Subject:  Re: Just to say hi!
Date:  Fri, 16 Jan 1998 17:12:28 +0900
 From:   "±è*±Çü" 
To:jco@usfca.edu

Dear Sue, very pleased to meet you, really.
Your Simson and JCO analogy was great, wow!
Anyway, I tried to find some nice Korean-teaching software for you,
but I'm afraid there's no such great program out in the market yet.
However, I could mail you very nice books of any kind, if you are
interested.
Let's keep in touch.

Kim



Subject:  Mothers and Daughters
Date:   Fri, 16 Jan 1998 17:31:11 +0900
From:   "±Ëº±«," 
 To:  "¡∂¿ÃOmega∫ ƒ≥Σ- ø¿√~ ±◊ΣÏ" jco@usfca.edu

Cyrano, 
 
Yes. But I suppose I should have elaborated the question. 
You know I only read two of her numerous works. 
Coincidentally the mother-daughter relationships in the two novels were very similar. 
A sexually prominent mother and a very introverted daughter.
Besides, father is literally and psychologically absent. 
On Randy's site I read JCO saying in an interview concerning Because It Is Bitter
that the book is largely based on her own experience. And then you also said that 
this peculiar mother-daughter relationships are repeated in her works. 
So I was just wondering if it's related to her bios or something.  
Guess your answer is no. ;) 
 
Kim 

 
 
Subject:  Re: Mothers and Daughters
Date:   Fri, 16 Jan 1998 12:38:13 EST
 From: Cyranomish Cyranomish@aol.com
 To:  jco@usfca.edu

Correction: The story "Images" appears in the book BY THE NORTH GATE, not UPON
THE SWEEPING FLOOD. Cyrano



Subject:  Re: Mothers and Daughters
Date:  Fri, 16 Jan 1998 11:59:10 EST
From:  Cyranomish Cyranomish@aol.com
  To: jco@usfca.edu

Hi, Kim.  Actually, I would assume that JCO's experiences as a daughter are
very important in her writing.  In CHILDWOLD we find a mother who usually
gives way to her strong-minded daughter.  But in the majority of her works,
the mother is the dominent one.  There's an early JCO story in the collection
UPON THE SWEEPING FLOOD called "Images," which has settled the whole
biography-mother-daughter issue for me.  In the story, the young heroine is
talking with a teacher about her home life and says about her mother: "She
hates me for having a mind different than hers.  But she loves me, she
cherishes me!...She doesn't drink milk anymore, to save money -- she SAYS she
has hers in the morning. But she really doesn't want us to know.  She would
keep it to herself -- secret -- she doesn't even know it SHOULD be secret.
She doesn't know how she gives herself.  She doesn't even know it!"  Then, a
few pages later, the speaker changes her attitude 180-degrees: "She would like
to run at her mother, scream accusations.  Why is my body so thin?  Why am I
so ugly?  To her mother's despair, she would continue: Because you drank all
the milk when I was little! Drank it all!  There was none left for me to grow
on!"
     I think this story is a wonderful example of the ambivalence inherent in
the parent/child relation.  One minute it seems Mother was a model of self-
sacrifice, then another memory comes to mind that makes Mother seem like a
bad, selfish parent.  Which one is true?  Both?  Neither?  We're left with the
stuff of great fiction.  Cyrano



Subject:   Joining the Group
Date: Wed, 21 Jan 1998 16:25:20 -0800 (PST)
From:  joyce l merritt jlm29260@email.csun.edu

Hello, group.  I've been following the discussion at Randy's website for 
a few months, waiting in the hope that I might get E-mail at home, but it 
hasn't happened yet.  Now I've gotten to the point that I can't stand not 
joining the group, so I've done it through my wife's university E-mail 
account, which I have to use at the library.  You're a very interesting and 
fun group to read.

I notice that (as of the last thing posted when I looked at the web site
today) no one has taken Randy's bait and commented on the "Man
Crazy"-related quotes from JCO that he put in.  In fact, I notice that the
group generally seems to have avoided discussing "Man Crazy".  Is this
because everyone dislikes the book?  I don't dislike it myself (though
it's not exactly the kind of book that you "like" in the conventional
sense), and I'm inclined to think that it represent's a trend on JCO's
part.  You could almost say that "Man Crazy" and "Foxfire" are a series
parallel to the Gothic series.  Perhaps the new series could be called the
"True Confessions" or "Tabloid" series, because JCO uses deliberately
sensationalistic plots and deliberately awkward first person writing
styles.  But I think that, with these books, she is, in part, reclaiming
something for "literature", as she has done in a different way in the
"Gothic" books.  Does this make sense to anyone else? 

Steve



Subject: Welcome, Steve, and a comment
Date:  Wed, 21 Jan 1998 16:34:48 +0000
 From:   "F. Schwartz" fabela@gte.net
 To:  jco@usfca.edu

Nice to have a new guy among us.

I was struck by the quote that Randy posted. JCO's description of the
masochistic streak in women really resonated for me; in fact, I used
part of it in a women's discussion group, to support my argument on a
related subject. Indeed, jco really knows about the eroticism of
victimization, quite apart from man-bashing.

Guess I'll have to read MAN CRAZY before I comment further on Steve's
interesting contribution.

Francie



Subject:  FOXFIRE, MAN CRAZY SERIES
 Date:  Wed, 21 Jan 1998 20:27:06 EST
From:  composer2@juno.com
 To:  jco@usfca.edu

Steve,

I don't know what it is that JCO might be "claiming" from literature,
I think MAN CRAZY's only real predecessor could be FOXFIRE, and 
lo and behold, it's the same author.  I cannot think immediately of
what you might mean by "claiming"--unless you are using it like claiming
new land.  In the pioneering sense, yes yes yes yes yes!  It is
definitely
true.

FOXFIRE is a brutal, in-your-face, unforgettable book--MAN CRAZY is more
forgettable, I think, but in a way I buy your "series" notion.  Whether
or not
it is conscious, you may be correct about that.  In fact, the more I mull
it over,
your argument is very valid.

No matter what, JCO has given us a lot of literature that has pioneered
the way 
for other works.   Your "series" idea definitely makes sense.

I think I will skim over FOXFIRE again this evening and give it some more
thought.

David C.
Michigan

p.s. -- Has anyone read any Alan Paton books here?  I am currently
reading Alexander's biography of him.



Subject: Re: Joining the Group
Date:Thu, 22 Jan 1998 08:38:26 EST
From:  Cyranomish Cyranomish@aol.com
 To:   jco@usfca.edu

Hi, Steve.  Welcome.  I too was interested in Randy's new offering on JCO.  In
recent years I've noticed how attracted some women -- young, highly-educated
women -- are to "mean" men.  It's unnerving.  I'm about to head out of town
til Monday, but look forward to discussing MAN CRAZY further with the group.
Bye, Cyrano



Subject:  Re: Joining the Group
Date: Thu, 22 Jan 98 09:10:57
From:  "Frank Malgesini" fmalgesi@uach.mx
 To:  jco@usfca.edu

Hello Steve

I can`t respond to your comments about Man Crazy because I haven`t read it 
but I want to mention that Foxfire seemed to me to be a departure for Joyce 
Carol Oates. As I was reading it I thought of it as a children`s story in 
that the good characters were good and the bad characters were really bad.

Only at the end when Foxfire began to become morally ambiguous did their 
victims also begin to become more complex. I think Foxfire is a very good 
book but it is not intended as realistic fiction -more like a mythic 
construction or perhaps a moral allegory.

Frank

Frank Malgesini 
fmalgesi@uach.mx
Facultad de Filosofia y Letras
Universidad Autonoma de Chihuahua



Subject: Re: FOXFIRE, MAN CRAZY SERIES
Date: Thu, 22 Jan 1998 10:37:21 -0500 (EST)
From:  diamond@math.wvu.edu (Harvey Diamond)
 To:  jco@usfca.edu

I haven't read Man Crazy, but the discussion seems to be about
first-person "confessional" novels. In that case, what about JCO's
novel "Expensive People" - it's in that same style from what I can recall.
I remember being quite impressed at JCO's ability to take on the
character of a juvenile boy and the wicked sense of humor displayed in
the book.

Harvey Diamond



Subject:  Re: FOXFIRE, MAN CRAZY SERIES
 Date:  Thu, 22 Jan 1998 17:14:27 EST
From:  FredMancor FredMancor@aol.com
 To:   jco@usfca.edu

Hi 

I found very interesting your comments on "Expensive People". I find this book
one of the best of JCO, and very injustly, and significantly, forgotten. I
find it to be fresh, sanely cynical and not overwritten at all, which cannot
be said of many of more recent JOC's novels.



Subject: Re: FOXFIRE, MAN CRAZY SERIES
Date:  Thu, 22 Jan 1998 17:48:31 EST
 From:  Ehaggar Ehaggar@aol.com
 To:   jco@usfca.edu

I am interested in the comments that several of the group made about how many
of JCO's heroines seem to be attracted to brutal, even psychopathic men---and
one male member of the group remarked ruefully that often it seemed that way
in life, that  women go for the bad guys rather than the good guys.  As
someone who has read a lot of JCO AND done a lot of work with battered women's
centers I found the questions interesting and provocative.

I think JCO does a wonderful job of expressing the adolescent girl's confusion
over what rough and brutal mean----to an inexperienced girl, both can be
confused with strength, that is, sure this man might bat me around sometimes,
but he could also protect me from people who would hurt me worse.  By the time
these women understand their error they are deeply involved in abusive
relationships.  I myself come from a family of intellectuals, and tend to be
attracted to blue-collar guys, or tough guys---men who can DO something
instead of just talking!  To be fair to myself, though I have to say I have
never been in an abusive relationship---but I wonder if JCO ever has--or has
perhaps observed them?  I am counting on Greg's biography to tell all!

Let me hasten to add, there are plenty of women in intellectually abusive
relationships--these I have been involved with, and would guess that most
women have at one time or another.  Forgive the confessional aspect of
this---but that strain in JCO's writing always distrubs, intrigues, and
fascinates me...

Ellen Haggar



Subject:  Re: FOXFIRE, MAN CRAZY SERIES
 Date: Thu, 22 Jan 1998 16:38:06 -0800 (PST)
From:  joyce l merritt jlm29260@email.csun.edu
 To:  jco@usfca.edu


I think that what JCO is claiming "for" (I hope I used that word instead 
of "from") literature is the complex reality behind sensationalism.  By 
using the first-person narrations, I think she is trying to give the 
experiences of people we don't usually hear from unless they've been 
filtered through the "National Enquirer" or some equivalent TV series.  
The victimized people whose stories would have been sensationalized would 
commonly be women outside the elite mainstream.  I assume that this is 
crucial to JCO's interest in them;  as she indicated in the quote Randy 
gave us, she knows or used to know people like that.  Perhaps she wonders 
why she didn't become one of them.  My impression is that, at various 
points in her career, JCO has wanted to write about practically everyone 
in practically every way possible, but that now, more and more, she is 
interested in representing the sorts of disenfranchised people that she 
knows best.  She seems to be doing this not only by telling their 
stories, but by encorporating their esthetics into her work, using the 
skills of an artist.

I agree that "Foxfire" is a more attractive novel than "Man Crazy", but I 
believe that JCO meant it that way.  After all, the members of "Foxfire" 
tried to take control of their own lives and to stop being victims, which 
is more pleasant to read about, even when the effort turns into a fiasco, 
than reading about someone like Ingrid in "Man Crazy", who repeatedly 
cooperates in her own victimization, and who turns away from her 
opportunities to improve her situation.  JCO is deliberately placing us 
as readers in an ambiguous situation (even morally;  if we like the book, 
are we, too victimizing Ingrid?  Is JCO victimizing her own character by 
making art about her?).

As to my thoughts on why people want to be victimized, I'll save those 
for later, as this message is getting pretty long.

Steve



Subject:  Re: FOXFIRE, MAN CRAZY SERIES
Date:  Thu, 22 Jan 1998 21:19:14 EST
 From:   Doozer411 Doozer411@aol.com
 To:  jco@usfca.edu

Ellen and my other fellow Oates fans-
   I, too, have done extensive research on battered women and have spent much
time in a battered women's shelter.  I completely agree with all you said,
Ellen.  I only have one thing to add.  Another reason for which women often
end up with abusive men is not because they are attracted to their men's
brutality but rather to his passion.  That passion can be at one of two
extremes- on the one hand, it can manifest itself in the form of very
affectionate and fervent adoration, and, on the other, it can manifest itself
in the form of vehement anger.  It is the men's passionate natures to which
the women are attracted. It is not because of a innate masochism that women
choose to remain in abusive relationships, but rather because when their men
are at the positive extreme, they are provided with the ferocious love and
passionate sex they crave- this is most definitely not a masochistic urge.
Therefore, I disagree with Oates' perception of women as inherently
masochistic- while, I do acknowledge that some women may exhibit masochistic
tendancies on occasion, I believe this to be the exception rather than the
rule. 
                                                                 -Lindsay  



Subject:  Re: FOXFIRE, MAN CRAZY SERIES
Date:  Fri, 23 Jan 1998 11:59:41 +0000
From:  John ivan139@spiritone.com
To:   jco@usfca.edu

I agree A. Wright.  Families do tend to replicate . . . 

My personal un-psychological (aka layman) view is that we learn our personal
definitions and expections of LOVE in childhood, in the 'love' patterns and
dynamics of our families.  

Then, as no one is perfect, whatever strengths and weaknesses of that initial
pattern of LOVE is sought in adult intimate relations.  Something I think JCO
is onto.

Unfortunately the deficiences seem to weigh more in our personalities.  It is
the wanting vs. having thing.  We care more about what we lack than what he have.

It is my feeling that we try to 'repair' and overcome these deficiencies in
adulthood.  Seeking relationships that replicate those old love patterns, and
in some cases (not all) seeking to 'fix' them.  It marks a personal victory. 
Might even be part of individuation.

Just a thought.

Ivan



Subject:  Re: FOXFIRE, MAN CRAZY SERIES
Date:  Fri, 23 Jan 1998 09:50:52 -0500 (CDT)
From:  ANDREA WRIGHT 
To:   jco@usfca.edu

I find it interesting that Ingrid's behavior with Enoch parallels (at least
somewhat) that of her mother with her father.  Both relationships are abusive;
both women are absolutely infatuated with their "men" (remember Ingrid's
collection of her husband's supposed mementos, which weren't really his after
all).  Though I have not done work with battered women or abusive
relationships, from what I read, families tend to replicate behaviors that they
have experienced.  I'm sure Oates had this in mind while writing the novel.

A. Wright



Subject:  Re: Re: FOXFIRE, MAN CRAZY SERIES
Date:  Fri, 23 Jan 1998 11:57:29 EST
 From:   Ivan139 Ivan139@aol.com
To:  jco@usfca.edu

Lindsay and Ellen, (and others)

I found your comments on the tendency of some woman to pursue potentially
abusive relationships interesting.  The attraction to power, rather than an
attraction to victimization.  Though in a way I think these two combine.

Sometimes I've wondered whether the attraction to power is a desire/need to
overcome the abusiveness, to win the love of the abuser -- possibly to convert
the abuser; perhaps to win a victory (through change) over abusers.  But the
abuse has its value as well, for whatever 'dysfunctional' purpose it serves.
It seems to me that people (men and women) who suffer negative self-images and
self-pity seek affirmations of their presumed valueless-ness.  Self-loathing
is not an easy thing to maintain, it requires help from outside.

I hate (and love) to bring up the example of Dennis Rodman.  Being a consumate
Bulls fan, I've given Dennis a lot of thought.  (Most people just write him
off, don't seem to care about him -- but he makes a good example of what I'm
talking about.)

Note the title of his book:  "Bad as I wanna be."  (No, I haven't read it, nor
will.)  Is this really what he wants?  I think not.  Dennis, obviously wants
to be loved, but lacking an ability to achieve positive intimate relations, he
pursues the exact opposite -- to turn himself into such a bad and pitiful
person that he suddenly merits our attention and affection and concern.  I
don't know if any of you watched the NBA finals last year, but prior to the
final game they showed a recorded interview with Dennis, in which the utterly
obnoxious interviewer from NBC (who I've noted is no where around this year)
kept prodding Dennis, saying something akin to: "You've really screwed up,
haven't you.  No one wants you, even the Bulls.  Your desperate, claiming
you'll play for free.  You're just really a horrible person, a real screw up."
Dennis response:  he started crying and prematurely left the interview.

Sorry for that diatribe, but it's my realm.

I haven't read "Man Crazy" but from reading what you've all written, I offer
the notion that JCO got the idea after seeing the film Breaking the Waves.
Any of you catch it?  It is about a women (someone demented) who marries a
man, but right after the marriage the man is paralyzed in an accident.  He
then taunts his wife to go out and have affairs (so he can vicariously have a
'sex' life), but his poor wife, not quite understanding, can only fulfill and
justify it by elevating it to a spiritual challenge of humility and
degredation.  Quite a painful film to watch.

Another film (I work in film, thus all the references) that depicts two
abusive men is Mike Leigh's Naked.  Quite an astounding piece of work.
Ironically, the year it came out, it tied for best picture at Cannes with The
Piano.  

Take care.
Ivan



Subject:  Re: FOXFIRE, MAN CRAZY SERIES
 Date:  Fri, 23 Jan 1998 18:35:08 -0000
From:   "Gary Couzens" Gjcouzens@btinternet.com
To: jco@usfca.edu

It must have had some effect on me too - it was the first JCO novel I ever
read, about fifteen years ago!

Gary Couzens

>Hi
>
>I found very interesting your comments on "Expensive People". I find this
book
>one of the best of JCO, and very injustly, and significantly, forgotten. I
>find it to be fresh, sanely cynical and not overwritten at all, which
cannot
>be said of many of more recent JOC's novels.
>



Subject:  EXPENSIVE PEOPLE
Date:  Fri, 23 Jan 1998 16:10:56 EST
From:  composer2@juno.com
To:  jco@usfca.edu

 EXPENSIVE PEOPLE was my first full-length JCO piece after Because It Is
Bitter and Because it is my Heart.  I thought it was very contemporary
even today, and as you say, not overwritten at all (We Were the Mulvaneys
was a great piece of work, but a tad overwritten I'm afraid).  You know,
I write a comment like that and then I think, Could I have done any
better?  Of course not!  So I only say that with the utmost respect and
reverence.

To Greg J.:  How did it feel to have "Will You Always Love Me?" dedicated
to you??  That is so cool, I have grown to love that collection even more
now that when it was first published a year or whenever ago.  Also, can't
wait to read your biography!  Are you pleased with the layout?

David C.
Michigan.



Subject:  Re: FOXFIRE, MAN CRAZY SERIES
Date:  Fri, 23 Jan 1998 16:13:07 EST
 From:  Ehaggar Ehaggar@aol.com
 To:  jco@usfca.edu

Dear Ivan and Everybody,

Enjoying all the comments on abusive relationships and why some women are
drawn to them---I was struck by Ivan's comment "We care more about what we
lack than what we have."  That pretty much sums up the state of mind of all
JCO's heroes and anti-heroes (male and female).

I also thought you might be interested in a comment one of my clients/friends
at the battered women's center made.  She is one of the despairs of do-gooders
like me [grin], someone who returns to the same abusive relationship over and
over again.  I finally asked her in some exasperation why she didn't just give
ALL relationships a rest for awhile (no children or economic neeed in this
case)  She said, "Bu t it's awful out there--if you're a woman you need to be
with one man to protect you from other men!"  That is a scarey way of
thinking, and I offer it as another basis for a lot of JCO's stuff.....

Ellen Haggar



Subject:  Re: FOXFIRE, MAN CRAZY SERIES
 Date:   Fri, 23 Jan 1998 18:24:19 EST
 From:  FredMancor FredMancor@aol.com
To:  jco@usfca.edu

This is to the whole group.
 Is anybody here interested in literature? Sometimes I feel like  I am a
-rather passive, indeed- participant in a psycho-therapy group. After all, JCO
is a writer. If some of her novels are good it must be because they are
literature, not essays on human psychology, and, if they are good, may be is
because they are an original and personal contribution to literature. Then the
question and the answer are in the texts, in their narrative strategies,
style, etc.



Subject: jco group dynamic
Date:  Fri, 23 Jan 1998 15:46:59 +0000
From:   "F. Schwartz" fabela@gte.net
 To:   jco@usfca.edu

Hey, Fred, chill.  jco is quite possibly one of the most psychological
writers around today. Nobody writes the dysfunctional American mindscape
as well. And Randy's quote was not just provocative - it was useful in
understanding jco.  I don't happen to agree with some of the statements
that have been made here regarding the masochistic streak in women - but
I don't think we are in danger of becoming a support group. In fact one
of the strengths of this group is that we are not bound by the
"academic" rules of literary criticism. As a writer, I am interested in
how devoted readers such as the ones who post here relate to what
they're reading.

When I'm not interested in what's being said, I just push the old delete
key and move on.

Francie



Subject:  Re: FOXFIRE, MAN CRAZY SERIES
Date:  Fri, 23 Jan 1998 16:15:49 -0800 (PST)
From:   joyce l merritt jlm29260@email.csun.edu
To:  jco@usfca.edu

I wonder if there is really a dichotomy between literature and psychology? 
Literature is certainly texts written in a certain fashion, but (despite
the deconstructionists) the evidence that I've seen suggests (I think it
really does more than suggest) that authors normally intend their texts to
be about something (more likely "somethings") which readers may catch on
to at least in part and find meaningful.  JCO, in particular, appears to
want (dare I say "need"?) to write, among other things, about
psychological issues that interest her, so that her choice of issues and
the reasons for which she's interested in them are major determinatives in
her choices of style and strategy and can't really be separated from them. 
I would certainly hope that we discuss the style and strategy of "Man
Crazy", which I meant to do in my original E-mail.  But, personally, I'm
grateful for messages such as Ellen's and Lindsay's, and appreciate the
courage involved in using insights gained from personal experience. 
Surely all these points enhance one another.  It it felt (to me, anyway)
that the quote from JCO about "Man Crazy" was an invitation to do just
this kind of thing.  Perhaps any technical points that Fred might want to
raise would be valuable for their own sakes and simultaneously for
shedding light on the psychological issues.  I look forward to more of
both. 



Subject:  Re: FOXFIRE, MAN CRAZY SERIES
Date:  Fri, 23 Jan 1998 19:47:22 EST
 From:  Ehaggar Ehaggar@aol.com
To:   jco@usfca.edu

In reply to Fred---

I am sorry that I was pushy enough to assume that life and literature were
equally important to all of us here, and that we thought the two were
connected---I will not contribute anything more, and will be waiting eagerly
for Fred's literary insights


Ellen Haggar



Subject: Re: EXPENSIVE PEOPLE
 Date: Sat, 24 Jan 1998 12:41:12 EST
  From:  RJohn713 
To:  jco@usfca.edu

Of course, the dedication was much appreciated.  Yes, I think the graphic
designers did a beautiful job with INVISIBLE WRITER.  Thanks,

Greg



Subject: Re: FOXFIRE, MAN CRAZY SERIES
 Date:  Sat, 24 Jan 1998 20:21:10 EST
From:  FredMancor 
 To:   jco@usfca.edu


I am sorry if I offended anybody, I sincerelly apologize,
Fred


There are, in my view, many differences between psychology and literature
 although one could see some coincidences which psychologists like Freud
 took in account and used to illustrate their theories (Oedip, Electra, etc., to
 be perfectly obvious) . But the differences are clear. There are differences in
 the purposes, in the organization of the discourses, in strategies, in  style,
 etc. Psychology is, or pretend to be, a science. So, the discourse of
 Psychology is impersonal, the author doesn't implicate himself in the text -
or so it seems-, there are not human characters, -if one can find them is
 because they are used to illustrate or verify the theory-, there is no story,
 there is no plot, there is not any specific traits of literary language:
 metaphors, metonimia, allussion, symbols, and so on, at least in the quality
 and quality and aestetic purpose that can be found and enjoyed in literature.

Do you imagine a psychology text which could possibbly start like this: "I was
 a child murderer...", and spend the next paragraphs to explain the ambiguity of
 the sentence, and keep this way (and the first narrative person) for the next
 hundreds of pages, till the end? 

Of course, the reader reads and exists, and has all the right in the world to
 read what she or he wants from a text. But reading literature is a game with
 some implicit rules among them arbitrarity, and an excess of subjectivity, in
 my view,  don't form part of the game.

Once said so, I  am really sorry if I hurt somebody. Honestly it was not my
 intention.

Fred



Subject:  By Means of an Introduction
 Date: Sun, 25 Jan 1998 12:27:55 -0800 (PST)
From:  "AnthonyH. Risser" ahris@yahoo.com
To:  jco@usfca.edu

JCO Discussion List,

   Hello. I've been visiting this website for a number of months now;
I have nothing but praise for its creator/keeper. However, I did not
discover the discussion-forum link until last week. I've been reading
through some of the archived discussions, decided to join in,
and--since it appears acceptable for "newbies" to do so--decided to
send an introductory e-mail.

   I have been a reader of JCO for about 15 years. My introduction to
her was her collection of stories, "Crossing the Border." I was living
in Canada at the time, and it was a time when borders were of heated
concern there: borders between the U.S. and Canada and between
French-Canadian and English-Canadian versions of "Canadian." I also
enjoy the works of Alice Munro, Margaret Atwood, Anita Brookner, Alice
Hoffman, Francesca Lia Block, among others.

   By profession, I am a neuropsychologist--a diagnostician concerned
with examining the consequences of brain disease and damage.

   Thank you.

Anthony H. Risser, Ph.D.
ahris@yahoo.com



Subject:  Re: By Means of an Introduction
 Date:  Sun, 25 Jan 1998 14:39:22 -0600
 From:   chrisr5 chrisr5@concentric.net
 To:  jco@usfca.edu

I have been reading JCO for many years as well and especially enjoy her
gothics like Bellefleur.  I met her at a local bookstore when BLACK
WATER came out and she autograhphed it. She is a person that once you
meet her you never forget her. Every time I read a new book or a short
story in PLOUGHSHARE...I think of her image..esp. her eyes. Many of her
poetry books are out of print so I get them from the local library and
type them and save them to disk. Have you ever read her poems? One of
the reasons her books never make the best seller lists like D. Steel is
that they are too thought provoking for the average reader. One must
read between the lines to digress the meaning of her messages.



Subject:  "Them"
Date:  Sun, 25 Jan 1998 15:43:27 -0700
From:   "Jennifer Hambly" jhambly@mailcity.com
To:   "JCO Discussion Group" jco@usfca.edu

Greetings Group,
I am a recent member of this discussion group and like the rest of you, am a huge
Oates fan.  I have a question about "Them" I would like to pose to the group:

How 'real' are the Wendall characters in Oates' "Them"? The Author's Note of "Them"
explains that the novel is based on the true experiences of one of Oates's students.
 However, Oates's explanation of the Wendall characters in the Preface to "Them"
seems to suggest that they are mostly fictional.  Any ideas?


Best Regards,
Julie 



Subject:  Re: By Means of an Introduction
Date:  Sun, 25 Jan 1998 19:42:55 EST
From:  composer2@juno.com (David C. Chaudoir)
 To: jco@usfca.edu

Anthony

Welcome to the group.  You should have been in on our discussion a while
ago about Atwood, Oates, and Munro -- mostly Atwood and JCO-- I think it
was Francine and I who were discussing it mainly.  Anyway, welcome to the
group.  I am surprised to hear you like Alice Hoffman--she has always
seemed a little too much of a "woman's writer" to me, more so than any
other I've read in the group, however before I get a lot of flack for
saying that, I would like to say that I very very very much enjoy her
contributions in literary reviews such as Richard Burgin's BOULEVARD and
others.  Clap clap.

David C.
Michigan

p.s.-- did anyone see the piece "LOST KITTENS" in TriQuarterly's last
issue--it is a section from MAN CRAZY.  Speaking of TriQuarterly, I guess
that Reginald Gibbons is out of there to devote more time to other
things.



Subject:Re:passion in the works of JCO
Date:  Mon, 26 Jan 1998 07:36:04 EST
From:  Cyranomish Cyranomish@aol.com
 To:  jco@usfca.edu


Wow, what a great discussion's been going on this past weekend.  I'm really
glad to be home, although it will take me some days to catch up.  Ellen and
Fred's remarks are very exciting and I hope neither of them withdraws from
this conversation despite occasional rough spots.  I like the use of the word
"passion" in place of masochism.
The m. word never really explained certain male/female behaviors to me.  When
I first
read the turbulent early works of JCO back in 1971 -- it reopened a world that
I'd glimpsed only in the works of Emily Bronte.  Then, when I first saw a
photo of JCO, I burst out laughing because I realized I'd been expecting the
author to look like a wild woman, not the gentle, highly intelligent person
she actually is.  (Perhaps the two types are one? and all parallel lines meet
in the end?)  Now I have to go do my laundry and then run over to the library
and pick up Dennis Rodman's book, which sounds very intriguing.  I will just
add that the reason MAN CRAZY didn't work for me was that Enoch was too much
the monster -- we didn't get to see the charismatic aspect of him -- the
ingredient that makes people follow "leaders" like Manson, Hitler, etc.
Cyrano



Subject:  You kidding Cyrano?
 Date:   Mon, 26 Jan 1998 10:58:51 +0000
 From:  John ivan139@spiritone.com
To:  discussion group JCO jco@usfca.edu


Come on, Cyrano, are you really going to read Dennis Rodman's book?  It is
hard to tell if you are joking or not.  Hope you are not joking.  I think it
would be an interesting read. Interesting yes, worthwhile, maybe.

I'm apologize to anyone and everyone who might have scoffed when I brought up
a character as questionnable as Rodman in a normally more noteworthy forum. 
Like I said, I am just a huge Bulls fan -- whom I must say have an extremely
enlightened coach, and that is the root of my fanatacism.

I too scoffed when Rodman came to my team.  I did not jump on the bandwagon
immediately -- it was one incident in particular that aroused my curiosity --
when Rodman head-butted the referee two years ago.

You have to watch the events leading up to the headbutt.  Dennis has fouled,
complained, received a technical, complained some more, been called for a 2nd
technical, which means an automatic ejection from the game.  But he doesn't
immediately leave the court like he should; instead he remains, wandering
around in disgruntlement while the other Bulls try to calm him and the ref
down.  

Now here's the interesting part:  Dennis wanders away a few feet, all by
himself, and you can tell he is already thinking about it, mulling the action
over.  Then quite calmly he sidles his way through the crowd to the ref,
pauses, and gives a long look up, like to heaven or to God.  Then he brings
his head down onto the ref's.

What was that look about?  My over active, Dostoevsky inspired imagination
leads me to think it was just that, a look to God, saying, "I know what I'm
about to do, You know what I'm about to do, so what happens next?  What wrath
will I incur?  Just watch and see whether or not I can take it."  What I read
into this presumed exchange is the foundation of my previously mentioned
thoughts on Rodman -- the only way he knows to get our attention, or God's, is
to do something obviously bad.  He only knows how to elicit this type of
attention, only knows how to respond to this type of attention.  It is the key
to his personality.  Yet what a befuddled, almost pitable personality it is. 
He badly needs new info, reformation, and he senses, I believe, that he is
capable of it.  Just old habits are hard to break.

Take care all, hope I haven't bored you.  Really, am just curious to know what
you think about this.  What anyone thinks.

Ivan



Subject:  Re: You kidding Cyrano?
Date:  Mon, 26 Jan 1998 16:51:18 EST
From:  Cyranomish@aol.com
 To:   jco@usfca.edu

No bull, Ivan, I'm reading Mr. Rodman's book even as we speak here.  It took a
little doing to find it though; the book had been stolen from most of the
libraries in my immediate neighborhood.  But now I have it (and will probably
return it when I'm finished).
I've just read the first chapter in which the author tells how he and his
friends used to sneak into the Texas State Fair when he was a lad via a 5-mile
treck thru a sewer pipe.
The tough but ernest tone of the narrative reminds me of JCO's early novel THE
TRIUMPH OF THE SPIDER MONKEY, which I consider the first of her 1st-person
worm's-eye-view short books about sociopaths.  I'd put THE RISE OF LIFE ON
EARTH,
and ZOMBIE into that category.  I like your parallels with Dostoevsky; his
compulsive gambling was, I think, an invitation for the gods to render a
judgment on him.  Earlier this month someone asked about JCO and Dostoevsky.
I meant to reply that there are some
good essays here on Randy's web page (the full text page) in which she
analyzes FD's
works.  I've always thought her great concern with young people and the
experiences that shape their souls is a VERY Dostoevskian issue.  Cyrano



Subject: 
Date:  Mon, 26 Jan 1998 17:09:22 -0800 (PST)
From:  joyce l merritt 
 To:  jco@usfca.edu

Here is a thought on "Man Crazy" which I hope is both literary and
psychological:  The main character is named Inrid Boone, and her mother is
Chloe (I can't remember whether or not Chloe's original last name is
given).  It strikes me that these names could be taken as a sign of
reaching for beauty in an awkward manner.  I'm working on the assumption
that it was essentially Chloe's decision that her daughter should be named
"Ingrid Boone", that "Daddy" didn't take an active part in the naming
process (and perhaps a similar process on the part of Chloe's mother led
to Chloe's getting her own name).  The same person who is named Chloe and
chooses the name Ingrid for her daughter is an excellent dressmaker,
probably with more talent than she has the opportunity to display.  In
other words, she's a creative person to whom beauty is important.  Ingrid
is a writer.  Both are living in situations in which it is apparently
natural for them to assume that they will become involved with men, and
that the men they will become involved with will abuse them--JCO seems to
imply that it is part of their culture.  In that case (and referring back
to JCO's quote that mentions women she has known, presumably women who
make this same assumption about men, finding beautiful and mystical
experiences that way), are the forms of the abusive relationships that
Chloe and Ingrid seek out ways of structuring and realizing beauty in
their lives, given a confused, awkward and in a sense hopeless way of
defining beauty?  Are Ingrid's abusive relationships more extreme than
Chloe's in part because Ingrid seems to be more intensely creative than
Chloe is? 

If what I am suggesting has much validity, then perhaps there is no
deepseated masochistic streak in "women" as a class, but rather an extreme
response on the part of women who are born into terrible cultural
situations.  Which is not to say that other elements may not be there, too
(such as what seems to be a common human love for frightening ourselves,
as by riding on roller coasters, watching scary movies, etc--but surely
for most people, who are born into less extremely abusive environments
than Ingrid's, a crucial point is the cathartic effect of knowing that the
danger wasn't real, or was survived, after all, whereas with Chloe and
Ingrid the danger is real and may not be survived). 

Steve



Subject:  Re: FOXFIRE, MAN CRAZY SERIES
 Date:   Mon, 26 Jan 1998 22:04:25 EST
From:    Shmoopak Shmoopak@aol.com
To:  jco@usfca.edu

I am fascinated by the discussion regarding the psychological aspects of
JCO's work, and I truly feel that (in JCO's case anyway), the psychological
cannot be disconnected from the literary.  It is difficult to ignore the
preponderence of "troubled" female characters in almost ALL of JCO's work, and
there is a common theme of masochistic behavior amongst these women.  I also
think that since the title of her latest novel, man CRAZY has such a blatant
psychological reference, we really shouldn't try to cut this discussion short.

I can't help but compare certain scenes from this latest effort with another
one of JCO's "psychological" thrillers, Zombie.  At one point, Ingrid tries to
lure a young girl in a mall parking lot into walking into a dark alley to help
save some "baby kittens,"  so that the satanic cult could kidnap this young
lady and throw her into a van.  Naturally, I couldn't help but remember
Quentin's strategy of luring an adolescent young boy into his van, by asking
him to help capture some "baby chicks" in a dark alley.  In fact, JCO often
employs such kidnappings through "psychological" seduction.  Rarely is anyone
just thrown into a van by brute force a la "Silence of the Lambs."  Rather,
it's almost as if these victims (mostly women) are "psychologically raped"
first, so that they are compelled by something within themselves, to go to
these cars or dark alleys or vans:  Connie in Where are You Going Where Have
You Been is first fascinated (albeit a little disgusted) with Arnold Friend.
Yet Connie keeps talking to Arnold who continues to charm his way into her
psyche.  Moreover, Connie is lured by the music playing in the background so
that she is lulled into believing she is safe.  Thus, when Friend finally goes
in for the kill, he has already wormed his way into Connie's psyche - so much
so, that Connie knows that resistence is futile and walks slowly and detached
toward her certain rape and death.  And Iris Courtney of Because it's Bitter
Because it's my Heart feels compelled to walk alone in a dangerous
neighborhood: "what logic, what purpose, walking alone at night in a
neighborhood so far from her own, a part of her mind not numbed with fatigue
but brightly alert, even hopeful, imagining she's in Hammond somehow...in
Hammond, in Lowertown...the slow-smiling eyes, the bared teeth glistening..."
Again, Iris is compelled to go into a dangerous neighborhood not by "the young
black men in their late teens," in their car, but by her own brightly alert
mind - by some kind of "hope."

I think that the psychosis of these "vicitms" as well as their abusers, is
absolutely fascinating, especially since these same scenarios show up again
and again in so many of JCO's tales - the more we flesh it out here the
better.

Thanks for all the insight!
Sue



Subject:  Re: By Means of an Introduction
 Date: Mon, 26 Jan 1998 19:31:56 -0800
 From: Knabke jamesk@lightspeed.net
To:  jco@usfca.edu

David C. Chaudoir wrote:

>   I am surprised to hear you like Alice Hoffman--she has always
> seemed a little too much of a "woman's writer" to me, 


what defines a "woman's writer ??"



Subject: Re: FOXFIRE, MAN CRAZY SERIES
 Date:  Tue, 27 Jan 1998 08:17:47 +0000
From:   "F. Schwartz" fabela@gte.net
To:  jco@usfca.edu

Francie here, having just read a fascinating article (NYTimes, Art)
about the divided reaction to Ted Hughes's "Birthday Poems," about his
life with Plath.

In keeping with the question, "What constitutes a Woman's Writer?" I
think we are drawn to jco's depiction of the "romance of abuse" because
it is a great question in literature right now. The world's continuing
fascination with Plath is being fed again, in poetry form. jco does know
a great deal about this particular dynamic, the fires that arise from
the pairing of two strong artists, and the reasons Plath committed
suicide.

jco's women can fight back, but she shows us the psychology from the
inside, she's not strictly bound to Freudian theory, and we are not to
pity these women. Understand them? Perhaps.

ZOMBIE, it seemed to me, has a "shadow meaning" - although the gender is
male, it can also be read as an allegory for the female's
self-loathing/arousal pattern, taken to the far extreme, to insanity.

I guess you could say I'm prejudiced, being a woman and being a writer,
and knowing how easily I ventured into relationships with dangerous men,
and knowing the twisted thrill of writing about it, I may be giving jco
more credit than she's due.

"A Woman's Writer" seems to me to be an empty phrase, of no use
whatsoever except to the mindset of marketing. jco is beyond this sort
of characterization, IMNSHO

This is fun!

Francie



Subject:  Re: FOXFIRE, MAN CRAZY SERIES
 Date:  Tue, 27 Jan 1998 08:21:37 +0000
  From:   "F. Schwartz" fabela@gte.net
 To:  jco@usfca.edu

Eek, a jco quote from the article I was reading:

"But the American author and critic Joyce Carol Oates said the Hughes
poetry 'lacks the originality and sharpness of Plath's poetry.'" 

Yea for jco!

And it's "Birthday Letters", I goofed.

Oh the heck with it, I'm attaching the whole article. Just delete if
you're not interested.



Subject:  Re: FOXFIRE, MAN CRAZY SERIES
 Date:  Tue, 27 Jan 98 13:01:25 EST
From:  MSUTTON@VM.SC.EDU
To:  Joyce Carol Oates discussion list jco@usfca.edu

On Tue, 27 Jan 1998 08:17:47 +0000 F. Schwartz said:
>"A Woman's Writer" seems to me to be an empty phrase, of no use
>whatsoever except to the mindset of marketing. jco is beyond this sort
>of characterization, IMNSHO

I think Oates would agree with you.  I skimmed "(Woman) Writer" recently, and
she seems opposed to the whole classifying authors by gender.

On a related note, are there any other essays/interviews/etc. where Oates
discusses her feelings on gender (particularly gender roles)?  I've found
a few, and I need to know for research, but I can't keep up with her
output.  Thanks in advance.

>This is fun!

Yep.

Mark Sutton



Subject:  FRANCINE-WOMAN'S WRITER
Date:  Tue, 27 Jan 1998 13:29:45 -0800
 From:  composer2@juno.com
To:  jco@usfca.edu

Francine---

I think the question What is a woman's writer? was related to my comment
on Alice Hoffman.  Further, I totally and completely agree with you on
your comments, and that JCO fits no such label (just as she fits no
genre).  Then again, how could anyone compare JCO to Alice Hoffman? 
Imagine!

David C.
Michigan



Subject:   A WOMAN'S WRITER
Date: Tue, 27 Jan 1998 13:21:00 -0800
 From:  composer2@juno.com
 To:  jco@usfca.edu

So as not to corner myself nor compose a sloppy definition in the few
minutes I have, I can not give a definitive definition of what a "woman's
writer" is.  I can, however, say what I mean when I say "woman's writer"
when referring to Alice Hoffman.  I believe that of the portions of her
novels I have read, I think that women in general can appreciate more
what Hoffman is saying as it applies members of the  feminine gender. 
Whatever.  I would define Alice Hoffman as a woman's writer just as I
would define Norman Mailer as a man's writer.  Let's see what kind of
flack I get for that.


David C.
Michigan


Subject: 
 Date:  Tue, 27 Jan 1998 15:04:14 -0500
From:  cafuller@EVE.ASSUMPTION.EDU (Catherine Fuller)
To:  jco@usfca.edu

        Let's face it.  If you are going to assign gender ownership, the
only true women writers I know of are bell hooks and Adrienne Rich.



Subject:  Re: A WOMAN'S WRITER
Date:  Tue, 27 Jan 1998 12:39:27 +0000
From:   "F. Schwartz" fabela@gte.net
 To:   jco@usfca.edu

Bzzzt! I dedicated my first book to Norman Mailer, before he became the
feminist Antichrist. I do not think he is strictly a man's writer, as
Woman is the focus of his novels... furthermore, I would say that only a
woman who knows men of Mailer's stripe, and "appreciates" the irony of
Mailer's machismo obsession, can enjoy him. But again, I don't think
"womanizers" can't be women's men, or write *for women*... it's too
limiting a concept.

And it's not Francine.
Francie



Subject:  Re: Silence of the Lambs
Date: Tue, 27 Jan 1998 16:30:43 EST
From:  Cyranomish 
 To:   jco@usfca.edu

I have to make a plug for SILENCE OF THE LAMBS.  It's an excellent book with
an outstandingly human (as opposed to superwoman) heroine.  Many subsequent
books that come across my review's desk try to emulate it, but none succeed.
By the way, the victim in SILENCE isn't tossed into the van -- she' s lured in
by a cunning psycho who tricks her into "assisting" him: he's got a fake cast
on his arm.  In the movie, the "normal" ordinary-guy
appearance of that character -- nicknamed Buffalo Bill -- was much more
terrifying than
his appearance later on  when he smears himself with warpaint and dances
around his lair in the nude.  Who was it in this discussion group talking
about movies recently?  The European film "The Vanishing" contains a similar
lure-her-into-the-car deception; and it's one of the most horrifying films
I've ever seen (the American version gives it a happy ending.)  Cyrano



Subject:  (WOMAN) WRITER
Date:  Tue, 27 Jan 1998 14:37:03 -0800
From:  composer2@juno.com
To:  jco@usfca.edu

Oates would definitely disagree with gender labels judging by what she
has said in the past.

Thank you for bringing up the book "(WOMAN) WRITER" -- I think it is too
often overlooked and
of high value for understanding Oates and her work.

David C.
Michigan



Subject:  Re: Women as decoys for other women
Date:  Tue, 27 Jan 1998 16:17:38 EST
 From:  Cyranomish Cyranomish@aol.com
 To:  jco@usfca.edu

Sue, in the same vein as Ingrid deciding not to lure a new victim with the
baby kitten ploy, Josie S. in FIRST LOVE similarly defies her "mean man" Jerod
by not luring a five year old girl to their house with promises of cookies &
"a baby-sized doll for her to play with."  For a tragic ending to this
situation, see the story "Testimony" in the collection RAVEN'S WING, told in
the voice of a preadolescent tomboy who's so smitten with a brutal older man
that she does indeed follow his orders and brings home a new victim,
whom he tortures to death.  JCO really plumbs the depth of the young
accomplise's motives: "It was sort of disappointing toward the end. She (the
victim) wasn't awake much, only just breathing funny, ..the inside of the tub
was all filthy from her soiling herself, and the blood, it made me sick to
clean it out, but I had to...Later I looked in the mirror and my face was wet
from crying, but I didn't remember crying."
     For those readers who don't know the story behind "Where are you Going,
Where have you been?" JCO got partial inspiration for it from a Life Magazine
story about a psycho nicknamed "the Pied Piper of Tucson" by the press -- who
resembled Arnold Friend.  What intrigued JCO about the newstory was that the
fact that many of the kids in Tucson who knew what the "Pied Piper" guy was
doing with his "dates" did not turn him in.  Something about him charmed them
into a weird collusion with their silence.
     Thanks for sharing the Plath article.  It's interesting.  I remember
being bummed out way back in the early 1970s with JCO's article on Plath in a
book of criticism NEW HEAVEN NEW EARTH, her conclusion being merely that
"Plath's era is concluded."
It seemed to me that "Plath's era "-- of having so many tantalizing options to
choose from and no real support in a sexist world -- was just beginning.  No
doubt JCO got tons of admonishing letters from feminists & Plath-lovers around
that article.  By "Plath's era" she meant, I think, romantic wishful thinking;
an era which is still very much with us to this day.  Cyrano



Subject:  Re: Women as decoys for other women
Date:   Tue, 27 Jan 1998 13:59:11 +0000
 From:   "F. Schwartz" fabela@gte.net
 To:  jco@usfca.edu

Amen, Cyrano!



Subject:  Re: Silence of the Lambs
Date:  Tue, 27 Jan 1998 17:03:02 +0000
 From:  John ivan139@spiritone.com
To:  jco@usfca.edu

Here's an anecdote about 'Buffalo Bill'

I work in film and used to work in Chicago, where 'Buffalo Bill' resides. 
Confoundedly, I can't remember his name.

Anyway, his significant other was a make up artist I worked with regularly,
tho she never mentioned her personal star connection.

Yet I used to run into these two all the time around town, and it took
me at least four or five meetings for my mind to click and realize the role
this guy had played.

I offer this anecdote because the scene in which Buffalo Bill dances around
nude in front of the video camera was never scripted; it was an
idea of the actor, which Jonathan Demme could net let pass.

The make up artist/Buffalo Bill portrayer have a child.  My friend used to
lament to me about what their child might think when he is old enough to view
that interesting scene.

Just a thought.

Take care all
Ivan



Subject: Gender? what is gender?
Date: Tue, 27 Jan 1998 17:12:28 +0000
From:  John ivan139@spiritone.com
To:   discussion group JCO jco@usfca.edu

Forgive these thoughts, but I am just loving interacting with all of you.  It
takes quite a bit of restraint not to post as often as I'd like.  (This is a
compliment to you all; thanks for sharing.)

I am a bit uncomfortable with all this gender talk.  Specifically the terms
'man' and 'woman', especially with all the psychological talk we've been trading.

Are not the qualities of femininity and masculinity a spectrum within us that
varies per person?

The most extreme example I can think of:  Was the character in 'The Crying
Game' and man or a woman, and whom did he or she read?


Ivan

('Everything is permitted', isn't it?)



Subject: Re: Silence of the Lambs
Date:  Tue, 27 Jan 1998 22:08:08 EST
From:  Shmoopak Shmoopak@aol.com
  To:  jco@usfca.edu

Ivan,
how fascinating!  I live in Chicago and now I'll have to keep my eyes peeled
for good ol' Buffalo Bill.  Actually, he was just in some horrible movie on
HBO where he plays a psychotic militia man who still lives with his mother and
sits in his underwear at the kitchen table looking at a catalog of weapons and
when his mother won't agree right away to buy him a 62 dollar knife he starts
screaming and ranting and raving until she finally gives in.  I think this guy
better hide a lot more from his kid than just "Silence of the Lambs" :)
Sue



Subject: Re: Women as decoys for other women
Date: Tue, 27 Jan 1998 22:02:41 EST
From:  Shmoopak Shmoopak@aol.com
To:  jco@usfca.edu

Cyrano:
First you were right about the Silence of the Lambs.  I too read the book and
saw the movie, and I totally forgot that in both instances, the Buffalo Bill
character did indeed use very cunning JCO-type tactics to "lure" the girl into
the van.

I will have to rearead Testimony based on your brief synopsis, as well as
First Love.  The "lure" occurs again and again, but never as "formula" just a
pervasive theme which I am very interested in.  On a related note, so many of
these stories seem to end in asomewhat somber note:  Zombie, Testimony (just
from what you've described), Where are You Going.  I was amazed when I
finished Man Crazy and found myself teary-eyed with happiness.  Can you guess
when I started getting schmaltzy?  Yep.  It was the second Ingrid identifies
the "you" as her therapist.  That is, when she tells her mother she will be
marrying her therapist.  It was such a NON JCO ending that I just about fell
out of the big stuffed chair at Barnes and Nobles.  This seems to be the
closest thing to a "real" happy ending that I have ever seen in a JCO work
(perhaps with the exception of Corkey Corcoran surviving being shot in What I
Lived For, and I'm not sure I was happy about that or not because he was so
despicable, but still you loved to hate him just like JR Ewing in the early
80's).  I don't know what to make of it.  Is it really a happy ending or is it
just wishful thinking on my part?  Is this to be the same type of marriage
that Elena faced with Martin Howe in Do With Me What You Will?  Indeed, Oates
has explored her fair share of older authoritarian men exploiting younger
vulnerable women (this theme occurs almost as much as the women as decoys for
other women!), but somehow I'd like to believe this is a little different.
Looking forward to your thoughts!
Sue



Subject: Re: Silence of the Lambs
Date:  Tue, 27 Jan 1998 22:36:24 EST
From:  Cyranomish Cyranomish@aol.com
 To: jco@usfca.edu

Ivan: What would "Buffalo Bill's" kid think when he sees that scene in
SILENCE?  Turning to the words of Fr. Zossima: "There are no memories more
precious than those of early childhood in one's first home ... indeed,
precious memories may remain even of a bad home, if only the heart knows how
to find what is precious."  I offer this lovely quote because I think it's
reflected in some of JCO's work, most recently in the concluding pages of MAN
CRAZY. I think there's often some precious detail in even the most turbulent
JCO fiction.  Cyrano



Subject: Re: Gender? what is gender?
Date:  Tue, 27 Jan 1998 19:59:44 +0000
From:  "F. Schwartz" fabela@gte.net
 To:  jco@usfca.edu


John, please post more often. The lately much-maligned Dr. Kinsey was
one who began to understand that we all fall into a range of sexual
behavior, our position within that range may evolve, devolve, or change
over our lifetime, and that labels are not all that useful when studying
human sexuality.

I too have great difficulty understanding the need for such labels. Both
"Silence of the Lambs" and "Red Dragon" are Thomas Harris novels that
have been made into intriguing movies ("Manhunter", directed by Michael
Mann, was where we first met Hannibal Lecter, who was played by a cool
Anthony Cox (check me on that name) -- and my affinity for FOXFIRE,
ZOMBIE and now, MAN CRAZY (still waiting for an avaiable copy) would
make me a candidate for enjoyment of characters like Buffalo Bill. I
think jco understands the erotic aspect of horror better than most
contemporary writers. Furthermore I think her understanding transcends
gender considerations.

Thanks for another enlightened view... are we having fun, or what? 

More, more!

Francie



Subject:  Re: FOXFIRE, MAN CRAZY SERIES
Date:   Tue, 27 Jan 1998 23:28:29 -0500 (EST)
 From:  Jennifer Nash jnash@fas.harvard.edu
 To:  jco@usfca.edu

Fred-
I don't think you can really separate the two. People are drawn to
literature partially because it depicts something about humanity -
something about the nature of people. A good writer, like JCO, balances
stylistic mastery with psychological insight.

- jen

"we shall not cease from exploration
and the end of all our exploring
will be to arrive where we started
and know the place for the first time." 

- t.s. eliot

On Fri, 23 Jan 1998, FredMancor wrote:

> This is to the whole group.
>  Is anybody here interested in literature? Sometimes I feel like  I am a
> -rather passive, indeed- participant in a psycho-therapy group. After all, JCO
> is a writer. If some of her novels are good it must be because they are
> literature, not essays on human psychology, and, if they are good, may be is
> because they are an original and personal contribution to literature. Then the
> question and the answer are in the texts, in their narrative strategies,
> style, etc.
> 



Subject:  Re: Silence of the Lambs
      Date:  Wed, 28 Jan 1998 05:40:35 +0000
      From: John ivan139@spiritone.com
        To:   jco@usfca.edu

Well put Cyrano.  And nice quote from Dostoevsky.  I've read Brothers
Karamazov only twice, and somehow that quote has never stuck.  Personally, it
doesn't hold true for me, but alas, this is not a 'support' group.

You attribute more power to the positive side of the human psyche than either
I or my friend, the make up artist/mother of the child.  

" . . . if only the heart knows how to find what is precious" -- yes, but
perhaps the biggest obstacle to this heart's perspective is fear.

At the time the mother made her lament to me their child was only three, and I
bet she projected her own lack of understanding of her husband's psyche onto
the child.

But thanks for inspiring contemplation!  And even some hope!

Take care.
Ivan



Subject:  Re: FOXFIRE, MAN CRAZY SERIES
Date:  Wed, 28 Jan 1998 15:41:20 -0500 (EST)
From:  Jennifer Nash jnash@fas.harvard.edu
To:  jco@usfca.edu

Hi everyone-
Sorry for responding to something thats a little dated - I was out of town
for a few days.

> I agree that "Foxfire" is a more attractive novel than "Man Crazy", but I 
> believe that JCO meant it that way.  After all, the members of "Foxfire" 
> tried to take control of their own lives and to stop being victims, which 
> is more pleasant to read about, even when the effort turns into a fiasco, 
> than reading about someone like Ingrid in "Man Crazy", who repeatedly 
> cooperates in her own victimization, and who turns away from her 
> opportunities to improve her situation.  JCO is deliberately placing us 
> as readers in an ambiguous situation (even morally;  if we like the book, 
> are we, too victimizing Ingrid?  Is JCO victimizing her own character by 
> making art about her?).

I always related Foxfire to Zombie - in both, JCO implants the reader in
the mind of the protagonist(s). Zombie frightened me because I felt as
though I was living in the mind of the insane. Steve, you are right,
Foxfire is a more attractive novel because JCO places us in the midst of
moral ambiguiuty where we can rationalize actions that we would generally
view as wrong. My favorite JCO novels (Zombie, Foxfire, and The Rise of
Life on Earth) are the ones where she places us in the mindset of someone
else and then rips us out suddenly, forcing us to adjust the lens through
which we see the world.

- jen

"we shall not cease from exploration
and the end of all our exploring
will be to arrive where we started
and know the place for the first time." 

- t.s. eliot



Subject:  Re: A WOMAN'S WRITER
Date:   Wed, 28 Jan 1998 15:50:46 -0500 (EST)
From:  Jennifer Nash jnash@fas.harvard.edu
To:  jco@usfca.edu

Francie-
I like what you said about writing and women and men. Whenever I hear
people talk about "women's writers" or "men's writers," I think of what
Virginia Woolf said at the end of A Room of One's Own where she says that
we must all strive for the androgynous mind where our gender is the
dominant part of our mind, but where both masculinity and femininity
exist. She says that the androgynous mind is resonant and lucid. And
I think thats so precise and so beautiful.

- jen

"we shall not cease from exploration
and the end of all our exploring
will be to arrive where we started
and know the place for the first time." 

- t.s. eliot



Subject: Re: DOSTOEVSKI PARALLELS
Date:  Thu, 29 Jan 1998 10:07:03 -0500
 From:  "Anthony" jackv@ptdprolog.net

hi....my observation will be mercifully short, essentially that there is a
resemblance between JCO and FD due to the preoccupation with psychology.
Psychology is the modern religion, but not the only one.  It just happens to
be the only one that people seem to believe in these days.  One of the (to
me) interesting things about Dostoevski is that he often concerns himself
with the psychology of religion.  I haven't read so many JCO books as many
of you.   Does JCO approach the notion of religion in any of her novel
and/or characters?  I wouldn't know.  On the other hand, she's a terrific
psychologist.

Anthony



Subject:   Re: FOXFIRE, MAN CRAZY SERIES
 Date:   Thu, 29 Jan 1998 10:11:21 -0500
 From:   "Anthony" jackv@ptdprolog.net

>Francie here, having just read a fascinating article (NYTimes, Art)
>about the divided reaction to Ted Hughes's "Birthday Poems," about his
>life with Plath.
>

I read the same story in the NYT.  It was interesting in general and
particularly interesting that the article had a comment from JCO.  I wish I
had it to look it over again or to post it.



Subject:  Re: A WOMAN'S WRITER
Date:  Thu, 29 Jan 1998 10:19:27 -0500
From:   "Anthony" jackv@ptdprolog.net

>Bzzzt! I dedicated my first book to Norman Mailer, before he became the
>feminist Antichrist. I do not think he is strictly a man's writer, as
>Woman is the focus of his novels... furthermore, I would say that only a
>woman who knows men of Mailer's stripe, and "appreciates" the irony of
>Mailer's machismo obsession, can enjoy him. But again, I don't think
>"womanizers" can't be women's men, or write *for women*... it's too
>limiting a concept.


That seems a pretty fair assessment to me.   I think it's only natural that
male writers would be able to write with greater empathy and perception of
male characers.  And vice-versa.  On the other hand, JCO's characterization
of her male protagonist Corky Corcoran in WHAT I LIVED FOR seems to have
mapped out the male animal with great perception and artistry, a sort of
ultimate and obsessive seeming naturalism.



Subject:  Re: DOSTOEVSKI PARALLELS
Date:   Thu, 29 Jan 98 12:44:00 EST
 From:  Mark Sutton MSUTTON@VM.SC.EDU

Oates focuses on fundamentalist Christianity in _Son of the Morning_ and, if
I'm reading the various posts right, Satanism in _Man Crazy_ (I have not
read either of the novels, so both of these points are from my readings of
criticism).  Religion shows up in some of the short stories, most notably
(ie.  the ones I can remember) "In the Region of Ice" and" At the Seminary."
_First Love_ also has grotesque religious iconography that covers Jared,
Jr.'s true colors.

As far as her presentation of religion, I believe she examines it as a kind
of defensive mechanism against the world.  That's the impression I got from
the short stories, so it might be different with her novels.  So, she
continues to be a psychologist.

Take this with a grain of salt,
Mark



Subject:  Re: DOSTOEVSKI PARALLELS
Date:   Thu, 29 Jan 1998 12:52:53 -0500 (EST)
From:   diamond@math.wvu.edu (Harvey Diamond)

Anthony,

        "Son of the Morning" is a religously-oriented JCO novel about the
life and making of an evangelist. It was written during the period when
televangelism was an important feature in American culture & religion.
Of course this reassertion of religion in America and the "culture wars"
(between religious and secular, and now European vs. nonEuropean)
remain important to any description of American, long after the  Swaggarts,
the Falwells, and even the Robertsons have been marginalized and JCO's novel
has been forgotten. It's a good novel though.

Harvey Diamond



Subject:   Re: DOSTOEVSKI PARALLELS
 Date:  Thu, 29 Jan 1998 13:44:10 EST
 From:  Cyranomish@aol.com


Hi, Anthony.  I was just rereading the Brothers Karamazov.  What a great
psychologist FD was!  JCO's SON OF THE MORNING is about a preacher,  She also
has an essay
about the books of GENESIS and JOHN in an anthology entitled CONFIRMATIONS.  I
was at an inn in Maine last week and discovered a tiny book entitled DEADLY
SINS in which prominent American writers have written essays on the seven
deadly sins.  JCO's essay was on "Despair."  I will look up the editor for
CONFIRMATIONS -- in her essay for that book, JCO discusses the churches she
went to in childhood and what they meant to her.  Cyrano



Subject:   Some thoughts
Date:  Fri, 30 Jan 1998 03:55:14 +0900
 From:   "±Ëº±«," sweetalk@netsgo.com


 Lindsay, Ellen, Ivan, Jen, Francie and others,  
 
I'm finally back from the new-year's visit to my family-in-law
(in lunar year yesterday was the new year's day) 
and wow, I had to spend a few hours to catch up with all the discussion posts.

I immensely enjoyed reading your thoughts on this masochistic streak in JCO, 

and the tendency her characters are drawn to abusive relationships. 
These days I'm reading ON BOXING, and I think this essay could give us a clue.  
What I suspect is that she is attracted to and deeply fascinated with men's
 physicality,  
as well as with what you called brutality, or passion. 
 
In JCO's novels that I read, the heroines are naive, pale, white, and
 intellectual, 
but the men they are attracted to are powerful, brutal, passionate and physical. 
I felt the author clearly identifies herself with the girls. 
Reading ON BOXING, I could picture JCO intensely staring at the bleeding, fighting boxers 
half frightened, half fascinated, all the way mesmerized. 
It reminded me of Iris secretly glancing the Fairchild brothers diving into the
 Peach Tree Creek, 
Josie S. in FIRST LOVE eyeing the two dark nipples and sweating body of Jared. 
The passage rites for these girls are always bloody physical. Always strange and fascinating.  
 
Perhaps because the physicality means reality/authenticity, I thought.
So the pale white girls must face the reality at least once in their lifetime.
 
Could be brutal, but also beautiful, even sweet. 
And as this personal problem unfolds, it gets interrelated with the larger,
 social perspectives.
In this JCO may be said to have something in common with D.H.Lawrence,
though sexuality in JCO seems more corrupted and distorted.   
 
It is also noteworthy that JCO's attitude is essentially feminine.
That physicality/brutality is always depicted as the attribute of the Other. 
Something women don't have in them but inevitably have to face and deal with

when they get involved with men.   
It is interesting because typically dangerous sexuality(physicality) is allotted 
to female, femme fatale characters. 
I personally like this side of JCO, breaking the rules of typical writing, 
mainly established by men. She could be called a feminist writer 
though I think she wouldn't claim to be one and probably would hate the title.
But what I mean by that is just she faithfully represents what the world feels like when it's 
filtered through a thinking woman's perspective. 
 
I agree with Jen that truly great literature should aspire to the androgynous vision, but 
Virginia Woolf's writing itself(not the vision of her writing) is far from androgynous. 
It is clearly a woman's writing. I mean, the simple fact of being a woman
 defined almost every aspects of her writing, which I don't think,
however, detriments the greatness of her works. 
Well, I still enjoy reading Lawrence or Milton, though I'm a female reader. 
Their writing is definitely male-centered, but the vision of their works are not that simple.
They aspire to the ideal vision of androgynous, i.e. humanistic world. 
It's also true with the movies of Jane Campion. Let's take THE PIANO for example, this is not 
a "women's movie" at all but still its perspective is distinctively feminine. 
So the terms such as "women's writer", "men's writer" are not quite to the mark, as many 
of you pointed out. But still, JCO's writing feels intrinsically feminine to me. 
At least so far. 
Well, I know I'm not equal to making this kind of hasty generalization, but 
I'm just sharing my spontaneous reactions... 
 
 
Thank you for the great insights!  
and Happy New Year to you all! 
 
 
Kim 
from Korea   



Subject:  Re: Some thoughts
Date:  Thu, 29 Jan 1998 14:14:59 -0500 (EST)
From:   Jennifer Nash jnash@fas.harvard.edu


Kim and everyone...

I think you are definitely right - and Woolf touches upon your idea in her
BRILLIANT essay. She says that in the male, the male side of the brain
should dominate the women's side and in a women, the female side should
dominate the male's side. What is nevessary is a harmony. "Perhaps a mind
that is purely masculine cannot create, any more than a mind that is
purely feminine." Her female-ness is part of her self, it is something
that defines her experience and the lens through which she sees the world
but she encourages the reader to see through an androgynous lens.

Happy New Year to you too, Kim.

- jen

"we shall not cease from exploration
and the end of all our exploring
will be to arrive where we started
and know the place for the first time." 

- t.s. eliot 



Subject:  Re: DH Lawrence
Date:  Thu, 29 Jan 1998 17:39:50 EST
From:  Cyranomish@aol.com

Hello, Kim.  You might be interested to know that JCO published a little book
on Lawrence in the late 1970s entitled THE HOSTILE SUN.  In regard to gender-
writing, two stories in the collection ASSIGNATION come to mind: "Ace," a
well-rendered hoodlum's perspective of a drive-by shooting; and "Fin de
Siecle," the emergence of a body-building Madonna-type character who may be
either a relic of the late 20th century or a harbinger of the new century
ahead.  Cyrano



Subject:  NORMAN MAILER / WOMEN
Date:  Tue, 27 Jan 1998 16:52:00 -0800
From:  composer2@juno.com

See. I am eating my words and it's still the same afternoon.  I know &
love Norman Mailer and think he would get a kick out of "feminist
Antichrist."  Apologies on the name! 

David C.

p.s. -- What do you think of the women in "Tough Guys Don't Dance"--that
seems to be the epitome of a man's novel, yet a lot of women I know are
attracted to it (maybe for Mailer's sheer prose and genius rather than
the subject matter).  "The Naked and the Dead" certainly does not seem to
have Woman as the focus of his novel, nor does "Ancient Evenings" or
"Armies of the Night."  Read "The Prisoner of Sex" for Mailer's few on
femininity! :-)



Subject:  Re: NORMAN MAILER / WOMEN
Date:  Thu, 29 Jan 1998 16:40:48 +0000
 From:   "F. Schwartz" fabela@gte.net

Prisoner of Sex (Atlantic Monthly) lays out Mailer's obsession for a

complete viewing. I don't think it's his "view" of womanhood as much as
his gaze upon it. Unforgettable prose. Henry Miller was proud.

"Deer Park", his "Hollywood" novel, orbits around the women in it.
"Naked & the Dead" was certainly a novel of war, but the beginnings of
his reverence/rhapsodizing/wailing for the love of women can be found in
the sexual reveries of the soldiers. "Armies of the Night" is
non-fiction. Peppered with descriptions of the women in the various
political camps. "Ancient Evenings": well, if you've read the entire
thing, I congratulate you, but what I read had an awful lot of sexual
subtext, I think I recall some anal references in the context of limning
sexual practices in Egypt...

glad to see some signs of life in this forum!

And I agree, Norman's about much more than sex, and yet sex is writ
large all over his work.

I also confess I was looking for a Mailer page the day I found jco's...

Francie



Subject:   Re: FOXFIRE, MAN CRAZY SERIES
Date:  Thu, 29 Jan 1998 17:02:14 -0800 (PST)
From:  joyce l merritt jlm29260@email.csun.edu

Francie:

"Amen" to your comment about the term "a woman's writer".  Now, if only 
society as a whole could be persuaded to agree with you (about that, and 
about all the related issues involving women)!

Steve



Subject:   Re: A WOMAN'S WRITER
Date:   Thu, 29 Jan 1998 17:12:21 -0800 (PST)
From:  joyce l merritt jlm29260@email.csun.edu

David:

I don't mean this to be flack.  Surely men should care deeply about what 
we commonly call "women's issues" and women should care deeply about 
"men's issues" because both are necessary aspects of being human.  It 
seems to me that most of us, of both sexes, are egotistical enough to 
assume that being human means being as much as possible like we are 
ourselves.  As long as humanity consists of two sexes (not to mention 
commn subsets of the "standard" sexes, such as gay people), none of us 
can be more than half human at most.  The closest we can come to full 
humanity is to become as familiar as possible with the concerns of the 
kinds of human that we aren't (that's a horribly awkward sentence, but I 
think it says what I want to say).  In that sense, I don't think it's 
helpful to classify anyone as a "woman's writer" or a "man's writer", 
even if the writer seems to concentrate on the issues of one sex (there's 
also the matter that such terms are commonly used to devalue a writer's 
work, implying the word "only").

Steve



Subject:  Re: Women as decoys for other women
 Date:  Thu, 29 Jan 1998 17:22:04 -0800 (PST)
 From:   joyce l merritt jlm29260@email.csun.edu

Sue:

I'm a great fan of your insights, but I strongly disagree about the 
ending of "Man Crazy".  I'll reveal that I've been in therapy myself, and 
have been told (as a general statement;  I didn't want to get involved 
with my therapists) that it is not only unethical for therapists to have 
romantic relationships with their therapists, but that they can lose 
their licenses for doing so in less than two years from the end of the 
therapy (at least in California).  I believe that JCO wrote the ending 
knowing this point, and that she meant to show that Ingrid is still open 
to abusive relationships with men who remind her of "Daddy" (for the 
unethical therapist is definately being abusive).

Steve



Subject:  Re: JCO & religion
Date:  Thu, 29 Jan 1998 20:59:48 EST
 From:  Cyranomish@aol.com

Correction, the essay in which JCO talks about her relationship with religion
and the Bible is in a book entitled COMMUNION: CONTEMPORARY WRITERS REVEAL THE
BIBLE IN THEIR LIVES, an anthology edited by David Rosenberg.  Before she left
home for college, JCO attended a Methodist church and then went to a local
Catholic church with her family.  Cyrano



Subject:  Re: A WOMAN'S WRITER
Date:  Thu, 29 Jan 1998 21:20:23 EST
From:  Shmoopak@aol.com

I always wondered how apt JCO's portrayal of Corky Corcoran really was (not
being a man myself).  Obviously he was not just any man but a political
animal.  Given all the scandal going on about the White House, I think JCO's
portrayal of this up and coming politico seems pretty on the mark.



Subject: Re: Women as decoys for other women
Date:  Thu, 29 Jan 1998 23:33:47 EST
From:  Ehaggar@aol.com

Hi---

Just wanted to add my strong agreement to Steve's analysis of the end of Man
Crazy----there is NO relationship more manipulative than that of a male
therapist and a distraught female client.  This novel is not a happy ending
one----it is one in which a badly damaged girl moves from relating to the
psychopath to relating with the therapist----there is no sense of independence
here, just a continued need to be managed by forceful men-----

Ellen



Subject:  Re: NORMAN MAILER / WOMEN
Date:  Fri, 30 Jan 1998 15:32:24 +0900
From:   "±Ëº±«," 


David,

Think I can agree with you when you say Mailer is a man's writer.
Not so much as a label as a convenient way of describing
some characteristics of his novels. I read "Tough Guys Don't Dance", and
yes, I agree that seems to be an epitome of men's novel in the same way
Alfred Bester's "The Demolished Man" or Gavin Ryal's "Midnight Plus One"
is a man's novel. But though being a woman, I immensely enjoyed all three of
them.
Yet still, when I think of the women in their novels, I get kind of
uncomfortable feelings.
I think it's the popular fiction tradition they are using (like all the
Hollywood pictures).
Well, the paradox is...I can still enjoy "men's novels" so long as they are
beautifully done.
While reading, they make me forget I'm a passive woman victimized by the
plot.
Maybe that's the real problem according to some feminist critics, though.
:-)

Kim
from Korea



Subject: Re: Women as decoys for other women
Date:  Fri, 30 Jan 1998 10:25:31 EST
From:  Cyranomish@aol.com

Hi, Steve.  I agree that Ingrid's situation at the end of MAN CRAZY does not
look very promising.  Cleverly, JCO keeps Ingrid's new boyfriend completely
out of sight -- possibly he is the one who loaned Ingrid the car to go visit
her mother.  At first, it made me think of Marianne's (sp?) happy ending in WE
WERE THE MULVANEYS, but then we see M.
meeting that doctor -- who is a veternarian, not a psychotherapist -- and his
policy is to let her reach her own conclusions.  (a therapist would be
directive, even if he were a nice, decent guy who means well.) The end of MAN
CRAZY reminded me of the scene in THEM where Maureen tells her mother that
she's going to marry a college teacher -- but we readers can see that this
marriage will have lots of problems and that in fact Maureen is simply
continuing her old maladaptive strategies on a new level. Back to Ingrid,
however, I think JCO provides a poetic clue in the final image of the damaged
tree that continues growing toward the light the best way it know how.  The
broken fir tree goes on living in its fallen state -- its only option being to
die.  Cyrano 



Subject:   Re: A WOMAN'S WRITER
Date:   Fri, 30 Jan 1998 11:03:24 -0800
From:   composer2@juno.com

Steve,

I agree that it is not helpful to classify writers as a "man's writer" or
a "woman's writer."  But, just as you pointed out, I do think there are
certain texts written about/for/encompassing women and same with men, and
in that sense writers who continually write in one of those ideas could
be dubbed (not necessarily 'labeled'  a woman's writer or a man's
writer--not in the sense to demean their work or deraugotize them.  I am
in concordance with the thought that no author could be fixed in one area
(men or women) of writing, but they certainly can be thought to be of the
school of a particular style.  Norman Mailer from the school of "man's
writing" and V.S. Naipaul from the school of "Magic Realism."  That is
kind of like comparing apples to oranges, as they say, but you get the
idea.  Great discussion.

David C.
Michigan



Subject:  Re: JCO & religion
Date:  Fri, 30 Jan 1998 10:40:43 -0800
From:   composer2@juno.com

JCO maintains to this day a Methodist preference (although I don't know
how "church-going" she is).  At least that is what she said in a recent
lecture.

David C.
Michigan



Subject:  Re: JCO & religion
Date:   Fri, 30 Jan 1998 13:49:23 EST
From:   Cyranomish@aol.com


Hi, David.  In that COMMUNION book I mentioned yesterday, JCO refers to
herself as "a nonreligious observer of religion."  Cyrano



Subject:  Re: "Methodist preference"
 Date:  Fri, 30 Jan 1998 13:53:45 EST
From:  Cyranomish@aol.com


One more thought, JCO's "Methodist preference" makes sense in that the
Methodist religion has always had a special concern with  the poor, as does
JCO's writing. One of her earliest declarations about her own writing was that
she wanted to speak for people who were unable to speak for themselves.
Cyrano 



Subject:  Re: "Methodist preference"
Date:   Fri, 30 Jan 1998 15:15:31 EST
From:   Ehaggar@aol.com

Cyrano---

Just a note about JCO's religious preference---when Methodism was started by
John Wesley in mid-19th century England, it appealed not just to the poor, but
to the working class and rural population---I like to think that JCO is
particularly good in expressing those states of mind, and these are certainly
groups of people who cannot speak for themselves in a literary manner.

And before anyone hits me on the head for sounding elitist---I come from a
semi-literate rural background and have the most respect for people caught in
that kind of life  (Fred, sorry to link literature and life again)

Ellen Haggar



Subject:  Re: A WOMAN'S WRITER
Date:  Fri, 30 Jan 1998 20:14:41 -0000
 From:   "Gary Couzens" Gjcouzens@btinternet.com

I agree with this on the whole. I'd even suggest that there are no subjects
that a writer must have first-hand experience to write about. If a novel
about women cannot speak to men, or vice versa (given a open-minded reader),
then I'd suggest this is a failing of the novel, or of the reader's
imagination or both. (You could extend this argument to include novels
written by and about  racial and sexual and religious minorities.) You don't
have to be a woman to be able to read Jane Austen, say; conversely, you
don't have to be Jewish to read Isaac Bashevis Singer. I don't know what the
ratio of the sexes on this discussion group is - from the posts I'd guess
it's close to 50:50.

As it happens, I'm a male reader who does find himself reading quite a few
writers who are women, JCO included. This may say something about me.  I
recently wrote an article about writing fiction from the POV of the opposite
sex. I'm talking from a British perspective here, and other countries'
experience may be different  - certainly, when I was growing up, it was okay
for girls to aspire to "boys' things", but not the opposite. To call a girl
a tomboy would not insult her, but to call a boy a "sissy" would be
devastating. Women may have to adapt themselves to male viewpoints to get by
in a male-dominated society, but the converse is actively discouraged.

Possibly as a result of that, we tend to notice more when male writers write
about women than vice versa. One example that springs to mind is William
Boyd's "Brazzaville Beach"; more recently, Martin Amis's "Night Train" was
much discussed because it's written first-person-female (by a writer who's
been accused of misogyny more than once in the past).

Women writing with a "male" voice tend to attract less attention. A couple
of examples: Rose Tremain's "Restoration" (Booker-Prize nominated, later
filmed) and Donna Tartt's "The Secret History" both attracted quite a bit of
attention - deservedly, as they're both good novels - but nobody to my
knowledge commented upon the fact that they're both written
first-person-male. And quite convincingly too, to my mind.

In the light of this, I think it's important to say that JCO writes
consistently well about men. Corky in "What I Lived For" is a brilliant
portrait from inside (third person, admittedly, but consistently from his
viewpoint) of a certain type of man. His machismo, his insecurities and
casual sexism come across very clearly. He's the sort of man who would
regard his "feminine side" as a weakness. You could put a male pseudonym on
this novel and (JCO's distinctive prose-style apart) fool a lot of people as
to the author's gender.

Gary Couzens



Subject:   Re: A WOMAN'S WRITER OR...
Date:  Fri, 30 Jan 1998 15:00:16 +0000
 From:   "F. Schwartz" fabela@gte.net

Gary, don't tantalize us in the "States"! -- "Night Train" hasn't come
out here as yet. Being a Martin Amis "freak" (favorites are "Money" and
"The Information") I am all a-twitter about the new one... and now
you've told me its voice is that of a female.

Hope nobody's neck is sprained during the jump from Mailer to Amis -
shall we now talk about the American "womanizer" as compared to the
"Brit" version -- and compare Amis's women to Mailer's?

And maybe it should be called "A Writer's Women."...

Oh - I keep forgetting to mention that, for me, "Tough Guys Don't Dance"
was not Grade A Mailer - I can't even remember the women. Certainly they
weren't as strong as Elena in DEER PARK. The later you get in Mailer's
oeuvre, the stronger the non-fiction (Picasso, Marilyn), and yet he
still has an old world way of writing about sex. When I say "old world"
I mean prefeminist.

*girlish giggle*

Francie



Subject:   Re: "Methodist preference"
Date:   Fri, 30 Jan 1998 18:19:34 EST
 From:   Cyranomish@aol.com

Ellen, thanks for the info on Methodism.  Rural & blue collar are certainly
JCO's background.  I hope her 1997 story "We Were Worried About You" appears
in the next collection.  It's a skillful tale  about one family's relationship
with cars -- how owning big, solid cars buffers them from the poor and
scruffy-looking people in their town.  Cyrano



Subject:  Re: "Methodist preference"
Date:  Fri, 30 Jan 1998 18:47:14 EST
 From:   Ehaggar@aol.com

Cyrano---

I look forward to reading "We Were Worried About You."  I always enjoy JCO's
obsession/understanding of the importance of cars in many people's lives.
Don't know how it is in other parts of the country, but in North and South
Carolina if you want to see the fanciest, most impressive cars, you go to the
poorest parts of town.  Indeed, it isn't unusual to be driving along the
backroads and pass shacks falling to pieces side by side with the most up-to-
date and accessorized vehicles.  I am sure that for some of the owners the car
is their spiritual home, not the mean places in which they actually have to
sleep......

Ellen Haggar      



Subject:  Re: Martin Amis
 Date:   Fri, 30 Jan 1998 19:25:18 -0600
 From:   JonWendell@webtv.net (John Eggers)

  Francie wrote that "Night Train" is not available in the USA.  It is,
and I'm almost done.
It's a short novel(174pp) and is the size of Man   Crazy.  I like it ,
quite a departure for Amis.   



Subject:  Re: Martin Amis
Date:  Fri, 30 Jan 1998 17:42:12 +0000
 From:   "F. Schwartz" fabela@gte.net


Wow. It hasn't reached little San Luis Obispo prior to this week.
Now I'm all excited!

Francie



Subject:  Re: Martin Amis
Date:  Fri, 30 Jan 1998 20:57:46 EST
 From:   Ehaggar@aol.com

Francie---

Are you a published novelist?  You mentioned having dedicated one to Norman
Mailer--give us titles!


Ellen Haggar



Subject:  ON BOXING
Date:  Sat, 31 Jan 1998 11:06:29 EST
From:  composer2@juno.com (D. C. C.)

Kim--

While I somewhat agree with you that JCO's ON BOXING reveals her
obsession with men's physicality, brutality, and perhaps passion, I think
it deals more with just her ultimate love and greater obsession with the
sport of boxing.  I hope you are reading the book-length version from
Ecco Press.  I have spoken to Miss Oates about that particular work, and
she has commented that boxing is one of her "secret" or "side" passions. 
She also commented on how shocked everyone was when the books was
published,  including many prominent New York Time sports columnists,
that a WOMAN was writing about this very male sport.  It kind of broke
the barrier for women boxing writers, and provided an outlet for Oates to
blurb about boxing legends like Mike Tyson and Muhammad Ali.  Look for a
portion of the book, ON BOXING, to appear in THE MUHAMMAD ALI READER,
which will appear in June from Ecco Press.  I have just finished reading
the pre-pub proofs and the entire collection, edited by Gerlad Early, is
a magnificent forum of great boxing writers (Plimpton, Mailer, Hauser,
Talese, etc.).

David C.
Michigan



Subject:  Re: Women as decoys for other women
Date:   Sat, 31 Jan 1998 11:35:54 EST
From:  Shmoopak@aol.com

Steve,
I hate to admit it, but I think you are right.  Of course JCO would know the
potential for abuse if a therapist starts seeing a patient.  And as we all
know, JCO has written countless stories revolving around the vulnerable young
woman and the powerful older daddy figure, and these all end tragically.  And
JCO does give us a terrifying protrayal of a patient's relationship with her
therapist(s) in Lives of the Twins (as Rosamond Smith).

I guess the ending of Man Crazy seems happy to me because in comparison to the
satanist, the therapist ain't such a bad alternative.  But in reality, it's
just another JCO story waiting to happen!

Thanks for the response,

Sue



Subject:   Re: ON BOXING
Date:   Sat, 31 Jan 1998 08:59:30 +0000
From:  John ivan139@spiritone.com

Katherine Dunn is also quite into boxing, though I can't say that I've read
anything of hers on this subject.  Don't really care to.  Don't see what all
the excitement is about.

Ivan



Subject:  Amis Critical Triumph
 Date:   Sat, 31 Jan 1998 09:09:41 +0000
From:     "F. Schwartz" fabela@gte.net

Just read two rave reviews of NIGHT TRAIN (NY Times). It's beckoning to
me!

I think the "darkness" of boxing is another element in the mix that
results in jco's heightened understanding of some women's attraction to
"brutal" men.

Now that I know Amis has written a dark romance, a police procedural
from a female point of view, I can hardly resist finding strands for
comparison. 

I have written (and published) briefly about NBA basketball.  The
magazine who bought the piece cut out almost all the actual "sports
writing" -- very likely because women aren't supposed to write about
roundball, either. Someday I hope to write about basketball, maybe as
the setting for a "dark romance."

Francie



Subject:  Re: Women as decoys for other women
 Date:   Sat, 31 Jan 1998 12:29:13 EST
 From:  Ehaggar@aol.com

Hi Sue--

Not to take anything away from Steve, but I was the one who commented on the
ending of Man Crazy and the therapist/patient abuse thing----I was answering
Steve, who indeed does say a whole lot of excellent things!

Ellen Haggar



Subject:   Re: Women as decoys for other women, "Man Crazy," Therapists
Date:   Sat, 31 Jan 1998 09:43:44 -0800 (PST)
 From:   Anthony Risser ahris@yahoo.com

   Several from the list have written over the past week concerning
the therapist-client relationship in the novel "Man Crazy."

   For example,

---Shmoopak@aol.com wrote:
>...Of course JCO would know the potential for abuse if a therapist
starts seeing a patient... And JCO does give us a terrifying protrayal
of a patient's relationship with her therapist(s) in Lives of the
Twins (as Rosamond Smith)... I guess the ending of Man Crazy seems
happy to me because in comparison to the
> satanist, the therapist ain't such a bad alternative.  But in
reality, it's just another JCO story waiting to happen!...

   Psychologists have a code of Ethical Principles. Adherence to them
is typically dictated within each state's statutes as part of
licensing and regulation statutes. The list might be interested in the
one's that address sexual/romantic relationships:

   Standard 4.05: Psychologists do not engage in sexual intimacies
with current patients or clients.

   Standard 4.06: Psychologists do not accept as therapy patients or
client persons with whom they have engaged in sexual intimacies.

   Standard 4.07: (a) Psychologists do not engage in sexual intimacies
with a former therapy patient or client for at least two years after
cessation or termination of professional services.

   (b) Because sexual intimacies with a former therapy patient or
client are so frequently harmful to the patient or client, and because
such intimacies undermine public confidence in the psychology
profession and thereby deter the public's use of needed services,
psychologists do not engage in sexual intimacies with former therapy
patients and clients even after a two-year interval except in the most
unusual circumstances. 

The psychologist who engages in such activity after the two years
following cessation or termination of treatment bears the burden of
demonstrating that there has been no exploitation, in light of all
relevant factors including...(7) any statements of actions made by the
therapist during the course of therapy suggesting or inviting the
possibility of a poosttermination sexual or romantic relationship with
the patient or client.

   Am I wrong in remembering "Man Crazy" as being more than a 'slam
dunk' in outlining that relationship? Although I would need to re-read
"Man Crazy" before offering a definitive comment here, I do remember
when reading it the first time, the part of the dynamic in that
relationship which was the most interesting to me was who, if it was
either of the two, would emerge, actually, as the manipulative one.

Anthony H. Risser, Ph.D.
rissera@yahoo.com 



Subject:   Re: Women as decoys for other women, "Man Crazy," Therapists
Date:   Sat, 31 Jan 1998 14:06:42 EST
From:  Cyranomish@aol.com

Hi, Anthony.  The thing about Ingrid and her therapist is that we never see
them together, and Ingrid's romance with him happens at the end of MAN CRAZY.
By keeping that relationship entirely offstage, the author forces us to think
the matter through.  Those of us who long to see the heroine have a happy
ending will hope for the best and see it as a positive development.  Those of
us with some experience in/or knowledge about therapist/doctor relationships
will find the ending more poignant and troubling.  Cyrano



Subject:    Re: Women as decoys for other women, "Man Crazy," Therapists
 Date:  Sat, 31 Jan 1998 11:57:33 -0800 (PST)
From:   Anthony Risser ahris@yahoo.com


Greeting, Cyrano:

   Yet, am I mistaken: wasn't the therapist introduced to us right at
the start, with the invitation to Ingrid to tell her story?

   "Offstage" yes, but wasn't that enough of a 'red flag' to the
reader that something, somehow, sometime (though not necessarily what
did occur) would occur? Again, I am relying on my memory, but wasn't
there something about the initial portrayal of the therapist that
almost seemed that he might be somewhat naive in nature or experience
(which was what opened up the dynamic for me to keep some part of my
mind open for things to happen)?

   [There already is someone who signs as "Anthony," so
I'll continue with the full:]

Anthony H. Risser, Ph.D.
rissera@yahoo.com 



Subject:   Re: Women as decoys for other women
Date:    Sat, 31 Jan 1998 15:01:22 -0800 (PST)
 From:   joyce l merritt jlm29260@email.csun.edu

Sue:

Thanks for your response, too.  I've been thinking vaguely about reading
"Lives of the Twins";  now I guess I'll have to go out and really do it
soon.  But first, "Mysteries of Winterthur" (I just finished "A Bloodsmoor
Romance"--now there's a book with the happiest ending I've seen yet in
JCO.  I gather that the happy ending was part of the point in writing it). 
I do agree with you that Ingrid in "Man Crazy" is better off with her
therapist-lover than with Enoch (or perhaps "in less extreme trouble"
would be the right term), so there is a sort of positiveness to the
ending, even though it's poisoned.  But among the possibilities for
Ingrid's future (along with emotional collapse, isolation and a return to
drugs and dangerous sex) might be a development of her writing beyond the
therapist-lover's controlling intentions, and an eventual disgust with her
manipulator that she might not direct completely against herself.  I don't
think she would have the self-confidence to walk out on him "Doll's House"
style, but perhaps her response might be enough less self-destructive than
her previous responses to let her find a new plateau that would be at
least a little better than the previous one.  At least we can't completely
rule out such a hope. 

Steve



Subject:  Re: A WOMAN'S WRITER
Date:  Sat, 31 Jan 1998 18:04:29 -0500 (EST)
From:  Matthew A Cheney macheney@cisunix.unh.edu


Gary Couzens makes some great points.  This whole thread on "women
writers" and "women's writers" makes me think of things a number of
"minority writers" have said about their work and their audiences -- for
instance, Sarah Schulman's call for men (gay & straight) to start reading
"lesbian novels" and to thus help reduce the ghettoizing effect of such
labels.  The whole issue of labels is gigantic -- where do they start,
where do they end?  Some science fiction writers absolutely hate the term
"science fiction", while others go out of their way to embrace it.  (An
English professor once told me that science fiction can't be literature,
because it is escapist formula fiction.  But what if a story or a novel
isn't escapist, isn't formulaic, but is still science fiction?  "Then," he
said, "it's literature.  Not science fiction.") 

I suppose the discussion could get really deconstructionist and say, "But
what's a novel?"  (To which we answer, "I know it when I see it."  Or,
"Who the hell cares?")

Another concept the discussion brings into question is the old adage,
"Write what you know."  Of course, those four words can be interpreted in
many different ways, but the most dangerous interpretation has led to
teachers telling students that they can't possibly write about people in
situations that they have not themselves experienced.  (I've heard of this
happening many times.)  This would, of course, preclude writing about
someone of a different gender, sexuality, race, etc.

My favorite answer to the "Write what you know" command comes from the 
end of Gore Vidal's essay on Thomas Love Peacock: "In any case, write what
you know will always be excellent advice for those who ought not to write
at all.  Write what you think, what you imagine, what you suspect: that is
the only way out of the dead end of the Serious Novel which so many
ambitious people want to write and no one on earth -- or even on campus --
wants to read."

Matt Cheney   

Maintained by Randy Souther
Last updated 1-27-98
Send comments and suggestions to Randy Souther