MARIANNE MOORE: A NOTORIOUS VIRGIN Mary Christh McLaren Submiüed in partial fulnllmem of the rquirements for the degree of Master of Arts Dalhousie University Halifàx, Nova Scotia December 1998 0 Copyright by Mary Christina McLaren National Library BiMiothéque nationale 1*1 of Canada du Canada Acquisitions and Acquisitions et Bibliographie Services services bibliographiques The author has granted a non- L'auteur a accordé une licence non exclusive licence aiiowing the exclusive permettant à la National Library of Canada to Bibliothèque nationale du Canada de reproduce, loan, distribute or seil reproduire, prêter, distribuer ou copies of this thesis in microform, vendre des copies de cette thèse sous paper or electronic formats. la forme de microfiche/film, de reproduction sur papier ou sur format électronique. The author retains ownership of the L'auteur conserve la propriété du copyright in this thesis. Neither the droit d' auteur qui protège cette thèse. thesis nor substantial extracts fiom it Ni la thèse ni des exnaits substantiels may be printed or otherwise de celle-ci ne doivent être imprimés reproduced without the author's ou autrement reproduits sans son permission. autorisation. Dedication For my parents. Table of Contents Titie Page .-1 Signature Page U Copyright Agreement Form iii Dedication iv Table of Contents v List of Illustrations Abstract Acknowledgements Pre face The Reception Histoy of Marianne Moore The First Reviews The Po- Debate Reviews by T. S. Eliot and William Carlos Williams The Stniggles of Othcr Reviewers A Cult of Personality? Deference to T. S. ELiot The Notorious Virgin Conctusion Marianne Moore Amongst the Modems Moore and ber Fernale Contempotaries The Sin of Self Promotion Moore Amongst the High Modernists Moore at 27~Di41 Conclusion "1 Should Like To Be Alone": The Feminist Politics of Marianne Moore Poetic Voice Quotations Humility and Restraint Marriage A Reading of "hilarriage" Moore's Feminist Politics Conclusion Bibliomhy List of Iilustrations Figure 1. "The Night Watch," Rembraodt Harmensz Van Rijn Marianne Moore was highly regarded by ber modernist contemporaries as an innovative and important pet By the tirne of her death in 1972, however, she received much les academic consideraiion than other pets of her generation. This thesis investigates when and why Marianne Moore's work ceased to be considered a principal component of the modem American litemy canon. In C)iapter 1, chronological study of the reviews of Moore's work reveals a shift in critical focus fiom her work, to her personality, and finally, by the Fifües and Sixties, to the stereotyped image of Moore as a spinster. It is this that resulted in both the misrepresentation of Moore as a timid figure in the modernist movement, and the inadequate critical consideration of her work. With tbis in min& Chapter 2 examinees Moore as an influence on her modernist peers. It examines Moore's reviews of and leîters to other modernist pets, as well as haeditorship at Tk Dial magazk hm1925 to 1929, in order to establish her authority within the poetic cornmunity, and her iafluence on the shaping of modemism itself. Finally, Chapter 3 analyzes Moore's poetry. It examines the terms by which she apparentiy withdraws her voice, and then attempts to show how in fact Moore's voice can be found. In spite of ha reputation among some critics as a tirnid woman, Marianne Moore emerges fiom her work as a strong and independent fwiinist figure. vii Acknowledgements 1 would like to take this oppoRunity to thank my parents and Dan for their tolerance during the development of this work, and for aiiowing me to subject them to regular doses of Marianne Moore's poetry. Thanks as well to Lynn Lantz for her help in administrative matters, and to Christi Luckyj for her council. 1 am gmtefui to Patricia Wilïis for generously sending me a copy of eollected essays on Moore thaî she had edited, Marianne Moore: Woman adPoet, as it proved to be an hvaiuable resource. 1 would also like to thank my second and third readers, Marjorie Stone and Bruce Greenfield, for their valuable comments. FinaMy, 1 would especially like to thank my supervisor, Len Diepeveen, for his encouragement, criticism, and patience. At the time of her death in 1972, twentieth century American poet Marianne Moore had achieved public recognition as a popular figure. Her face appeared on postage stamps, and she had made the cover of Esquire magazine in the 1970s. She was practically a household name in her hometown of New York. Academically, however, she received very little consideration. Just over twenty-five years later, Moore has been erased fiom the memory of popular culture, but is beginning to make a comeback in academic circles.' Fiip through the pages of any anthology of modem poetry today, and you will undoubtedly corne across an entry or two of works by Mme. Her poetry, after ail, provides a usefid and wncise illustration of syliabic verse, and her poem "Poetry" in particular adds a wonderMy impudent element to any collection The predominant focus in many of these books, however, is on Moore's poetic technique or her quirky personality; there is a general avoidance of the ethics and playfiil ironies that are so richly embodied by her poetry. The Norton Anthoiogy of Modern Poetry, for example, discusses Moore's syllabic technique, but then tums to discuss her visits to the Bronx Zoo and her penchant for basebail (419). Moore is known more for her personality than for her body of work or influence on other poets. She still teceives less cntical attention than her High Modernist contemporaries, who had themselves championed her work in the twenties and thirties. ' An interesthg cornparison cen be made bennai the academic resurgence of Moore and the relative drop in academic popdarity of certain poets wbse academic popdarity had reached a high point in the sixties. A simple MLA ~eatchreveals thaî since 198 1 there are only 85 ciiations for Allen Tate and 93 for MoreRocthke, but 272 citations for Marianne Moore. Figure 1. 'The Night Watch," Rembrandt Harmensz Van Rijn. Oil on carivas, 363 x437 crn, 1642. Amsterdam, Rijksmuseum. The question is, then, who was Marianne Moore really, and what role did she in the modernist community? In his 1983 retrospective for Partisan Review, Glenwa Wescott, Moore's Li felong friend and correspondent, illustrates her position within th modernist conununity as follows: Do you remember, can you see in mernory, Rembrandt's so-called The ffiglrt Watch, [see figure 11 which is in fact a &y watch? . .About thirty upper-middle-class Amsterdam gentlemen constituting a guard of honor troop foward in most unrnilitary order out of cavernous darkness into magicai sunshine. in their rnidst, mystery of mysteries, a little childlike woman or womanly child, very blond, as in a dream, clad in numerous raiment of greenish gold; having, suspended from her belt, a white chicken with feet of gold; wearing also, on a ribbon, a rich purse or pouch. Thus, to my imagination, Miss Moore had ken, in the rnidst of her fellow writers, the literary establishment of the century. 1 often seem to myself deficient in humor, but when 1 first thought of this a while ago, 1 laughed aloud; and it amuses me still. If this were a lecture ratber tban an essay.. perhaps 1 could attach twentieth century names to al1 of Rembrandt's forgotien burghen.. wbether or not it made you laugh, you would easily perceive Miss Moore's likeness to the faiylike small personage who incomprehensibly strayed into Rembrandt's ken and captivated him while he was doing this vast commissioned work. She bad the same Titian blondness.. But my point, worth thinking about, is that she was in the middle of the picture, a mystery in the middle of the picture-how did it happen? . .whence came ber intellect and temperament fantasy and genius? Who could have foreseen her? (399- 400) This higb?y omate porirait of Marianne Moore initially seems to sukribe to the typicai view of Moore as the notorious virgin pet, a childiike figure wtio is in stark con- to the rest ofthe comtnunity of male modemists. As it progresses, however, the Moore that begins to emerge is magical, mysterious and anonymous. As he continues, Wescott adds that with her contempotaries, Moore . .renrained detached, fùli of het own devices. Furthemore, both in life and career, she never seemed to march dinctly at us, hmbackground to foreground, out of tradition into modemity, as ambitious happy-oaîured men and women in the arts are inclined to do. Like the girl in Rembrandt's picture, her movement was cmssways, hmleb to right, bnediag the mode (mode after mode), travershg the parade, a law unto herselc more exalted and more focused than the generality of literary mortais. (400) The figue who symbolizes Moore for Wescon, is the anomaly within the painting. Although she is positioned slightly aside hmthe center, the light shines directly upon her, attracting the attention of the viewer. in this scheme, Moore is more than just a detached figure-sbe assumes a power that is fbeled by her ability to move with or aght the community at her own convenience. So wbat happened to this image of authority aod autonomy? How did this powerfùi image of Moore get replaced by the perception of Moore as the overly polite and subjugated puritanical spinster?7 1s Wescotî's remembrance of Moore just a product of his imagination, or did she really exist-and cm we resmther? Marianne Moore received much praise hmher couternporaries in the twenties and thirties. The essays of Eliot and Williams, for example, elevate Moore as an important and equal artist within the modemist poetic commmity.