She and Louisa shared this love of acting, writing plays together and entertaining the family with tableaux and original melodramatic plays such as “Norna, or The Witch’s Curse.”

Unexpected rewards

Although she never pursued acting professionally, it still granted her many rewards, the best being meeting her future husband, John Bridge Pratt. They played the romantic leads in “The Loan of a Lover” and soon became lovers themselves.

Both she and Louisa were powerhouses on the stage but Anna faded into the background once off the stage. She preferred to defer to others and bask in their success.

Love of words

writing

Anna’s abilities weren’t limited to acting. Several books mention her writing skill and her ability to easily learn foreign languages. In Eden’s Outcasts, John Matteson quotes family friend Llewellyn Frederick Willis (from his Alcott Memoirs ) regarding Anna, “Skilled in learning languages and a thoughtful writer, she perhaps exceeded all her sisters in terms of her pure intellectual gifts.”

Anna however, lacked ambition. Matteson continues, “Unlike Louisa, however, she lacked the confidence to try to publish them. Her excellent mind was ‘shown more in the appreciation of others than in the expression of herself.’ ” (p. 210 of the ebook).

A quick portrait

Matteson also writes of Anna,

“She was the most even-tempered and amiable of the four. Her sense of humor was keen but without Louisa’s tartness. While she partook enthusiastically in the game of her friends and sisters, her zest was tempered with a sense of dignity. She was more beautiful in her graceful bearing than in her physical features.”

More to come …

In my next post, I will share lesser-known facts about Anna including journal entries she made as a girl that reveal a dreamy pre-teen full of yearning (and even a desire to be famous). We’ll find out in part, what made Anna tick.

Are you finding Anna to be more interesting than Meg March? What did you think of Meg as a character in Little Women?


Are you passionate about Louisa May Alcott too?
Send an email to louisamayalcottismypassion@gmail.com
to subscribe, and never miss a post!
Facebook Louisa May Alcott is My Passion
More About Louisa on Twitter

by

Personalizing Louisa through the reading of Little Women

Little Women

Responding to my request, I am pleased to present a guest post by Jillian author of the A Room of One’s Own blog. Jillian is exploring the classics and using her blog as a journal, sharing her reactions and insight. As a new student to the classics, I depend heavily on Jillian’s blog to guide me to good reading, and she has never let me down. I know you will appreciate her unique point of view on Louisa’s most successful and far-reaching work, Little Women.

Reading Little Women – a guest blog by Jillian
A Room of One’s Own

When Susan asked me to write a guest blog for her lovely Alcott site, I wasn’t sure what I could possibly talk about — though I was keen to contribute a few words, since I’m all about spreading the Alcott love.

Anyone visiting this blog has either read something by Louisa May Alcott or is curious to meet her. That’s one of the things I truly love about literature — that potential to unite us. Those of us who have read Little Women share the experience of it. We can exchange glances and know that Jo, that Meg, that Amy and Beth lived their lives within our souls for a while. Louisa’s Little Women has been a shared memory between strangers from all over the world for over a century.

I can’t tell you anything about Alcott that Susan hasn’t already said better. (Indeed, when I have a question about Alcott, I generally seek her out.) I’m certainly no expert on Louisa, or her family, or her century, or Transcendentalism. I’ve read one biography and a couple of her shorter works: Hospital Sketches and “Transcendental Wild Oats.” So I can’t even give you a very thorough review of her library.

But I can tell you who my Louisa is.

Before 2010, I had barely heard of Louisa May Alcott. I didn’t care about Concord, though I was fascinated by the Civil War. My interest pulled to the South, though. To Tara and the searing apart of Atlanta — action and all that. (My favorite book is Gone With the Wind.) I certainly never intended to read Little Women. I was a busy, on-the-go 21st century person, more inclined to enjoy the movie than the novel. I added it to my classics project list more as an “I should read this” item than a wish list book that I yearned to explore. It seemed like something I should have read as a little girl, and having not read it felt like a gap. I’d enjoyed the 1994 movie and figured Little Women was a good enough place to start with the classics.

A lot of people have expressed irritation when they read Little Women – not only for a certain turning point in the story which makes me chuckle and applaud Jo March (if you’ve read it – you know!), but for the very “littleness” of the book. I don’t mean that it is itself little, for my copy weighs in at 502 pages. I mean that this century seems to yearn for action, adventure, a snappy opening, a protagonist with an excrutiating decision to make at once, and LOTS of tension.

fashionweekadventures.com

Little Women isn’t like that. More, it’s a window into the world of women in nineteenth century New England. The book is quite didactic – something that bothers some people. Especially in the early chapters, the book seems to focus on how to be a proper little woman and grow up to be a proper wife. But what people miss, I think, is Marmee. A woman who pulls to her daughter Jo early in the novel, sharing with her an inexplicable anger and desire to fight that the other sisters, and Jo’s father, don’t understand. Just like one could read Pride and Prejudice as a love story and miss the side story about Charlotte Lucas, I think one can read Little Women as a didactic novel and miss the nuance in the Jo story.

Little Women is separated into chapters that read like short stories: days in the lives of the March girls and what they faced in 19th century Concord. The stories aren’t so much about plot – as they are warmth and love and survival as women in a world that wanted women to be quiet, be useful, be relatively ornamental, and well… be little. See, that’s what I remember most about Little Women: as much as it felt didactic, there was Jo. Awkward, cranky, boisterous, clumsy, loud Jo who wanted nothing more than to live up to those didactic standards and couldn’t. She is a contrast, and so too, is Little Women. It’s a foundation of who one “should” be as a proper New England woman, written through the eyes of four sisters: an artist, a wife, a musician, and a writer. And oh, that writer — how she doesn’t fit! She loves her sisters, and as slow-rolling as the story is to start, it gets to you, when you realize that this world was Louisa’s, and that sweet Beth was her sister, and that this didactic outpouring is the very world she lived in, and that the writer produced the very book laid open on your 21st century lap.

The title itself gives me shivers. One could read “Little Women” as a commendment of littleness, or one could read it as the very world into which Jo, and likewise, Louisa, had been sat. She adored that world, I think. But she wasn’t quiet, she wasn’t predictable, and she wasn’t little. So the novel reads as a sort of tribute to the place Louisa couldn’t make her own: a world of giving sisters who laugh and hug and dream and try to stay alive while Jo sits insolently gazing out the snow-crusted window, her willful chin working as ardently as it can to stay small and proper and level while her ravenous soul pulls to war and Laurie and running and loudness, and Marmee.

The thing about Little Women is – it stuck with me. Not just the lessons, but the story, the sisters, the sense of comfort and safety and snugness that is Louisa’s novel. I’ve read over sixty books since then, and still I pull to Alcott’s work. Still I count it as a favorite.

My Louisa is a fighter — not so very different from me or Scarlett O’Hara or Mr. Dickens’ Oliver Twist (which surely Louisa read by night in lamplight.) She’s a product of her century and all that she read and all that she lived. While Atlanta was being ripped apart by fire, Louisa was in Massachusetts — writing. She lived that world that I find so fascinating. She lived it from the Northern side, sat between Thoreau and Emerson, under the roof of Bronson Alcott, surrounded by sisters. Little Women is her side of the story — how she coped, and how her three very different sisters faced the same world.

I read that publisher James T. Fields dismissed her work as insignificant once, and advised her to, “Stick to your teaching, Miss Alcott. You can’t write.” Oh, that makes me angry. I remember learning, as I explored her world, that while she is certainly didactic in Little Women, she is that way because she was told to do it. Apparently books about being a proper wife were what sold, in the nineteenth century, by women writers. And that’s what was expected of Louisa. She wanted to write about ghosts and mystery and thrilling stories, but the men of that world wanted her to write about how to be a proper little woman. What absolutely endears me to Louisa — is that she gave them that. But within it, she gave them Jo March — herself, her soul, a little woman who could not fit into that world, and who desperately yearned to be good enough.

That girl is my Louisa.

This March I intend to re-read Little Women to see what more I can ring from it, and to enjoy alongside it Geraldine Brook’s March and Alcott’s own sequels, Little Men and Jo’s Boy’s.

I don’t think I’ll ever again be satisfied with “just the movie.”

Jillian blogs at A Room of One’s Own, where she journals her exploration through classic literature.

by

A Meet and Greet full of pleasant surprises

I went to Concord yesterday afternoon full of anticipation at meeting an email friend in person. I’ve met many such email friends and it’s always a thrill. Gabrielle Donnelly, author of The Little Women Letters has become such a friend through stories exchanged about our favorite felines, and our favorite author.

Little did I know how many other wonderful women I would meet later at Gabrielle’s presentation and book signing at Orchard House:

Meet the staff of Orchard House! back row L to R: Pat Zirpolo, Sigrid Bott, Gabrielle Donnelly, Polly Peterson, Lis Adams. Front row L to R: Iman Sakkaf, Nancy Italleran, Karen Goodno, Jennie Johnson.

All the attendees of Gabrielle’s Meet and Greet were Orchard House staff members!

Nirvana.

Talk about being able to indulge in my passion – this was like feasting on prime rib and chocolate mousse. :-) But I digress . . .

Tea at the Colonial Inn

The afternoon began with two new friends meeting over tea, coffee, lobster and crab bisque and a delicious rice dish at Concord’s historic Colonial Inn. Gabrielle is a delight and the conversation was lively and stimulating. It’s the first time I’ve been able to truly share my passion about Louisa with someone equally as passionate. It was wonderful.

Walking through the front door of Orchard House

It was dark by the time we made our way to Orchard House for Gabrielle’s presentation and I have to say it was a bit of a mystical experience to walk through the front door, just like so many of the Alcott family friends had done in years past.

In Louisa May Alcott A Personal Biography, Susan Cheever wrote,

” . . . the Alcott family began to receive visitors. Their Monday night open houses featuring bowls of Bronson’s apples were often crowded with old friends like the Hawthornes and the Emersons.” (page 125)

And now I could experience such a visit and with people who have devoted much time and effort to make Orchard House the magical place that it is to visit.

Learning more about Gabrielle Donnelly
and The Little Women Letters

Seated around the dining room in chairs, we all listened intently as Gabrielle described her background: growing up in the 50s and 60s with four boisterous brothers, and taking refuge in Little Women. She described the book which she read again and again as her “comfort reading” and “consolation reading,” brimming with intelligence and warmth.

So when she learned of the opportunity to compete for the chance to write The Little Women Letters, she jumped at it.

Bringing Little Women to the 21st century

An editor at Simon and Schuster, Lydia Newhouse, came up with a way to bring the classic tale of the four March sisters into the current day: following the lives of three sisters who were influenced by letters from their great-great-grandmother, Jo March. Several writers competed for the opportunity to pen the new novel; Gabrielle, along with other writers, submitted a completed first chapter, and hers was chosen.

In a scant six months’ time, Gabrielle completed all her research and wrote the book. Immersing herself in Little Women and its sequels, Gabrielle took on the mind and heart of the March sisters, leaving behind a legacy of letters for the current family, the Atwaters, to dig through. Second sister Lulu, the most like Jo, derived great comfort and benefited from the wisdom of these letters.

Going beyond the end of the story

Gabrielle described how she imagined beyond the ending of the last book, Jo’s Boys, with Jo having a surprise daughter in her 40s. She read to us the first letter from Jo to Amy describing the experience:

My daughter has arrived in this world, and bless the infant, she is the reddest and the squallingest baby you ever did see! We both had a hard time of her birthing, but she came through like a trump, and when they laid her upon my breast she looked up at me with her little sharp gray eyes, and nodded with a decided air, as if to say, “There no! I don’t think we’ll be doing that again, Mamma, and I for one rejoice to know it.( page 1)

She imagined Jo as no longer being famous as a writer, and happy at the prospect. Because she was no longer famous, the Atwater sisters (Emma, Lulu and Sophie) didn’t know anything about her except what they heard from their mother, Fee, an ardent feminist. In the end,  “Grandma Jo” would have a profound effect on Lulu, giving her needed direction in her life.

I posted a review of the book where you can find out more about this delightful story.

The work of writing The Little Women Letters

The Little Women Letters created a unique situation with regards to research. Gabrielle needed to immerse herself in Louisa May Alcott’s writings while also researching contemporary London life where the story is set.

She described how Louisa’s writings were full of detail on all things domestic so that she could write the March sister letters with an authentic voice. She even mentioned the necessity of gently but firmly tussling with her editor to keep  some of the typical slang of the period in the letters so that readers would come to believe Jo or Meg or Amy wrote them.

Although born and bred in London, Gabrielle knew that her many years of living in the United States would necessitate connecting with young Londoners to get a sense of life there now. Her many years of journalism coupled with great connections provided her with the knowledge she needed to create the Atwater family.

Meeting the Atwater family – a reading from The Little Women Letters

Gabrielle then read from pages 14-16 of the book, introducing the connection between Jo March and the Atwater family through an amusing and lively conversation between the sisters. We all applauded at the end of the reading.

The Orchard House staff and their vast knowledge

The evening concluded with a lively discussion about the Alcott family where I picked up some interesting bits of trivia:

  • Margaret Lothrop, daughter of Harriet Lothrop (aka Margaret Sidney, author of the Five Little Peppers series and owner of The Wayside) transcribed Lizzie Alcott’s journal from her days at The Wayside (known then as Hillside). Lizzie’s journal is said to be the most complete record of life at Hillside. The transcription has been typed up and is available in the Orchard House archives.
  • John Pratt, often imagined to be as “dull” as John Brooke in Little Women, actually enjoyed going to parties and socializing. Anna, because she was going deaf, did not like to go out but would eagerly listen to her husband’s descriptions of social events. Although a bookkeeper, John had an artistic side as he enjoyed acting (that’s how he and Anna met), so he was hardly dull like John Brooke.
  • Anna did not die of a broken heart after her sister Louisa and her father Bronson passed away within a couple days of each other. She developed some kind of medical condition over the years and died rather suddenly while doing housework.
  • There is an unpublished and apparently very moving letter by Anna describing Louisa’s last visit with Bronson.  This is the source of the short conversation between the two:

“Father, here is your Louy,” Alcott said gently. “What are you thinking of as you lie there so happily?” With his final feeble gestures, Bronson took Louisa’s hand and said, “I am going up. Come with me.”

Her answer, “Oh how I wish I could.” Her father kissed her. “Come soon,” he said. (pge. 252, Louisa May Alcott A Personal Biography by Susan Cheever)

A magical time comes to an end

Gabrielle ended the evening with a book signing, and before leaving, everyone posed for the picture above in the parlor. We left Orchard House as the first flakes of snow were falling, heralding an early winter. It only added to the magic.

I enjoyed immensely the time I spent with Gabrielle and look forward to growing our friendship. And being able to spend such quality time at Orchard House . . . ah yes, Nirvana. :-)


Are you passionate about Louisa May Alcott too?
Send an email to louisamayalcottismypassion@gmail.com
to subscribe, and never miss a post!
Facebook Louisa May Alcott is My Passion
More About Louisa on Twitter

by

Take a tour of the final resting place of the Alcotts

There’s a terrific article on the Concord Patch written by a licensed Concord tour guide, Harry Beyer. He takes you on a tour of the Alcott family plot at Sleepy Hollow cemetery. Here’s a teaser from the article:

Louisa May was an active abolitionist, helping to shelter runaway slaves on the Underground Railroad. She was also an early feminist. Protesting the exclusion of women from Concord’s 1875 Centennial parade and ceremony at Old North Bridge (the celebration at which Daniel Chester French’s Minute Man statue was unveiled), she wrote ”It was impossible to help thinking, that there should have been a place for the great granddaughters of Prescott, William Emerson, John Hancock, and Dr. Ripley, as well as for … the scissors that cut the immortal cartridges” for the shot heard round the world. “It seemed to me that … the men of Concord had missed a grand opportunity of imitating those whose memory they had met to honor.”

Here’s the link to the article where you can read more and see the grave markers for each family member.

I thought it was very curious (and very cool) that of all the biographies written about the Alcotts, Beyer recommends Madelon Bedell’s book, The Alcotts Biography of a Family. I’d love to know why . . . I left a comment on the post inquiring, hopefully he’ll answer.

by

DVD Giveaway Contest – Win by writing about your favorite Little Women character

As promised, and in honor of Louisa and Bronson’s impending birthdays (November 29),  I am giving away a free DVD of the acclaimed documentary, Louisa May Alcott The Woman Behind Little Women thanks to the generosity of Nancy  Porter and Harriet Reisen.

I’ve seen this documentary a few times and it is just wonderful seeing Louisa brought to life this way. All dialogue is taken from primary sources and much of it is filmed at Orchard House. You can see scenes from the film, interviews, and outtakes.

How to win? Write a short paragraph about your favorite character in Little Women – state who the character is and why that character is your favorite. If apropos, mention how this character may have impacted your life. Best entry wins!

Deadline for submission is Tuesday, November 23; hopefully the winner can receive her DVD in time for Louisa and Bronson’s birthdays.

And we’re off!

by

Comparing the March sisters with their real life counterparts

Harriet Reisen, author of Louisa May Alcott The Woman Behind Little Women, sent me this. It’s interesting and fun to see the comparisons. I’d love to hear what you think!

Thanks, Harriet, for this contribution!

Gentle Readers:

Asked to compare Louisa May Alcott’s fictional sisters to her real four, I find that they are inextricable in my mind, as I suspect they were in Louisa’s.  That she found it impossible to write of Amy March after the death of May Alcott suggests that to me. I find the beginning of Jo’s Boys almost unbearably touching for its image of Amy March in a terrestrial heaven (“Mount Parnassus”).

Little Women led me to Louisa Alcott, of course.  It tells a great deal about her, and is her masterpiece, but her works, her life, and her times, are quite different, and much more than that one wonderful novel.  I re-read Little Women only once for the book – I needed to read the 23 other books she wrote, not to mention poems, short stories, journals, letters, etc – and so you, dear readers, are undoubtedly more expert than I am on the fine points of the Alcott versus the March sisters.  I would love to know how you would flesh out and/or change this chart, esp.

Here’s my chart, a Wikipedia entry in the making?

Alcott Family March Family
grueling poverty, hungry genteel poverty, had a servant
teenage years 1840s teenage years 1860s
teen years lived in Hillside house teen years lived in Orchard House
moved some 30 times had one home
Louisa was nurse in Civil War Mr. March was minister in Civil War
were social and political activists concerned with plight of poor
Anna Alcott Meg March
plain but loved beautiful things beautiful (“Someone had to be”-LMA)
married John Pratt, amateur actor married John Brooke, tutor
married at age 29 married in early 20s
two boys, Fred and John girl and boy twins, Daisy and Demi
Louisa Alcott Josephine March
nicknamed Louy nicknamed Jo
tempestuous and moody “wild nature”
independent in Boston supervised in New York
serious about acting and theater theater a beloved childhood pastime
had hair cut off while very ill sold her long hair
was seamstress, laundress, servant was aide to wealthy Aunt March
never married married
had no children had two boys
lived in Boston mansion; 10 servants lived at Plumfield College, not wealthy
Elizabeth Peabody/Sewall Alcott Beth March
called “Lizzie,” “Betty,” rarely “Beth” called “Beth”
died age 23 died age 16
“her pretty hair all gone” at death loss of hair not mentioned
enjoyed playing music was musically gifted
intended never to leave home asked Jo to take her place at home
Abigail May Alcott (May) Amy March
accomplished artist, worked hard things came easily to her
attracted benefactors (Aunt Bond) attracted benefactors (Aunt March)
graceful, poised at young age graceful, poised at young age
gave free art lessons somewhat self-centered and vain
chosen for Paris salon twice became a professional artist
married at age 37 married in early 20s
died at 39 after birth of Lulu happy and benevolent; mother of Bess

To see other ways that Louisa was not Jo March, check out this video.  It’s less than a minute, and it’s funny.                                                 –Harriet Reisen

by

Motherhood, Marriage, and Keen Observations

Chapter 38 of Little Women, “On the Shelf” again showed me what a keen observer Louisa was.  She never married nor bore any children yet her description of Meg and John’s adjustment to parenthood was dead on. I listened to the audio book with my mouth open just about the whole time, in awe at how real, and familiar, this chapter was.

This line brought back vivid memories: “As she was a womanly little woman, the maternal instinct was very strong, and she was entirely absorbed in her children, to the utter exclusion of everything and everybody else.” When our son was born nearly 25 years ago, I fell head over heels in love. I often say that the first six weeks of his life were the happiest and most peaceful in mine. For the first time in my life, I had only one thing that I thought about and that was Stephen. I was blessed with an easy baby – no colic, sunny disposition, good sleeper – but even if he had been difficult, I still would have been like Meg. My poor husband patiently waited until I emerged from my bubble and realized he was there again.

It’s no wonder John sought comfort from his neighbors and Meg was fortunate his solution was so benign. She was also fortunate to have a mother who loved her enough to tell her the truth, pointing out Meg’s neglect of John. Marmee’s advice was perfect, as always.

The ending of the chapter was priceless. I winced and smiled as I listened to the chapter and heard of Demi’s naughtiness just as Meg and John were having their first bit of quality time together. It was so real and again, so familiar. I loved how John handled the problem, gently but firmly showing Meg where she was going wrong in catering to Demi.

As I listened, I kept thinking, “How did Louisa know such detail?” It was like she was a fly on the wall. Obviously she observed her older sister Anna and husband John Pratt with their two children but I still was amazed at her powers of observation. Louisa must have been an intensely curious person!

One of our ‘regulars,’  Meg North, has a wonderful blog about balancing writing and business, and is conducting a month long creative writing class. Her class on characters addresses these very issues of curiosity and the observation of people, and how important these elements are in the creation of memorable characters, which Meg says is vital to a book being good. Louisa certainly was a master craftsman in those areas, which makes reading Little Women such a joy.