Milford, Nancy Winston. Zelda: A biography. New York: Harper & Row, 1970.
I want to be Zelda. Zelda as a young girl, that is. From the time she was a small child and all through her teens she was a strong-will, independent, defiant, do-as-I-like girl. She was wild and free, not confined to WhatWillTheyThinkOfMe thoughts. We do have something, one thing in common, “Zelda did not have the knack for forming close friendships with girls her own age” (p16). I can relate but unlike Zelda, it’s not to say the similarity didn’t cause me considerable angst.
Zelda, as Mrs. F. Scott Fitzgerald, seem to have it all. As a couple, they roamed America and Europe carefree and extravagantly. One of their friends made a prediction, “I do not think the marriage can succeed. Both drinking heavily. Think they will be divorced in 3 years” (p67). Even parenting didn’t slow down the partying. Scottie, their daughter was pawned off on nannies most of the time.
In the summer of 1929 Zelda quietly went mad. “…Zelda sank more deeply into her private world, becoming increasingly remote from Scott and Scottie” (p 155). Her turmoil during a stay in a mental institute is well documented through letters to Scott. It was heartbreaking to read and I decided I didn’t like F. Scott and maybe I didn’t want to be Zelda anymore. But, what I am now is fascinated with Zelda’s life. I want to read her book, Save Me the Waltz. I suppose it will have to wait until after the BLC.
Probably the thing that disturbed me the most about this biography is F. Scott. He blatently took Zelda’s life as subject matter for most, if not all, of his novels. When Zelda tried to do the same thing he became jealous and domineering, demanding she edit certain parts (which she does). It’s as if he is unable to accept the possibility that his wife has talent as a writer. The inequality in their relationship speaks volumes.
BookLust Twist: From Book Lust and the chapter “People You Ought to Meet” (p 183). She called the book “compelling” and I would say she forgot to add “tragic” because by the end of Milford’s biography of Zelda I was heartbroken.
~*LunaSea*~ 
this is a common story within the arts. Ok. not that the story is common, but the framework is. Feminist art historians (first generation) wrote thesis after thesis using stories, like Zelda’s, that had a care free sprit but was subjugated by family, or husband, or society (usually a combination) so the end result was addiction, madness.
The most recent (because we are still too close to the past three decades) is Lee Krazner. Whe was a wonderful painter, and it is now argued that she had a better understanding of paintng and art then Jackson Pollack.
http://www.davidgilhooly.com/assemblagejpg/krazner.htm
Wow. that was a long winded way to say, “cool, sounds like a good book”
E. M. Forster would argue that you were right the first time, that the story is common, but not the plot. The story is the pattern, the “what next?” of events while the plot produces the question of WHY? I agree that family, society, and society all had a hand in Zelda’s downward spiral. What I couldn’t get over was the mutual jealousy they unleashed on each other.
Lee Krazner’s eye saw angels and devils alike. Her work speaks volumes.
Yes, Nancy Milford’s book on Zelda was fascinating. Definitely worth a browse when / if you have time.
PS~ I should have said MAKE time for a well worth browse, read cover to cover if / when you have the time.