-->
|
Natalie Wexler |
Q: In your novel The Mother Daughter Show, you
made use of your own experiences as a parent at Sidwell Friends School to
examine mother-daughter relationships at an elite private school, in a somewhat
satirical way. How is the fictional "Barton Friends" similar to, or
different from, Sidwell, and how did other Sidwell parents react to the book?
A: Barton Friends is definitely not meant to be an accurate
portrait of Sidwell. I certainly borrowed some things I’d observed in that
milieu and used them as grist for the novel, but—this being fiction, and not
just fiction but satire—I exaggerated certain things, omitted others, and
invented freely. There are many things I loved about Sidwell that didn’t make
it into the novel because, basically, they didn’t serve the plot and/or they
weren’t funny. Needless to say, satire works best when you focus on foibles and
defects rather than on things that are working beautifully.
Beyond that, I’ve heard from readers in the non-Sidwell
community that Barton Friends is a lot like other elite private schools—and
probably some elite public schools as well. So—although as far as I know,
there’s no other school where mothers of graduating senior girls write and
perform a show for their daughters every year—there’s a lot in the book that
really isn’t specific to Sidwell.
As for the reaction of Sidwell parents, I would say that it
has varied. The people I’ve heard from directly have generally been very positive,
with some telling me that the book really resonated with them. But I understand
there are others who aren’t so happy. Not having talked to them directly, I can
only speculate on their reactions, but at least some of them seem to think that
my characters are thinly veiled portraits of real people—which is not the case.
While the characters might say or do a few things that real people said or did,
they are fictional creations. And it was a lot of work to create them!
Q: Did you identify more with one of the characters in the book than with the
others, and if so, why?
A: I put pieces of myself into each of the three main
characters, but Amanda—who is really the protagonist—is the one I identify with
the most. Like me, she’s a writer, and she finds the creative process
exhilarating. In the novel, she can’t seem to stop churning out funny new
lyrics to old songs, even when it becomes clear that the show is going in a
different direction, because it’s way more fun than other aspects of her life
(she has a daughter who won’t talk to her, and she’s under pressure to find a
job after 20 years as a stay-at-home mom). In my own life, I was working on a
novel that wasn’t going so well, and writing these song lyrics was definitely a
way of distracting myself from that particular problem!
But in many ways Amanda is not me, and I’m wary of being
confused with her. For one thing, she takes the Mother Daughter Show far more
seriously than I did. And her song lyrics (which are, in fact, my song lyrics)
are clearly better than anyone else’s (which, of course, I also wrote when I
wrote the novel). That was most definitely not the case with the real Mother
Daughter Show. Other people were writing terrific song lyrics. But for the plot
of the novel to work, Amanda’s lyrics had to be better than everyone else’s.
Q: Your previous novel, A More Obedient Wife, is very different--it
takes place in the 1790s, and focuses on two wives of Supreme Court justices.
Was it difficult to switch from one time period and style to another?
A: No, it was surprisingly easy. I’d actually finished writing A More Obedient Wife several years before I started The Mother Daughter
Show, so it wasn’t as though I plunged directly from one to the other. But
aside from that, the material clearly demanded a different voice—contemporary,
obviously, and lighter—and that’s the voice that emerged.
In some ways it’s easier to write about the world around you
as opposed to that of a different era. You don’t have to do research to figure
out what your characters would eat for breakfast, for example, and you don’t
constantly worry that you’re getting some detail wrong. And it can be very
satisfying to put in little riffs and observations about what’s right in front
of your eyes.
On the other hand, there was something about adopting
an18th-century voice (or rather, two 18th-century voices), as I did
in A More Obedient Wife, that made it easier to enter a fictional world, one
that couldn’t possibly be confused with my real world. Maybe partly because I
was writing out of my own experience, it was a little more difficult for me to
come up with a plot and characters that worked for The Mother Daughter Show.
Q: How did you gather material about these two 18th century women, and did your
own background as a lawyer help you with the research?
A: I came across the two women, Hannah Iredell and Hannah
Wilson, while I was working as an editor of a multi-volume project called “The
Documentary History of the Supreme Court of the United States, 1789-1800.” In
those days the Justices spent as many as six months of the year traveling
around the country holding circuit courts, and while they were gone they wrote
and received many letters from their friends and families. Reading those
letters—which had been gathered by the staff of the Documentary History project
before I joined it—I became intrigued by these two Hannahs and wanted to find
out more about them. Of course, there wasn’t much more to find out. There were
biographies of their husbands, the Justices, but women’s lives weren’t
considered important enough to record in detail. So eventually I decided to
write a novel about the women, using the letters as a jumping-off point, to
fill in the gaps with my imagination.
I could never have done all the research myself—the other
staff members at the Documentary History let me have access to the thousands of
documents they’d accumulated, even after I’d left the project and was working
on the novel. I would say that my background as a lawyer helped me only in the
sense that it helped me get hired at the Documentary History project. They were
under the impression that it was a good idea to have a lawyer around, even
though what I’d learned in law school was of very little help in understanding the
legal system of the 1790s. (I also have an M.A. in history, which may have
helped a little more.)
Q: What are you working on now?
A: I’ve gone back to that novel that wasn’t going so well when
I was working on the real Mother Daughter Show—except that it’s changed quite a
bit since then. As with A More Obedient Wife, I’m fictionalizing the life of
a real but obscure historical figure, someone whose life I can partly record
and partly imagine. Her name was Eliza Anderson Godefroy, and in 1807, at the
age of 26, she founded and edited a magazine in Baltimore. As far as I can
determine, she was the first woman to edit a magazine in the United States,
although historians don’t seem to know about her. The novel focuses on that one
tumultuous year of her life, 1807, and instead of interspersing my fictional
narrative with real letters, as I did in A More Obedient Wife, I’m including
excerpts from the magazine.
One interesting parallel: Eliza’s mission in editing this magazine
was to raise the level of culture in Baltimore, then a young and raw city, and
her chosen method was to satirize the foibles and follies of her fellow
citizens. Some of them didn’t appreciate that, especially when they thought
they recognized themselves in sketches that she insisted were meant to be
“general” and fictional. I’m not sure I completely believe Eliza’s defense (she
really wasn’t writing fiction), but it was odd to be writing about someone who
was experiencing something vaguely similar to what I was.
Q: Anything else we should know?
A: Just that I’m delighted to have been interviewed by you,
Deborah. Thanks so much!
Interview with Deborah Kalb