Sunday, August 21, 2016

Alice Munro’s Queenie

Alice Munro’s Queenie, from London Review of Books
http://www.lrb.co.uk/v20/n15/alice-munro/queenie
11,653 words
 27 pages printed out (5 pages in London Review)


Here we have another wonderful Alice Munro story about young women and friendship, a story that feels so vividly detailed and true, that we wonder if it’s autobiographical. Who knows? I always feel as if Munro has reached back into her youth and is describing “real people” she knew intimately. But this just a credit to her writing. She brings these characters so vividly to life by giving them such specific, concrete details, that we think these characters could only be based on real people. I suspect that she borrows details from real life people, but then the story and the characters take on shapes and lives of their own so successfully that the story becomes entirely a work of fiction.

On to the story of Alice Munro’s dissatisfied, reaching, thoughtful, observant young women.  The characters here, the protagonist Chrissie and the antagonist, Queenie, her stepsister from her father’s second marriage, are both at important points in their lives. Queen is newly married, and doesn’t want the narrator to call her Queenie anymore because her new husband might object. Chrissy is going to visit her for the first time in several years. This is how the story opens---with pointed dialogue. 
“Queenie said, ‘Maybe you better stop calling me that,’ and I said, ‘What?’"
“Stan doesn’t like it,” she said. “Queenie."

This is an intriguing way to start a short story: Who is Stan, we want to know? And why does he get to decide what Queen is called? This brings us to what always has to be our next question: Why is the writer writing about today? Well, today is the day the narrator has gone to see her stepsister, who is now married to someone she once called Mr. Vorguilla. That’s interesting, and a bit unsettling. Queen has changed in appearance too, and a character coming upon a sudden change, at the beginning of a short story, is a great idea. It answers the question, ‘Why today?” Why is Chrissy writing about today? Because today is the day she went to see her stepsister for the first time in years, and she was startled by the sight and the circiumstances she was living in.

Note the great, specific details of the narrator and Queenie's first meeting. We see Queen for the first time, along with the narrator:
“It was a worse surprise to me to hear her stay ‘Stan’ than to have her tell me to call her by her right name, which was Lena. But I could hardly expect her to go on calling him Mr. Vorguilla, now that they were married, and had been for nearly two years. During that time I hadn’t seen her, and for a moment when I saw her in the group of people waiting for the train at Union Station, I hadn’t recognized her. Her hair was dyed black, and puffed up around her face in whatever style it was that in those succeeded the beehive. Its beautiful corn-syrup colour---gold on top and dark underneath---as well as its silky length, was forever lost. She wore a yellow print dress that skimmed her body and ended inches above her knees. The Cleopatra lines drawn heavily around her eyes, and the purely shadow, made her eyes seem smaller, not larger, as if they were deliberately hiding. She had pierced ears now, gold hoops swinging from them…”

This level of detail helps us see the story’s title character, vividly. We know something is wrong---Queenie’s beautiful, long, blonde hair is gone and her eyes, which most women want to make larger, look smaller.

On page 2, Munro begins a subtle flashback, to a time when the narrator remembers Mr. Vorguilla’s yellow teeth, razor, shaving brush and “possibly hairy” shaving soap. These are great, disgusting details, and remind the reader that both girls once called Mr. Vorguilla “Mister” and there was a time when Mrs. Vorguilla was still in the picture. This is intriguing---what happened? Did Queenie seduce a married man whom the narrator found disgusting? Where did Mrs. Vorguilla go? These unanswered questions push us along and we will find out the answers to them soon enough.

Some of what Munro does so well here and elsewhere is to establish neighborhoods via smells, sounds, and vivid physical descriptions of buildings and their residents. As the two young women get off the streetcar, “trying awkwardly to share the weight of the suitcase…” the narrator tells us what she sees. “Some of the roofs came down over the walls like caps, or else the whole second storey was like a roof, covered in shingles. The shingles were dark green or maroon or brown. The porches came to within a few feet of the sidewalk and the spaces between the houses seemed narrow enough for people to reach out the side windows and shake hands. Children were playing on the sidewalk, but Queenie took no more notice of them than if they were birds peeking in the cracks. A very fat man, naked from the waist up, sat on his front staring at us in such a fixed and gloomy way that I was sure he had something to say to us. But Queenie marched on past him.  She turned in partway up the hill, following a gravel path between some garbage cans…”

This is great, visual description. And then we get this unsettling but memorable piece of news:“It turned out that Queenie and Mr. Vorguilla shared a bathroom with the Greeks. You took your roll of toilet paper with you---if you forgot, there wasn’t any. I had to go in there at once, because I was menstruating heavily and had to change my pad. For years afterwards, the sight of certain city streets on hot days, certain shades of brown brick and dark painted shingles, and the noise of streetcars, would bring back to me the memory of cramps low in the belly, waves of flushing, bodily leakage and confusion…The cot in the sun porch was where I was to sleep. Close outside the windows the landlord and another man were fixing a motorcycle. The smell of oil, of metal and machinery mixed wit the smell of ripe tomatoes in the sun. There was a radio blaring music out of an upstairs window.” This is wonderful, specific memorable detail. Perhaps unpleasant to come upon---limited access to toilet paper, menstrual cramps and pads, the smell of oil and the sound of a radio blaring---but you won’t forget it, and it all establishes a mood----Queenie is living in difficult, noisy, crowded, smelly circumstances, and the narrator will not have great memories of visiting her.

What’s also important to note here is that even though the narrator isn’t happy about the life she’s sees Queenie inhabit, it’s great material. A character who is in reduced circumstances, married to a difficult man (or woman) makes for an intriguing story, especially when that character has known a better life. We learn a bit about the fun the narrator and Queenie had together as children (which we learn on pages 4-7 when we read that Queenie’s mother Bet married the narrator’s father, and then Queenie ran off with Mr. Vorguilla, a much older man who she works for, a week or so after his wife died.) It’s not clear yet whether this story is a tragedy or not, but we would be surprised if Queenie had a fairy tale ending. No matter. The sadder, more difficult stories tend to be more interesting to read and often much easier to write.

On pages 8-9, Mr. Vorguilla makes his entrance and he’s not particularly appealing: “(Queenie) half got up, as if to touch him, but he veered toward the sink…” This is a great gesture---he doesn’t want to be touched by his wife. Coupled with what he know about his fake teeth and the fact that he doesn’t want Queenie to be called Queenie, we begin to suspect that this marriage is a difficult one and the narrator is there to witness it. And to reinforce this impression, Munro gives us this flashback to Mr. Vorguilla, when he was still married to Mrs. Vorguilla, teaching music at school and giving piano lessons at home: “He ran a glass of water and drank it all down, standing with his back to us. Exactly as he used to do when Mrs. Vorguilla and Queenie and I were sitting at the kitchen table in that other house, the Vorguillas’ house next door. Mr Vorguilla would come from a practice somewhere, or he would be taking a break from teaching a piano lesson in the front room. At the sound of his steps Mrs. Vorguila would have given us a warning smile. And we all looked down at our Scrabble letters, giving him the option of noticing us or not. Sometimes he didn’t. The opening of the cupboard, the turning of the tap, the setting of the glass down on the counter, were like a series of little explosions. AS if he dared anybody to breathe while he was there.” (page 9)

It is clearly unfortunate that Queenie married this man. At this point, we are 1/3 of the way through the story, and done with the first act. Is there enough here to keep us reading? I think there is. At this point, we want to know: What kind of man is Mr. V. and why does Queenie stay married to him? We want to rubberneck and look deeper inside of this marriage.

On pages 11-13, we learn that Queenie failed her year at high school, went to work for the Vorguilla’s when Mrs. Vorguilla became sick, and that after Queenie and Mr. V. married and moved to Toronto, they had to sell some of the nicer furniture, in order to make ends meet. Queenie found work at the movie theater and was trying to make ends meet.  And then, on page 15, we get to the stressful heart of the story. In a 27-page story, this is towards the end of the second act (pages 10-18) and a great place for tension to rise to a crescendo. Stan accuses Queenie of getting drunk and losing a Christmas cake. He insists she gave the Christmas cake to Andrew, a dental student who had come to their holiday party. He moves to hit her (page 16):

He got up and came at her with his hand raised, saying not to tell him that he’d been drunk, never to tell him that. Queenie cried out, ’I won’t. I won’t. I’m sorry.’ And he didn’t hit her. But she began to cry. She kept crying while she tried to persuade him. Why would she give away the cake she had worked so hard to make? Why would he not believe her? Why would she lie to him?

“Everybody lies,” Stan said. And the more she cried and begged him to believe her, the more cool and sarcastic he became.

“Use a little logic,” he said. “If it’s here, get up and find it. If it isn’t here, then you gave it away.”

 Queenie said that wasn’t logic. It didn’t have to be given away, just because she could not find it. Then he came close to her again in such a calm half-smiling way that she thought for a moment he was going to kiss her. Instead he closed his hands around her throat and just for a second cut off her breath. He didn’t even leave any marks. ‘Now,’ he said. “now---are you going to teach me about logic?’”

This is difficult material to read but read on we do. We’re smack in the middle of the story and by this point, we want to know: What happens next? On page 17, Stan stops speaking to Queenie. He pretends she doesn’t exist. He won’t have sex with her. Finally, she breaks down, begs Stan to forgive her, says she must have given the cake to Andrew, and they make up by having sex (page 17.) Stan is a manipulative monster and Queenie is stuck with him. (And on page 18, we learn that Queenie finds the cake on the back porch but never tells Stan.)

By this point, we feel for Queenie. But Queenie doesn’t seem terribly put out by it. “Her voice which had been so woeful in the bad parts of the story was now sly and full of laughter, as if all the time she been telling me a joke, and throwing out the cake was the final, ridiculous point of it…Well you and me are very different Chrissy,” she tells the narrator. Very different. ‘ She sighed. She said, “I am a creature of love.” And, what about our narrator? How does she feel? “I had to pull my head out of my hands and turn around and look at her.” She is appalled. But different strokes for different folks. And what can she do to help her stepsister? Very little, especially given that Queenie’s mother and Chrissy’s father want nothing to do with Queenie.

Over the next few pages, the narrator gets a job at a drugstore and is fired. She goes home to Queenie (page 22): “Queenie was in the kitchen, wearing another of her skimpy dresses, and all her make-up. She had bangles on her arms. She was setting tea-cups on a tray. I was dizzy for a moment coming out of the sunlight, and every inch of my skim bloomed with sweat.” We learn that Stan sometimes go through Queenie’s purse (bottom of page 22) so she has to hide letters in her underpants and receive them in a secret mailbox. (As we’ve discussed, secrets, lies and deceptions are great for stories.)

On page 25, we learn that “Queenie ran away again.” We’re almost at the end of the story now. Are we surprised that Queenie ran away from Stan? Upon first reading this story, I was. I was half-expecting Stan to kill her. So I was glad and relieved that she ran off with another man. As for the narrator, how does this impact her? Against all odds, she continues a Christmas card relationship with Mr. V. As for Queenie, the narrator never sees her again. Little is made of this tragedy (and it is a tragedy, that two young women, who were close family and related, if not by blood, then by true attachment to each other). The narrator flashes forward. On page 26, we learn that she has married and had children and her children are grown up and her husband retired. She’s old now, as she “tells us” this story. She thinks she has been seeing Queenie in various locations: “She wore a spotty suede jacket that time and she did not look either prosperous or well. Another time she was stopped at a crosswalk, leading a string of nursery school children on their way to the swimming pool or the park. It was a hot day and her thick middle aged figure was frankly and comfortably on view, in flowered shorts and a sloganed T-shirt.

The last and strangest time was in a supermarket in Twin Falls, Idaho. I came around a corner carrying the few things I had collected for a picnic lunch, and there was an old woman on her shopping cart, as if waiting for me. A little wrinkled woman with a crooked mouth and an unhealthy looking brownish skin. Hair in yellow-brown bristles, purple pants hitched up over the small mound of her stomach---she was one of those thin women who have nevertheless, with age, lost the convenience of a waistline. The pants could have come from some thrift shop and so could the gaily coloured but matted and shrunken sweater buttoned over a chest no bigger than a ten-year-old’s.

The narrator looks at her and then ignores her. Then, she goes back in the store to find her long-lost stepsister. “Then in the parking lot I made an excuse to my husband, said I’d forgotten something, and hurried back into the store. I went up and down the aisles, looking. And in just that little time the old woman seemed to have gone. She might have gone right after I did, and be making her way along the streets of Twin Falls. On foot, or in a car driven by some relative or neighbor, or even in a car she drove herself. It was possible but hardly likely that she was still in the store, and that we kept going up and down the aisles, just missing each other.”

What a sad ending. Two step-sisters, who had once spent so much time laughing and living together as girls, and then as adults, Queenie trying to help Chrissy get a job in Toronto, and Chrissy dreaming of ways to rescue Queenie from her difficult marriage, and us, as readers, becoming very invested in both of their stories (though I did feel more invested in Queenie’s trajectory than I did with the narrator’s.) Ultimately, these two semi-sisters end up as utter strangers to each other, the narrator having no idea what ultimately happened to Queenie, but knowing that in some way, they have abandoned each other.


This is an intricately detailed, intensely absorbing, disturbing and ultimately surprising story about women, friendship, marriage and the unpredictability of life. God is in the details here and by the end of the story, we have come to know and admire Queenie, despite her many flaws, and I suspect that Munro wants us to wonder: What happened to Queenie?

Saturday, August 20, 2016

Mary Karr, Crotch Grabber

Mary Karr, Crotch Grabber
http://www.newyorker.com/culture/culture-desk/the-crotchgrabber

Mary Karr, High Maintenance

Mary Karr, High Maintenance
http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2016/05/16/down-with-high-heels

About 735 words, 13 paragraphs long

There’s nothing Mary Karr writes that I don’t want to read. In this short essay about her love affair with and divorce from high heel shoes, she does what we have talked about many times: She elevates the objects of shoes and feet, and simultaneously tells several stories at once about what it’s like to have once been a vain, young girl, who has evolved into a sensible middle-aged woman. In Karr’s work, you feel the anger, the energy, the humor, all pulsating beneath the surface. She lacerates herself, promotes herself, mocks herself, expresses disdain for her old self and hope for her (and our) new selves. It’s exhilarating to read her work, even when it’s short. Why is that? I think it’s because she’s so skilled at creating tension, at alternating between paragraphs that describe her nostalgia for her lovely youth with paragraphs that underscore the pain and discomfort of old gnarled feet. It’s sort of a plus/minus system of happiness and unhappiness, beauty and ugliness, wisdom and rue, practicality and ridiculousness, and the overall impact is of a great energy surging through her work.

Let’s take a look at her first paragraph:
This spring, I donated to Dress for Success a box of high heels that I—over decades—almost bankrupted myself for: four-inch sandals with leafy vines that twine up your leg, five-inch leopard pumps I could lurch about five feet in. The money I spent on them might have freed me to retire by now.

Notice the great, specific, universally-appealing detail: The sandals with leafy vines that twine up your leg, the five-inch leopard pumps that were impossible to walk in. We immediately see these shoes, in all their beauty and potential for pain-inducing misery. Karr taps into that universal desire to look gorgeous and sexy, even it’s crippling. This is a positive paragraph, even if it ends in regret over the money she spent on beautiful shoes.

In the second paragraph, she admits to the expensive misery those shoes brought: the expensive plaster foot cast, the bunions, the neuromas. Add on the four-figure plaster foot cast, which gets tossed at year’s end, because the bastards know your beleaguered and bunioned foot will keep spreading like yeasty dough. This is a negative paragraph, full of an ugly (albeit funny) vision of her fat old foot.

In the third and fourth paragraphs, notice how she toggles between fantasy and fury, remembering her high ballerina arches, her evenly tapered toes, her days as a foot model. This is a positive paragraph.

In the fifth paragraph, she describes her feet as “gnarled up like gingerroot.” This is a fresh, memorable and ugly image. Her ass is tired. She can still squeeze into a size four, but only if she sprays herself with Pam: Given new bra technology and some spandex, I can squish stuff in and—spray a little PAM on me—still slither into a size 4. But standing for an hour in heels sets red lightning bolts blazing off my feet. She uses vivid imagery throughout---she never takes the easy way out and writes, “My feet hurt like hell.” Instead, note how she gives us real objects to visualize: Gingerroot, Pam, red lighting bolts blazing. We won’t forget this paragraph or these images.

In the sixth paragraph (now we’re firmly in the middle of this 13-paragraph piece), we get this doozy of a sentence: But no one detailed how those stilettos—named for a dagger—would irreversibly cripple me. This is a startling and disturbing sentence. We worry for her. Is she really crippled? Probably not, but it’s a great teaser of a sentence and it prompts us to read on.

In the seventh paragraph, we have the fusty old Puritan remind our narrator that God would have made her feet look different if S/He wanted her to wear high heel shoes, practical advice Karr dismisses. (As well she should. Following sensible advice doesn’t make for great reading unless it comes at the end of a story.) 

In the eighth paragraph, Karr hones in on the truth all women (and trans men) know to be true: High heels make your legs look awesome and sexy: “For I was a slave to the desire that rules our libidinal culture. And an elongated foot and leg just announces, Hey, y’all, there’s pussy at the other end of this. Yet every pair of excruciating heels also telegraphs a subtle masochism: i.e., I am a woman who can not only take an ass-whipping; to draw your gaze, I’ll inflict one on myself. This is shocking to read---we don’t usually see the word “pussy” in The New Yorker. But it works here---it’s blunt and to the point. There’s great energy in this paragraph.

In the ninth, tenth and eleventh paragraph, Karr throws around some famous, celebrity names: Andre Leon Talley, Michelle Obama, Victoria Beckham. They all have something to say (or show) about shoes. Beckham saves the day by wearing sneakers and saying she can’t do heels anymore. Look at the great, energetic writing that follows: Thanks to her, a woman’s comfort finally meant more than her significance as a brood sow. I hobbled out to buy slides, then shipped off my old tormentors. Parties no longer meant popping anti-inflammatories and slipping heels off under a tablecloth. My feet rejoiced. I snagged every taxi I loped after, took subway stairs at a sprint.

In the 12th paragraph, Beckham goes back to wearing spike heels, and Karr despairs, calling her feet “large loaves of rye bread”: But recently I spotted Beckham jammed into spikes again. Traitor! Then, at a soirée, a concerned friend asked, “What’s with the shoes?” Looking down, I suddenly saw myself shod in large loaves of rye bread. This is a great, funny, memorable image. Karr mocks herself for embracing comfort and practicality.


In the 13th and final paragraph, Karr exhorts all women everywhere to throw away their high-heeled shoes. She addresses us and Beckham directly: Oh, womenfolk, as we once burned our bras could we not torch the footwear crucifying us? How about this Independence Day? Our feet and spines will unknot, and high heels will fade from consciousness along with foot-binding and rib removal to shrink your waist. The species may stop reproducing, but who the hell cares. Come back, Victoria. Your sisters await you. Does this last paragraph work? I think so. It’s funny, it’s a bit violent with its references to foot binding and foot removal, and it circles back to Karr’s pint that women have long subjected themselves to a ridiculous amount of pain in pursuit of beauty. It’s a short, intense, memorable piece that manages to incorporate humor, celebrities, sharp writing and smacking good sense.

Alice Munro’s Red Dress---1946

Alice Munro’s Red Dress---1946.
http://www.narrativemagazine.com/issues/stories-week-2012-2013/story-week/red-dress-1946-alice-munro
From Dance of the Happy Shades: And Other Stories (Vintage, 1998)

What I love about Alice Munro’s fiction, especially when the narrator writes in the first person about her mother, is that we never really know if this is Munro writing autobiographically, or if she is making up the material out of whole cloth (so to speak.) No matter. It’s a sign of terrific writing when the reader thinks the story you’re writing HAS to be true, it reads so authentically, even if it’s not. 

(Is this story autobiographical? Who knows. Probably. Munro did have a conflicted, sometimes bitter relationship with her mother and her mother did sew and for a while, made a living at it.)

In this story, Munro embraces what we have spoken so often of in class: Elevating the object. In this story, the object is the red dress. The whole story revolves around the making of it, the wearing of it, and the consequences of wearing it, with wonderful backstories about the relationships between mothers and daughters, and the relationships between teenage girls and boys, woven in. It’s a coming of age story, really, with an ending that is ambiguous and not (in my opinion) completely successful, but the story itself is quite compelling and while we’re reading it, we see Munro’s mastery at work. 

To wit: God is in the sewing details here. As we’ve discussed in class, process is always interesting. Note the wonderful details about the making of the red dress: “My mother was making me a red dress. All through the month of December I would come home from school and find her in the kitchen, surrounded by cut-up red velvet and scraps of tissue paper pattern. She worked at an old treadle machine pushed up the window to get the light, and also to let her look out, past the stubble fields and bare vegetable garden, to see who went by on the road. There was seldom anybody to see.
     The red velvet material was hard to work with, it pulled, and the style mother had chosen was not easy either. She was not really a good sewer. She liked to make things; that is different.
    Whenever she could she trip to skip basting and pressing and she took no pride in the fine points of tailoring, the finishing of buttonholes and the overacting of seams as, for instance ,my aunt and my grandmother did. Unlike them she started off with an inspiration, a brave and dazzling idea; from that moment on, her pleasure ran downhill. In the first place, she could never find a pattern to suit her. It was no wonder; there were no patterns made to match the ideas that blossomed in her head. She had me made me at various times when I was younger, a flowered organdy dress with a high Victorian neckline edged scratchy lace, with a poke bonnet to match; a Scottish plaid outfit with a velvet jacket and tam; an embroidered peanut blouse worn with a full red skirt and black laced bodice...

This all sounds quite lovely. Then the narrator sums up her mother and herself:
I was embarrassed by the way my mother crept around me, her knees creaking, her breath coming heavily. She muttered to herself. Around the house she wore no corset or stockings, she wore wedge-heeled shoes and ankle socks; her legs were marked with lumps of blue-green veins. I thought her squatting position shameless, even obscene…My head was muffled in velvet, my body exposed, in an old cotton school slip. I felt like a great raw lump, clumsy and goose-pimpled….” These descriptions aren’t pretty. However, they are vivid and detailed and we can see the mother and daughter in all their miserable glory.

The narrator is 13. Her good friend Lonnie comes over to watch the making and trying on of the dress: While Lonnie is “there,” the narrator makes her confession to us (p.3): “We made a pact to tell each other everything. But one thing I did not tell was about this dance, the high school Christmas Dance for which my mother was making me a dress. It was that I did not want to go.”

The narrator’s dress is making her a dress to wear to the high school Christmas Dance, a party that the narrator tells us she doesn’t want to go to. Does this answer the question: Why is the writer writing about today? I think so. Teenage discomfort, and a fear of socializing, is a universal problem, one that almost any reader can relate to. Does the admission that the narrator doesn’t want to go to a party signal that this is going to be a profound and memorable story? Not necessarily, but as in all stories, it’s all in the telling. In Munro’s stories, small, almost minute things happen but they almost always have enormous consequences.

The narrator makes much out of her chronic discomfort and stress: “At high school, I was never comfortable for a minute. I did not know about Lonnie. Before an exam, she got icy hands and palpitations, but I was close to despair at all times. When I was asked a question in class, any simple little question at all, my voice was apt to come out squeaky, or else hoarse and trembling. When I had to go to the blackboard I was sure---even at the time fo the month when this could not be true---that I had blod on my skirt. My hands became slippery with sweat when they were required to work the blackboard compass. I could not hit the ball in volleyball…I hated Business Practice because you had to rule pages for an account book, using a straight pen, and when the teacher looked over my shoulder all the delicate lines wobbled and ran together (page 4)… The details of her discomfort are so finely wrought that even though they might make us squirm in recognition, we understand exactly how she is feeling and sympathize with her.

All of the other women in the story seem acutely uncomfortable too: “I hated Englsih because the boys played bingo at the back of the room while the teacher, a stout, gentle girl, slightly cross-eyed, read Wordsworth at the front. She threatened them she begged them, her face red and her voice as unreliable as mine. They offered burlesqued apologies and when she stated to read again they took up rapt postures made swooning faces, crossed their eyes, flung their hands over their hearts. Sometimes she would burst into tears, there was no help for it ,she had to run out into the hall. Then the boys made loud mooing noises; our hungry laughter---oh, mine too---pursued her. There was a carnival atmosphere of brutality in the room at such times, scaring weak and suspect people like me.”

Everyone in the school sounds completely stressed out---but there is great tension here, and even though it sounds like a miserable place to be, it’s a great place to set a coming of age story.

So, we wonder, how will our heroine get out of going to the party? She tries, on pages 4-5, to get herself sick, and fails. “Every morning, including the day of the dance, I rose defeated, and in perfect health.” (page 5.)

The day of the dance, the narrator/author, returns to our elevated object, the red dress: “My mother, never satisfied, was sewing a white lace collar on the dress; she had decided it was too grown-up looking.” Oh no! What will happen?  This little sentence is quite anxiety-producing. But a few sentences later, we learn tat the dress is actually quite successful: “Then she zipped up the dress and turned me around to the mirror. The dress was princess style, very tight in the midriff. I saw how my breasts in their new stiff brassiere, jutted out surprisingly, with mature authority, under the childish frills of the collar.”

Then Lonnie shows up, in a much prettier dress: “She had on a pale blue crepe dress, with a peplum and bow; it was much more grown-up than mine even without the collar. Her hair had come out as sleek as the girl’s on the bobby-pin card. I had always thought secretly that Lonnie could not be pretty because she had crooked teeth, but now I saw that crooked teeth or not, her stylish dress and smooth hair made me look a little like a golliwog, stuffed into red velvet, wide-eyed, wild-haired, with a suggestion of delirium” (page 6.)

We are now on page 6 of a 13-page story, at the end of the first act (there is a space between the first and second act), almost smack in the middle of a three-act story. More has to happen, now that we see the has not found a way to avoid going to the party. Now, problems must arise at the party in order to keep us reading. And they do.

What happens at the dance? A boy names Mason Williams asks the narrator to dance because he has to, then walks away. “’See you,’ he said. He walked away. It took me a a minute or two to realize what had happened and that he was not coming back. I went and stood by the wall alone.”

Things get worse. The band begins to play again (page 8) and more boys came over to ask the girls to ask. The narrator’s friend Lonnie is asked. The narrator is not. “Why them and not me?” she asks. “Why take them and not me? Why everybody else and not me? I have a red velvet dress, I did my hair in curlers, I used a deodorant and put on cologne. Pray, I thought…It did not work. What I had been afraid of was true. I was going to be left. ”

Then a strong, independent girl named Mary Fortune finds the narrator in the bathroom and tries to persuade the narrator to leave the dance with her and go have a cigarette and a chat, harkening what could be the beginning of a deep friendship between two intelligent young women who know themselves to be outsiders, and (we hope) better for it. Mary Fortune, like all the other female characters in the story, has her own set of disfigurements: “In the light the high window, I could see her narrow, scornful face, her dark skin pitted with acne, her teeth pushed together at the front, making her look adult and commanding.” But Mary is astute and thoughtful: She calls the dance, “The greatest collection of boy0craz girls you could imagine is right here in this school…” The narrator is glad to be acknowledge by her: “I was grateful for her attention, her company and her cigarette…” Hurray! We think. The narrator is coming of age and maturing! She has made a new, mature friends /What a wonderful, heartening story!

But no. That would be too conventional an ending for Munro. The narrator follows Mary and comes of age while doing so, but in her own, awkward, fierce, unexpected way: “I found that I was not so frightened, now that I had made up my mind to leave the dance behind. I was not waiting for anybody to choose me.  I had my own plans. I did not have to smile or make signs for luck. It did not matter to me. I was on my way to have a hot chocolate, with my friend.”

Just as she is about to leave the dance with Mary, a boy approaches her. They begin to dance. She considers telling him that she is about to leave: “But I did not say anything…” When Mary looks at the narrator, “I made a weak waving motion with the hand that lay on the boy’s shoulder, indicating that I apologized that I didn’t know what had happened and also that it was no use waiting for me. Then I turned my head away and when I looked again she was gone.”

The boy (Raymond Bolting) takes her home. He is not happy that she lives so far away. This is not a budding romance. Munro gives us more specific, authentic gestures of the narrators’ discomfort: “The cold was making y nose run a little too, and I worked my fingers through the candy wrappers in my coat pocked until I found a shabby Kleenex.” She shares it with Raymond. He kisses her briefly, “with the air of one who knew his job when he saw it, on the corner of the mouth. Then he turned back to town, never knowing that he had been my rescuer, that he had brought me from Mary Fortune’s territory into the ordinary world.”

This is hardly a feminist tract, and this 13-year old narrator does not behave admirably, ditches the possibility of new friendship. Then she spies her mother in the kitchen window, and reveals to us that her feelings for her mother haven’t improved either, and that what she has learned from the evening’s event is that she was unlikely to be as happy as her mother wanted her to be, but her mother would likely never realize it. The last paragraph is heartbreaking, but beautifully written, revealing that the narrator has matured, but it’s a maturity that allows her to see her own and her mother’s limitations, not a maturity that brings her a romance or a new, healthy teenage friendship. As hard as the mother tried to get her daughter ready for the dancing by making her a red dress, she has no idea what her daughter is capable of, or even feeling: “I went around the house to the back door, thinking, I have been to a dance and a boy has walked me home and kissed me. It was all true. My life was possible. I went past the kitchen window and I saw my mother. She was sitting with her feet on the open oven door, drinking tea out of a cup without a saucer. She was just sitting and waiting for me to come home and tell her everything that had happened. And I would not do it, I never would. But when I saw the waiting kitchen, and my mother in her faded, fuzzy Paisley kimono, with her sleepy but doggedly expectant face, I understood what a mysterious and oppressive obligation I had, to be happy, and how I had almost failed it, and would likely to fail it, every time, and she would not know.”


The making of the red dress set all this in motion.