Just been looking up Shirley Jackson on Wikipedia and think I may have spotted some mischief. At the time of writing, the Wikipedia article states:
Jackson's husband, the literary critic Stanley Edgar Hyman, wrote in his preface to a posthumous anthology of her short stories[3] that "she wanted always to be interviewed, to explain or promote her work in any fashion, or to take public stands and be the pundit of the Sunday supplements. She believed that her books would not speak for her clearly enough over the years."
However, this online essay, giving a critical interpretation of Jackson's story 'The Lottery', gives contradictory information:
Jackson's husband, Stanley Edgar Hyman, has written in his introduction to a posthumous anthology of her short stories that "she consistently refused to be interviewed, to explain or promote her work in any fashion, or to take public stands and be the pundit of the Sunday supplements."
It looks to me very much as if some imp has simply reversed this statement in the Wikipedia article, for some reason. Perhaps Jackson aficionados can help out here.
Anyway, it could well be a small reminder that Wikipedia is not a real encyclopaedia!!!!
I’m no expert on her, although I read ‘We Have Always Lived in the Castle’ in one sitting. From what I have read of her she was a lot like Aickman in his lack of propounding upon his stories after the fact. I would have to say that your latter option is likely the truth of the matter. On a separate note, I think that it is an admirable thing that she has a literary prize named after her. Hopefully the award committee does her legacy justice.
I want to read We Have Always Divvied up the Pasties; it has a great title.
For sure the cyber vandals are about, and with nothing better to do! Bless ‘em!A good – in fact superb – book on Jackson is Judy Oppenheimer’s “Private Demons: The Life of Shirley Jackson.”Jackson said about herself (“Twentieth Century Authors” ed. Stanley J. Kunitz and Howard Harcraft ) :“I very much dislike writing about myself or my work, and when pressed for autobiographical material can only give a bare chronological outline which contains, naturally, no pertinent facts.”Ummm. Doesn’t exactly sound as if she’s courting the paparazzi or the literati with that? She tended to stay at home “where she was happiest and felt the safest”.
I’d like some private demons, I think. I only have welfare state demons.Anyway, it sounds like an interesting book.She has a sympathetic face:http://blog.syracuse.com/shelflife/2007/12/jackson.jpg