Preface to the 2014 Edition
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Preface to the 2014 Edition If wide Internet searching had been available in 1992, when The Fra- grance of Sweet-Grass was first published, I would only have had to scroll through a couple of dozen entries to explore the critical field con- cerning Lucy Maud Montgomery (1874-1942), respectfully but concise- ly catalogued as a late nineteenth- and early twentieth-century Canadian author. Today, when I enter 'L.M. Montgomery' into the University of Prince Edward Island Robertson Library search engine, I find more than twenty-five thousand items. What has happened to the study of L.M. Montgomery? Why do her works seem to matter still? And, more point- edly, why make freshly available to new and seasoned scholars my criti- cal study of Montgomery's novels, now more than twenty years old? I can sum up my answer to these questions with four concepts: con- text, confluence, community, and creativity - which may in time prove to be the ones we use to assess what creates a fifth c, classic. I undertook the writing of Sweet-Grass at a very special time in my own life and academic career and was able to do so because of certain cultural forc- es and opportunities converging at precisely that moment; through that writing, I engage with a growing number of Montgomery readers, fans, and scholars determined to inquire meaningfully, through multiple dis- x Preface to the 2014 Edition ciplines and perspectives, into the ways particular texts impact our lives and the ways we shape virtual and actual communities.1 Creativity has been a focus and will be, newly I think, a distinct focus for Montgomery reading and research in the future. A reading of creative patterns is what 2 makes Sweet-Grass a 'pioneering' text and perhaps a place to begin a critical engagement with Montgomery's novels, even yet. Before I begin to break down my answer into some of its component parts, I want to identify something that motivated me to write this book initially - and that continues to inspire me - about Montgomery's writ- ing: concepts and creative tensions. Montgomery continues to hold my attention because she exploits tensions so well: between realism and ro- mance, sentiment and sentimentality, humour and gravity, exuberance and tranquility, interior and exterior.3 The telling of Anne's story, or for that matter, the telling of Emily's or Valancy's or Pat's or Jane's, is ren- dered through tensions and release of tensions I still find poignant and potent. In addition, I now see my writing about Montgomery and, in the larger picture, even Montgomery's evolving reputation as a writer for different audiences, as manifestations of culturally constructed creative tensions. The writing of Sweet-Grass as an academic book also intended for a popular audience was a declaration of tensions: to defy and at the same time to celebrate. I had earned tenure and promotion along more con- ventional lines before I dared to take a year's leave without pay to write a book from the core of my heart. I would never have used the expres- sion 'core of my heart' then; it would have embarrassed me and fellow scholars who were trying to establish Montgomery as a serious subject for study. With a perspective shaped largely by feminist literary criti- cism, I was writing for an academic audience I hoped very much would include Montgomery readers and fans curious about their beloved author. I thought the non-academic readers would not be conversant with aca- demic shorthand, which would have made my study sound more accept- ably rigorous and detached. I wanted the title to declare my intention to include non-academic readers and fans; we compromised with a title and subtitle. The light, sentimental sounding metaphor from Montgomery's fiction, 'the fragrance of sweet-grass,' introduces the heavier freight of the subtitle ('L.M. Montgomery's Heroines and the Pursuit of Romance'): the sporadically overpowering and persistently motivating influence of Preface to the 2014 Edition xi a complexly constructed romance in the lives of women, both as readers and as people operating within particular cultural expectations. So, the writing of what was arguably4 the first full-length, single- authored work of literary criticism dealing with all of Montgomery's novels relied on sustaining a tension between (at least) two supposedly different ways of seeing and talking. One of the most inspiring tensions I experience with Montgomery's writing is this simultaneous reading as both life-time fan and literary critic. Pleasure keeps me reading as a fan; curiosity compels me to ques- tion and to explore the patterns I perceive within the texts and in my engagement. More than this, I want to know why Montgomery is read by so many different kinds of people in so many different countries. What is there about her creativity that crosses supposed boundaries of culture, gender, and time? What can I learn, and invite others to see with me, about the human brain and mind (and perhaps about the conventionally per- ceived mind and body split) from assessing her creative works and proc- esses? Because of the volume of her output of fiction and self-revealing non-fiction, and the degree and history of her popularity, Montgomery's writing is, I think, an ideal place for science and the arts together - more fruitful tensions! - to explore creativity itself. In the 2011 preface to his groundbreaking 1993 book Creating Minds, Howard Gardner speculates that we may now be on the 'cusp of im- portant breakthroughs in two areas' where creativity is concerned; one is in artificial intelligence, the other in 'the biological understanding of creativity': I do not mean that we will discover the genetics of creativity; I believe that crea- tivity is an emergent of individuals 'at promise' when they live in a specified so- ciety, with certain values and opportunities. But I do believe that we will discover a good deal about what happens in the brains, as well as the minds, of creative individuals. Perhaps we will discover the extent to which those brains and those minds may have been different from the beginning or, more likely, how they learn and how they make use of what they have learned. And these lessons, in turn, may help us to encourage creativity in a larger portion of the populations, in domains new as well as old.5 Interestingly, a focus on creativity, in studying Montgomery, is exact- xii Preface to the 2014 Edition ly what Elizabeth Waterston suggested in her landmark essay of 1966, which is widely credited with starting what was to become the field of Montgomery studies. In outlining Montgomery's remarkable achieve- ment as an artist, Waterston says, 'If we re-examine her life story and look at her books as in part an unconscious supplement to the biography, we come close to watching the miracle of the creative imagination.'6 Not only was Waterston declaring Montgomery to be worthy of study (no small assertion for an academic to make in 1966), but she was claim- ing that by studying Montgomery's artistic uses of the archetypal in the everyday, we were 'watching the miracle of the creative imagination,' presumably thereby coming to understand something profoundly human and instructively promising in so doing. Fast forward to 2008, when Elizabeth Waterston published Magic Is- land: The Fictions ofL.M. Montgomery, even the title of which suggests all of Montgomery's writing is fiction - creative narrative, construct. This book was meant to be the literary companion to Mary Rubio's long-awaited biography, Lucy Maud Montgomery: The Gift of Wings, which was also released in 2008. Waterston's study takes up each of Montgomery's novels, just as I did in The Fragrance of Sweet-Grass, but places the writing of each book within the framework of Montgomery's life as a context for their creation. Waterston's highly readable book ends with these comments on biography, art, creativity, and a neuroscience that seeks to understand them: Biography does not explain the alchemy of art. Readers recognize much more than confession or auto-therapy in the Montgomery novels. They find, for one thing, deep symbolic meditations on art and life, male and female, home and away. Such wisdom is surely not attributable simply to an individual's mood shifts. What she did with her island reveals the mystery of talent, or genius. ... Some day neurologists may trace the flukey heritage path to a Pavarotti or a Thompson, or the genetic thread that gives narrative genius to an Austen, an Aesop, a Montgomery. Meantime, let's call it magic.7 And I think this is exactly - again - where Montgomery criticism is go- ing to go. We will continue to consult the journals, of course, looking at them not just for what she said or did, or did not say or do, but for how she presented those thoughts and doings. We may treat them as fasci- Preface to the 2014 Edition xiii nating fictions, as Elizabeth Waterston's title suggests. So long as we discuss L.M. Montgomery, we will probably debate interpretations of her life and death,8 and we may consider in discussions of her novels, short stories, essays, letters, photographs, scrapbooks, poetry, and jour- nals, circumstances from her life. But I think the most exciting readings of Montgomery to come will be concerned with her creativity, her gen- ius, and these researches will take us right back to the novels, her public productions, her creative sustaining of multiple tensions: the grounding for The Fragrance of Sweet-Grass.