literary friendships


Eva Green, Gemma Arterton to Star in Virginia Woolf Love Story

Eva Green and Gemma Arterton will star in drama Vita & Virginia, based on the true story of the love affair and friendship between literary icon Virginia Woolf and author Vita Sackville-West.

The film will be directed by British helmer Chanya Button (Burn, Burn, Burn) from a script by Eileen Atkins based on her own play of the same name, which debuted in 1992.

Virginia Stephen married Leonard Woolf in 1912, and then met socialite and author Vita Sackville-West, wife of Harold Nicolson, in 1922. They began a sexual relationship that lasted nearly a decade, as shown in their various letters and diary entries. After their affair ended, they remained friends until Woolf’s death in 1941. Green will play Woolf while Arterton will play Sackville-West.


Percy Bysshe Shelley and Lord Byron.

Byron: Alas! poor Shelley – how he would have laughed – had he lived, and how we used to laugh now & then – at various things – which are grave in the Suburbs. – You are all mistaken about Shelley –  – you do not know – how mild – how tolerant – how good he was in Society – and as perfect a Gentleman as ever crossed a drawing room; – when he liked & where he liked.

Shelley: I have no other news to tell you, my dear Lord Byron, unless you think this is news: that I often talk, and oftener think, of you; and that, though I have not seen you for six months, I still feel the burden of my own insignificance and impotence; as they must ever forbid my interest in your welfare from being put to the proof. Adieu.

We are sun and moon, dear friend; we are sea and land. It is not our purpose to become each other; it is to recognize each other, to learn to see the other and honor him for what he is: each the other’s opposite and complement.
—  Hermann Hesse, Narcissus and Goldmund
Friendship—my definition—depends on two things. Respect and trust. Both elements have to be there. And it has to be mutual. You can have respect for someone, but if you don’t have trust, the friendship will crumble.
—  Mikael Blomkvist, The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo (Millennium series, Stieg Larsson)

I always liked this novel. It’s dark and perfect but only if you know what you’re getting yourself into. Really like this definition too.

reignofthespirit  asked:

Hey Pilf! I know Les Mis and Victor Hugo is more your speed, but do you know much on Alexandre Dumas? Did he and Hugo interact much? I feel like I read somewhere they were both present during the June Rebellion and I'm hoping that's right, but I'm wondering if they were rivals as far their writing went. :D ((I'm sorry if you don't have much info on this I'm just on a three musketeer fix atm and I was curious if you had any fun facts!))

When the reading (of Marion de Lorme) was over, Dumas, with Herculean strength, lifted the poet (Hugo) in his arms and carried him about , crying “Hugo, we will carry you to glory!  Hugo, you will make all of us famous!”  Everyone cheered and laughed….Then Adèle Hugo, carrying herself proudly in silken evening dress, swept into the room with cakes and sherbets and ices.  “I can still see the gigantic Dumas,” wrote Henri de la Touche, another witness of the evening  “stuffing his mouth with cake , and shouting, with his mouth quite full: Admirable! Admirable! Admirable!” –Matthew Josephson, Victor Hugo

I don’t know as much about them as I wish I did, because what I do know is pretty great! Because Hugo and Dumas were actually super best giants of literature buddies forever.  

 I am not even slightly joking. Dumas mentions Hugo in his memoirs several times, and always with open affection and even delight over their past.  Hugo always treated Dumas as a welcome guest and a dear friend.  Hugo helped Dumas with editing, advertising, and planning theater engagements, and Dumas did the same in return and then some.  Dumas was with Hugo for the Battle of Hernani, repeatedly argued for Hugo’s worthiness to be a Peer of France, and helped keep Hugo out of a duel or two (no one kept Dumas out of duels. Dumas wanted to duel, he dueled. ) 

They had their arguments and their weeks of very publicly Not Talking To Each Other, especially when they were younger–given their politics and the fact that they were both famously strong in their opinions, it would have been weird if they didn’t – but that never lasted, and the more Hugo moved towards republicanism and socialism the less they had to fight about. They had  a lot in common–both sons of Napoleonic officers, both trying to fight for literary legitimacy in the same way, etc– and instead of it making them rivals they always seem to have just bonded over it , and helped each other professionally and personally as much as they could. When Hugo was in exile, they moved on to being Political Protest Buddies, too. 

I keep mentioning the changes in Hugo’s political opinions, because Hugo was not always solidly in favor of revolution and the republic. And Dumas…was.  Seriously, he was always involved with the republican movement, and pretty darn open about it too.  During 1832, Dumas spent the days of the barricades dashing between the political leaders of the official republican movement and the ground-level troops, arguing desperately for the officials to step forward and give the fighters their public support.  Hugo…was temporarily trapped in an alley by crossfire after going out to see What The Fuss Was, and when he got out he wrote in his diary that it was a shame so many men were going to die, but that France wasn’t ready  for a republic yet and the republic, when it came, would have to come peacefully and without fighting. 

So you can see how they might have had some arguments. But somehow, it never really stopped them being friends, or being seen as allies. All the pop culture cartoons of the day that depict them both always, always  depict them as friends, partners, or collaborators, whether the cartoonist wants you to love or hate them. 

Of course, the Romantic groups Hugo and Dumas were a part were very often close allies– you don’t make a successful art movement in the middle of censoriffic regimes by stabbing each other in the back all the time. But Hugo and Dumas were still notably fond of each other– Dumas especially seems to have been one of the few big-name writers who just liked  Hugo, without being put off by Hugo’s oddities or feeling overshadowed by him. 

You can find more about them by checking my Dumas tag! And hang on, there’s one thing in particular I wanna reblog that seems to pretty well sum up their working relationship. 

Thank you for asking this!:D 

how i know i am a truly next level insufferable nerd: whenever i see a seemingly ~nice~ jane austen novel quote about love or friendship or literary enthusiasm on, say, an internet graphic or a notecard or a throw pillow, i can’t just let it slide. i always have to complain about it. to cry out “CAROLINE JUST SAID THAT BECAUSE SHE WAS SO THIRSTY FOR DARCY, SHE DON’T CARE ABOUT READING” or “ISABELLA THORPE IS THE WORLD’S #1 HYPOCRITE, SHE OBVIOUSLY MEANS THE EXACT OPPOSITE OF THAT, WHAT IS WRONG WITH YOU, GET THOSE WORDS OFF YOUR THROW PILLOW UNLESS YOU WANT IT TO BE A THROW PILLOW OF LIES.


Siegfried Sassoon and Wilfred Owen.

Sassoon and Owen - names that found their niche
In literary history. Owen’s dead.
The other one survived the bullet which
Toward that War’s end just grazed him on the head.
Yes; his career continued. But of late,
His state of mind has made him wonder whether
Sassoon’s continuance was appropriate…
Should not these soldier poets have died together?

Know that since mid-September, when you still regarded me as a tiresome little knocker on your door, I held you as Keats + Christ + Elijah + my Colonel + my father-confessor + Amenophis IV in profile. What’s that mathematically? In effect it is this: that I love you, dispassionately, so much, so very much, dear Fellow, that the blasting little smile you wear on reading this can’t hurt me in the least. If you consider what the above Names have severally done for me, you will know what you are doing. And you have fixed my Life – however short. You did not light me: I was always a mad comet; but you have fixed me. I spun round you a satellite for a month, but I shall swing out soon, a dark star in the orbit where you will blaze.

Have you felt it too? Have you seen how your best friends love everything about you- except the things that count? And your most important is nothing to them; nothing, not even a sound they can recognize.
—  Ayn Rand
If you do not find a companion, intelligent, one who associates with you, who leads a good life, lives soberly, walk alone like a king who has renounced the kingdom he has conquered … It is better to live alone; there is no companionship with a fool
—  The Buddha, The Dhammapada

anonymous asked:

Senpai! It's almost time so don't let any rude anons ruin things for you! *throws peonies at your feet*

I’m so pissed at how these antis have made me bitter, I used to be so kind and positive about everything, I would never have called someone an idiot or called them out but these people are so aggressive and rude to us IN OUR OWN TAGS precisely so we see it, they just want to create wank and I just get so angry that people are this AWFUL to other human beings over a TV show. Jeez.

They are applying no understanding of the difference between real life situations and fictional authorial intent whilst calling US delusional or saying we have a lack of reading comprehension for you know, READING THE STORY. This just really does my nut in! They’re saying this to a bunch of literature teachers and students, actual authors, PHD students, law grads etc, LBR 90% of people I interact with here have a higher education degree of some kind, we are not stupid.

If even the CREATORS say there’s a bisexual reading in the content that an anti is trying to disprove because *real life v fiction crap debate* no, there is a valid bisexual reading in the content, the creators literally said so. If the character is based off a bisexual character, if it’s CONSISTENT over 12 years there is probably a reason for it. No? I mean wow is this all such a huge coincidence? My bad. Maybe the creators totally did this ALL by accident, 12 years worth of coincidence! 

I mean jeez do these people think we really can’t tell the difference between platonic friendship and romance? Why then do we only write about DEAN being bisexual and Dean/Cas as romantic writing in canon on the show? Weird huh? For someone like me who has zero agenda, I have no reason to want a queer character in the show for the sake of it, the show just made me see him as bisexual through the consistent hints of “look this guy is severely repressed about a ton of things and ONE OF THOSE THINGS is his bisexuality”. It’s not the be all and end all about Dean. It’s just one of the facets of his repression and his ultimate emancipation and THAT is what gets us excited! HAPPY DEAN.

 If we’re so intent on “making everyone gay” and “forcing the gay into the story” or whatever they think we are doing why not Sam huh?


Funny how it’s consistent on the show. Funny how so many other characters on the show calls him out on it too, saying he’s overcompensating, assuming he’s queer etc. 

Funny how Dean reacts to this with embarrassment whereas Sam shrugs it off.

Funny how this only ever happens to Sam early on because he’s around DEAN.

Funny how this later transfers to Cas with the “your boyfriend first”, “the one whose in love with you”, “your human weakness” etc as it becomes more about love and not just about his sexuality, BUT Dean was noticeably framed as queer way before Cas was ever introduced.

Why is it consistently DEAN? 

Do these antis just not ask themselves WHY stuff happens? AT ALL? Is there literally NO questioning of the content they’re being shown?! All you have to do is ask “why is this consistent” and it’s OBVIOUS.

Wow. Much accident. Such coincidence. Cos this is such a common occurrence in FICTION, that accidents keep consistently occurring and NEVER mean anything. Duh, wow, I should just stop writing, it’s obviously just all a massive coincidence and the other coincidences we’ve written about that later became canon were obviously such an ACCIDENT. We just got lucky I guess. 


Do they think we are making it up when we say Dean/Cas fulfills ALL THE TROPES of a classic romance? Do they not see how we meta about the CONSISTENT narrative of a love story here? Not just stares and friendship actual LITERARY ANALYSIS.

Do they just see our crack posts about cucumber water and think this is what we base our readings on?

I don’t need to write realms more on how Dean’s bisexuality is a valid interpretation AGAIN. It’s such old hat. 

BUT I still am generally all sunshine and rainbows and I’m just waiting for season 13 to back us up some more cos I mean where else is this all going. 

I could have in the past thought that this was all just layering for subtext, because that has happened in the past in other shows, in movies, it’s an often used way to write a story, to add homoerotic subtext. It sucks but it just is, we know this. However the more recent move into taking it out of subtext and into the text, making the Dean/Cas interactions so heavily TEXTUALLY romantic, making this the most obvious reading and not the subtext anymore (I love you, mixtape, Ishim’s “human weakness” then calling his own “my love” etc) showing the other sides of Dean’s repressed side coming out and his sexuality appearing to be one of those things…

If it doesn’t then it just makes no logical sense right now given how they’ve now built it all so much. 

Bring it on.

anonymous asked:

Are there any FEMALE literary homoromantic friendships from the turn of the 19th century? The only one I can think of is Dorothy and Ozma...

Anne Shirley and Diana! And of course every Jane Austen heroine and her gorgeous rival/protege/mysterious neighbor, but that’s earlier in the century.


W.H. Auden and Christopher Isherwood.

Wystan was embarrassed by Christopher’s public self - the Isherwood who would put an arm around his shoulder when cameras or other eyes were watching. Isherwood was good at self-exposure; he knew all the tricks of modesty and never boasted except in private. […] Wystan was shyer and more fastidious; this sometimes had the odd effect of making his public self seem aggressive, dogmatic, arrogant.

No one is useless in this world who lightens the burden of it to anyone else.
—  Charles Dickens (John Rokesmith (alias Harmon) to Bella Wilfer in “Our Mutual Friend.”)


Alice Munro and Margaret Atwood.

Atwood: We’re all slightly furtive, we writers; especially we Canadian writers, and even more especially we Canadian female writers of an earlier generation. “Art is what you can get away with,” said Canadian Marshall McLuhan, and I invite the reader to count how many of the murderers in Munro’s stories are ever caught. (Answer: none.) Munro understands the undercover heist that is fiction writing, as well as its pleasures and fears: how delicious to have done it, but what if you get found out?

When we read a literary text … we enter a relationship with its creator that is roughly analogous to a conversation. Obviously, it is not as interactive as an ordinary conversation … But just as an ordinary conversation gives us a stake in understanding our interlocutor, so does interaction with an artwork
—  Noël Carroll, Art, Intention, and Conversation