(Robert Lowell and Elizabeth Hardwick)
First, Bishop acknowledged receipt “your
letter of the 24th of June.” She wanted to reassure her aunt that
she hadn’t “forgotten you, & shall write at length when I have time.” Even though
Bishop clearly was in a rush, she still took time to sketch the basics of the
main cause of the delay.
She vaguely remembered that she “may have
told” her aunt about this visit when she last wrote, and confirmed that “my
friends the Lowells came, around July 1st.” Already a month into the
visit, Bishop reported that it “has kept us awfully busy.” She quickly qualified,
“ — though a great pleasure to see them and to be able to talk to him about
writing, etc.” She noted that both Lowell and Hardwick had already “given
several talks,” and she and Lota “had them up for week-ends.” But her concern
about the cooking that she had mentioned in passing in the May letter had come
to pass. She noted that they had “no cook — she ran away again, for good this
time.” One has to observe that it might not be so surprising that Maria would
vanish, given the criticism that Bishop often expressed in her letters to her
aunt — even as patient as Bishop perhaps tried to be, Maria would grasp the
issue. That said, Maria was also married, yet the husband stayed, and Bishop
noted that “the husband and I manage somehow!”
They had also taken the Lowells “to Cabo
Frio for 4 days,” trying hard to find things to do because “the organization
that invited them did absolutely nothing in the way of publicity,
entertaining, arranging, etc.” As a result, “Lota and I had to do it all.” Amid
this doing, Bishop tossed off: “plus a ‘revolution’ now over.” Just what she is
referring to is unclear. Brazilian politics in early 1962 were nothing if not volatile.
In July, the Prime Minister changed, but President Goulart remained in power.
Whatever this event was, it registered only as a glancing reference for Bishop.
The element that made this extended visit the
most problematic was not politics or too much cooking, it was “the fact that they
brought their 5½ year old child with them.” In addition, there was “a college girl
to look after” this child. Bishop scribbled: “(now left)” in the margin next to
this line. Five extra people were rather a lot when all Lota and Bishop had for
transportation was “a tiny Volkswagon [sic] car.”
At the time Bishop wrote this hurried
letter, Lowell was “off now seeing a few places on his own.” Bishop so wished
that she “could have gone with him, but couldn’t.” The reason for this confinement
was “the wife alone at the hotel with the child.” Bishop felt she couldn’t leave
them, partly because “the child [is] a horribly behaved little girl —
poor thing.” Bishop readily asserted that her behavior was not “her fault.” She
laid the blame at the feet of the parents: “they are just too ‘intellectual’
… to know how to treat a small child.” This “complicated” situation meant that “we
suffer.”
Bishop had enough experience with other children
to have some perspective on this little visitor. She noted that Monica, Mary
Morse’s adopted child, “is such an angel and so happy compared to her [Harriet Lowell].”
Further, “so are E’s little girls.” She noted that “Suzanne [was] the same age,”
so she was “trying to get them together to play.” The problem with this plan
was that “E has been up in “Terezopolis [sic] for 2 weeks,” because of “school
holidays.” But they were returning that very day, so perhaps the plan could
manifest.
Based on what happened during this visit, Bishop’s
account is the barest outline. She offered a much more detailed explanation in her
last extant letter to Grace in 1962, written near the end of September. For
now, this hurried note continued with a “gossipy” paragraph about Elizabeth
Naudin, particularly about her parenting skills, and then a concluding paragraph
with a few updates and projections. The next post will tackle these bits and
pieces.
No comments:
Post a Comment