Skip to main content

#1352: Willa Cather to Zoë Akins, January 18 [1937]

More about this letter…
Plain view:

Guide to Reading Letter Transcriptions

Some of these features are only visible when "plain text" is off.

Textual Feature Appearance
passage deleted with a strikethrough mark deleted passage
passage deleted by overwritten added letters overwritten passage
passage added above the line passage with added text above
passage added on the line passage with added text inline
passage added in the margin passage with text added in margin
handwritten addition to a typewritten letter typed passage with added handwritten text
missing or unreadable text missing text noted with "[illegible]"
uncertain transcriptions word[?]
notes written by someone other than Willa Cather Note in another's hand
printed letterhead text printed text
text printed on postcards, envelopes, etc. printed text
text of date and place stamps stamped text
passage written by Cather on separate enclosure. written text
Dearest Zoë1;

Never was there such a jolly toy as this Chinese nightingale! He arrived in perfect condition, a marvel of packing. But Zoë, it's my duty to tell you that you can't trust Thorley's4 for anything but weddings and house decorations. The nature of the firm has changed. The one clever woman who used to execute your orders is always out of town2, doing weddings etc in Greenwich5, Albany6. Last Easter a tremendous old man in charge sent here for you an over-blown rose bush which I made him exchange for a gardenia. This Christmas eve Thorleys sent three stalks of red lilies in a tub, all the leaves yellow, and a large tag tag marked $15.00 hung on it. (To what noun does the pronoun "it" refer, please?) That's the way they take care of orders. They are not florists at all any more, but house decorators. You can't trust them.

Some day soon, with the aid of a typewriter I'll try to tell you exactly what I so dislike7 in Mr. Dan Totheroh8's version of "A Lost Lady"9 and then at the same time I'll send you back the MS. I'm a little sad that you liked this thing with its inhuman, unnatural speech, wholly out of character. You must have come to the conclusion that anything can be done to a book in order to make A PLAY out of it. Why so? Why in hell need it be made into a play AT ALL? Alex. Dumas fils10 was at least intelligent. When he wanted to make a play11 out of his novel "La Dame aux Camelias"12 he made an altogether different thing: scrapped the narrative, an kept the characters and used them in a way suitable for dramatic presentation. Why have Mr. Totheroh and Mr. Donald X——13 gone ahead and "dramatized" this book? Because they have very few ideas in their own handsome heads, I imagine. I don't like O'Neil14, but at least this can be said for him, he makes his distortions out of his own cocoanut, he doesn't go sniffing round in a file of novels for them.——The Elizabethan playwrights made plays out of the old chronicles & narratives, which merely gave a series of happenings, so the dramatist really did "create" the characters. Well, there is another side to every question. This is the way I feel. What with keeping my poor books out of "omnibuses" and off the radio, and off the stage, I'm not having much heart to write any new ones. Wasn't the King's15 speech16 fine? I do hope you heard it!

5

This seems to be a grumbly letter, scolding at florists and playwrights and the evil manners of the times. I surely don't mean to scold at you dear Zoë, except in so far as you are too willing to accept professional "put-overers" at their own valuation of themselves.

Forgive my sour temper and chuckle. I don't take myself very seriously, but I take my convictions seriously—still.

Lovingly W.
Mrs. Hugo Rumbold1 2041 Bridgen Road Pasadena3 California NEW YORK N.Y. STA. Y2 JAN 18 1937 3 PM By Air MailCather