Does not review books. Please congratulate Dr. Leach on the revived Forum. Glad he could get the fine story by Miss Sedgwick. Willa Cather [Stout #740]
Plans for new house are wonderful; view will be splendid. May buy or build in Taos herself, but if so, much simpler, more of a hut, with a bare interior like rooms at Isleta [pueblo]. Is staying at Jaffrey until October 20. Serialization of Archbishop in the Forum begins in January. Willa [Stout #845]
She is probably the only person who has perfectly understood the book. Meant to be showing the basic attraction/repulsion of being in a marriage. Henshawes are intense lovers. Please send another copy of the review. Has enjoyed her stay in Jaffrey and feels proud of the mountain climbing she has done. Archbishop begins in the Forum in January. A completely new form for her. Willa Cather [Stout #857]
Doesn't want to emphasize landscape; that sounds like descriptive ornamentation and implies there is action in it. Willa Cather [Stout #901]
Sending suggested advertising copy, which emphasizes turbulence of the period immediately after the Mexican War. Willa Cather [Stout #902]
Will autograph book when in New York, but is leaving for Arizona in a couple of weeks. Merry Christmas to her and Forum staff. Willa Cather
Does have a lengthy short story [ "Double Birthday" ] drafted, and the Forum may have the first look at it when it is ready. Father is ill, so may not get to it soon. Will be in New York in two weeks. Willa Cather
Manuscript will be there by 11 a.m. tomorrow. Apologizes for delay. Willa Cather
Received letters and thanks him for his sensitivity. The review [Granville Hicks, "Bright Incidents," Forum, September 1931, vi-vii] she discussed in the letter [see #1842] is the only one that ever hurt her personally. Thought the Forum was a friend even though business perspectives seem to overtake everything. Review will not inspire controversy, though, for a writer must not become defensive in print about her work. Has gotten over the whole thing. The two of them should get together to toast Mr. Hicks, or whatever his name is. Willa Cather
It is not a review she wrote about, but an essay evaluating her writing and character generally [Granville Hicks, "Bright Incidents," Forum, September 1931, vi-vii]. People seem to think the piece reflected Leach's and the Forum's viewpoint, for Hicks was not cited in letters they have sent her. Understands an unobtrusive editorial relationship, but this went too far. At McClure's, would never have let such a destructive article be published, and no staff member would have let it through without explicit approval from Mr. McClure or herself. It is possible to be civilly critical, but the piece is so disrespectful that it never should have been published. The Forum is free to think what it pleases, but what editor can justify printing the following [Hicks's text is literally cut out and pasted on the letter]: "Like most of her books, it is elegiac, beguiling its readers with pictures of a life that has disappeared, and deliberately exploiting the remoteness of that life in order to cast a golden haze about it." "Deliberately exploiting" suggests she is manipulating her readers for self-aggrandizing reasons, and she is not. Other reviewers, like Dr. Cross, don't particularly care for the novel [Shadows on the Rock], but at least have enough sophistication to see what she was attempting [in Wilbur Cross, "Men and Images," Saturday Review of Literature 8 (August 22, 1931): 67-8]. The Forum's piece certainly damages her reputation, but even worse, it injures her personally, as the Forum has always been a friend. Is sorry that first letter of complaint sent to an editor is being sent to him. Willa Cather
