May Sarton: A Biography

If you've read her series of journals, this one pretty much de-bunks the "Myth of May"; I divide her life into pre-Judy and post-Judy (Peters makes clear that there wasn't really a whole lot of "ongoing Judy"). First half for me wasn't as interesting, detailing May's social climbing; with the possible exception of Eva Le Gallienne, the rest of her celebs meant nothing to me. Foreshadows May's predatory nature, along with background of her dysfunctional childhood. For the second part, I'm assuming readers are familiar with her journals, and I'll try to keep spoilers to an absolute minimum ... Point #1: May and Judy were a couple only briefly (if really at all), May's continuous displays of concern in the journals notwithstanding, I'd chalk her efforts at including Judy up to guilt. (Same holds true for her "dear" Eleanor Blair, whom she used and discarded by the time the journals really got going.) Point #2: I read "Plant Dreaming Deep" (essays on Nelson) after the many daily journals. From that book, one would assume that May stayed in Nelson, chugging away at her writing day-after-day, during that period. Actually, she was there well under half the time, and carried out several (torrid) affairs. Point #3: "Journal of a Solitude" is the story of a middle-aged writer in rural NH, devoted to her animals and garden. May expresses a desire to move on from that location, her new home in Maine coming into play by the end of the book. Behind-the-scenes her life would've made a National Enquirer editor sit up and take notice! The townsfolk by then were relieved to be free of the drama, although the move to Maine almost falls through at one point. Point #4: Regarding her time in York as a whole -- it's hardly surprising her intestines acted up constantly, and her heart gave out, those "drinks" to which she refers were often doubles, and several at a go! Her personal life continued at a fevered pitch; several of the "friends" mentioned were either women hopelessly attracted to her (whom she enjoyed using) or ones she went after. One point I was hoping would be clarified: the role of her "protege" Susan - victim or predator? There's evidence of both. Peters makes a reasonable case that Norton eventually stopped editing altogether, shoving the submitted "final draft" straight into bookstores to meet deadlines, figuring her fans would buy anything by May Sarton, as long the stuff kept appearing. May does come to understand by the end that they were doing her no favors in the long run, royalties or not. To some fans all these salacious details are un-necessary, if downright mean. However, May made quite a bit of money portraying herself as a kindly, concerned old(er) lady, who could be a bit cranky due to age and illness; true in a sense, as she could be quite generous with her money, and helpful to some admirers. However, almost every single person figuring in her journals in a positive (or neutral) light came to realize how "expendable" they really were in

I think the reviewers of this book who pat themselves on the back for not being taken in by the "persona" of May Sarton should go back to her journals again -- especially "Journal of a Solitude." It seems to me that Sarton was very much aware of the unpleasant aspects of her own nature, the twists and turns of mood, the antisocial tendencies, the destructive effect of anger. Should she be condemned because she allowed the persona of "sister, mother, lover, mentor, friend" to take on a life of its own, to the point that millions of fans can still see her no other way? The persona itself has the power to heal -- even if the real woman was faced, as we all are, with sorting out the mess of her life. The fact that Sarton knew this biography would be published showing her "warts and all" was telling -- certainly not the final act of a hypocrite. This is not an easy biography, and fans of Sarton may be put off for awhile after reading it, but I found that after time I was able to go back to her books with more understanding, and more appreciation, for the writer and person of May Sarton. Highly recommended!

For fans who have been drawn to the healing balm of May Sarton's novels, poetry and journals, this biography may be hard to take. Many readers of Sarton, myself included, had fallen deeply for the world May had constructed for the reader. One feels turmoil bubbling under the surface of workds like "Journal of a Solitute" but it never surfaces. Through her writing, Sarton had created her own "private mythology" while "keeping the hell out of her work" (to quote her friend and critic, Louise Bogan). Margot Peters captures the hell for her in this meticulously researched biography. It is a compelling read that, if closely analyzed, does not betray May Sarton and her works;it illuminates the woman, making her life story what Sarton's writing should have been - raw and intense.

Margot Peters did a good job in reporting the details of Sarton's life and connecting them to Sarton's works. But instead of giving the facts and letting readers evaluate them, she continually judges Sarton and crams her disapproval down the reader's throat. I was especially annoyed by her decree that Sarton was a "minor writer." Sarton was clearly hard to live with. Romantic involvement with her was a pathway to pain. But she had important things to say, and she said them well. Had she been a man, the suffering she caused her friends and lovers would be taken for granted as the artist's privilege, and forgiven for the sake of the work. I didn't know her, but I know her work, and for its contribution to my life, I'd forgive her anything.