pickThis is a soft pick. Taking emotion out of it; this is a well-researched, well-written, and unbiased biography. But emotionally speaking, my feelings for its subject were ambivalent. At times I admired and respected her, but there were certain things I could not get past, like her privileged branch of feminism which ignored the intersectional necessity of Black feminism as well as equal rights all across the board (for people of color and LGBTQ)⬇️
jen_the_scribe “We can admire how this woman, born at a precise moment in history when opportunities for women were expanding, made full and abundant use of her freedom to work and raise a family, while also acknowledging how her curiosity stayed circumscribed within her privilege.” The author realized this as well and mentions her lack of grit when it came time to edit Black writers, how she continued to reject their work. Or the fact that she only brought up⬇️ 3d
jen_the_scribe …one other female editor, who was also just as easily forgotten in the history of the magazine. The majority of female writers who were published in The New Yorker wrote about being a homemaker, and Katharine herself tended to state that this should be a woman‘s priority. However, she was still a force for the magazine and paved the way for other women to come in later in the magazine‘s history. I enjoyed learning about this era of literary…⬇️ 3d
jen_the_scribe …history. I found her second husband, E.B. White extremely likable, as well as her oldest son, Roger Angell (who also became editor of The New Yorker). Overall, I was fascinated by Katharine‘s life and work, and the historical aspect of this time period. I read it slowly and lost count how many journal entries I wrote about it (as you can see, I have a lot to say about it). As a writer and a reader, it definitely appealed to my literary senses. 3d
14 likes3 comments
