Items

• 
  Ellen Wallace Scrapbook, 1920

  During the fall term of 1920, Harriett Ellen Norton (nee Wallace) kept a scrapbook while attending the Michigan State Normal College (MSNC). Harriett Wallace, known to most as Ellen, was from Bay City, Michigan and a member of the Delta Sigma Epsilon sorority, Le Cercle Francais club, and History club. She graduated in June of 1922 and remained in the area after graduation with her husband Stanley Norton whose family owned and operated Norton's Flowers. Stanley Norton, a member of the Arm of Honor fraternity, also attended the MSNC but withdrew to enlist in the military during World War I. Materials in the scrapbook include invitations to on and off campus events, dance cards, correspondence, clippings, receipts, and photographs. Many of the campus invitations are from the Arm of Honor and Kappa Phi Alpha fraternities. Please note, the book was scanned so that on pages where items were folded the page was scanned multiple times each time exposing more of the materials in the scrapbook.
• Handwritten letter from Denise Levertov on a half-sheet of green paper

  Handwritten letter from Denise Levertov to Louise Kertesz written on a half-sheet of green paper.
• Typewritten letter from Richard Eberhart to Beverly Jarrett

  Letter from Richard Eberhart to Ms. Beverly Jarrett, detailing that he would like to give her a blurb for the jacket. He notes that he will be wintering in Gainesville, Florida, for the winter term.
• Envelope from Mary Haynes North to Louise Kertesz

  Handwritten envelope from mh north to Louise Kertesz
• Envelope from Mary Haynes North to Louise Kertesz

  Typewritten envelope from mh baldwin north to Louise Kertesz, badged September 12th, 1978.
• Letter from Albert Einstein to Muriel Rukeyser

  A photocopy of a typewritten letter, dated September 12th, 1942. The letter is from Albert Einstein to Muriel Rukeyser. The background information on this letter is that Muriel Rukeyser wanted Albert Einstein to write a foreword to her poetry book, Willard Gibbs, which was about the eponymous scientist. Rukeyser asked Einstein to “...lend his name to her effort to make Gibbs known to a time that needed the story of his achievement”. Without reading Rukeyser’s book, Einstein refused, saying that “In my view, there is but one way to bring a great scientist to the attention of the larger public: it is to discuss and explain, in language that will be generally understood, the problems and solutions which have characterized his life-work. This can only be done by someone who has a fundamental grasp of the material”. Einstein acknowledges that the personal side must be taken account of, but it can't be the whole focus of the book, or the work becomes “....banal hero-worship, based on emotion and not on insight” and that Einstein has learned “...by my own experience how hateful and ridiculous it is, when a serious man, absorbed in important endeavors, is ignorantly lionized”. In the end, Einstein completely denies Rukeyser’s request, saying that “...I cannot give my public endorsement to such an undertaking. It would seem to me less than honourable. That sound harsh: I even fear that you will take my inability for unjustifiable unkindness. But so I am, and cannot be otherwise”. The first part of the letter is bracketed, while on the back of the paper, a sticky note says, “Einstein”
• Letter from Kate Daniels to Louise Kertesz

  A two page, original, typewritten letter, dated January 16th, 1984. The letter is from Kate Daniels to Louise Kertesz. The letter begins by saying that it has been a while since Kate had received Louise’s letter, which she sent on July 20th which indicated that Louise would be willing to correspond with Daniels about the biography of Rukeyser that she is working on, Daniels apologizes for the long delay in responding. Daniels briefly updates Louise, saying that the biography, tentatively titled Muriel Rukeyser: A Life of Poetry, will be published by Random House Inc. Bill Rukeyser, Muriel’s only heir, is cooperating with Daniels fully in the making of the biography, and Daniels will be going to California on March 9th to meet with him and tio go through the Rukeyser materials in the Berg Collection, which Daniels remarks must have been totally uncataloged when Louise worked with them, and Daniels thinks about what a hard time Louise must have had. Daniels will begin working with the Library of Congress Collection in the next few weeks. Daniels has contacted numerous colleagues and friends of Muriel’s, all of whom have consented to speak with Daniels and share manuscripts. Daniel has noticed that in The Poetic Vision of Muriel Rukeyser, Louise had spoken to and corresponded with Muriel several times. Daniels asks if Louise would share the information about the correspondences with her,and for Louis to write to her about her relationship with Muriel. Daniels wonders what Rukeyser was like to work with, and any impressions Louise had of her, professionally and personally. Daniels considers Louise’s input to be enormously impersonating as Louise was the first, and so far only critic and writer to complete, a full length study of Rukeyser, Daniels asks if Louise would be willing to share some letters with her, and to share any materials that Louise might have. Daniel is willing to pay any fees that Louise may incur by doing this. such as the fees for xeroxing and postage. If Louise would be more comfortable speaking with her on the telephone, Daniels would be willing to do that. Daniels asks if Louis could respond to her more quickly than the time that Daniles took in responding to Louise’s July letter. Daniels apologizes for the long delay in responding, and says that it has not been due to the lack of interest, but only the desire to tell Louise more specifically about the outlines of the book that she is writing. Daniels also says that Louise may be interested to know that Poetry East, the literary magazine that Daniels edits and publishes at the University of Virginia, will be publishing a special issue on Muriel Rukeyser and her poetry in the Spring of 1985. Miriam Riek, a long time friend who had gathered a number of essays after Muriel’s death but never published them, will be guest editing it. Daniels ends the letter by saying that if Louise is interested in contributing something, or if she knows of someone who might be, Daniels hopes that Louise tells them about the issue of the literary magazine. The adaddres to Daniels is at the English Department for the University of Virginia. Daniels says that she hopes to hear from Louise soon,and she hopes the best for Louise for the New Year. Near where Daniels mentions that she got Random House Inc. to publish her book, someone, possibly Louise, has underlined that section and written on the letter, “Did she?” in all capital letters.
• Letter from Louise Kertesz to Kate Daniels

  An original, typewritten letter dated January 26th, 1984. The letter is from Louise Kertesz to Kate Daniels. Louise begins the letter by saying that she is happy that Daniles is working on a biography of Muriel, and Louise will help in any way she can. Louise also congratulates Daniels for getting Random House as he publisher. Louise will send Daniels xeroxes of her correspondence with Muriel. She will also xerox letters some of her colleagues wrote about her and her work. Louise will have to locate some of these items, since she has moved. Louise has a xerox machine, and she just asks Kate to reimburse her for the postage. Louise has also taped interviews with Muriel. They are precious to her. She will allow Daniels to listen to them, but she doesn't have equipment that would let her make transcriptions, and she is nervous about mailing the originals. They can discuss this at a later date, and Louie is sure that hearing Rukeyser with an interviewer will interest Daniels. While she was writing her book about Rukeyser, Louise describes her relationship with Muriel as “...a student trying to understand her work in its context. I grew to admire it and her more and more a I read her work and interviewed her and spoke to her on the phone. She was very strong, despite strokes. I felt she had the inner strength and insight and the “magic” of utterance of the true artist”. Louise is sure that people close to Rukeyser can describe her personality and mind in greater detail. Louise was with Rukeyser, in person, not more than 10 times, and maybe less. Louise had lunch with Rukeyser in her apartment once, drinks once, and the rest of the time they worked and Louise had a bus or plane to catch. They did speak on the phone frequently. Louise describes Rukeyser as “...warm, welcoming, generous”. Her standard exclamation when Louise announced she was on the phone was “Oh, Good!” She never said anything about anyone, or took swipes at her detractors on the phone. As Daniels may know, Louise’s book is about Rukeyser’s work and her critics. Besides showing the interconnecting themes of her work, she also wanted to illustrate the phenomenon of the verbal abuse of a great artist by small (sexist) minds. Louise has enclosed a review of Rukeyser’s Collected Poems, which was her last published book, that appeared in the Hudson Review. The review demonstrated how disgraceful “respected “ critics could be, until the very end. Muriel mailed Louise that review, with no comment. Prichard used to teach, or maybe still does, at Amherst College. Muriel saw all of Louise’s chapters before they went to press. The books were published and a copy appeared in Louise’s mailbox two weeks after Rukeyser died. Her secretary, a woman from Sarah Lawrence called Jan Levi, was reading Rukeyser Louise’s page proofs on the last week of her life, and she was weeping and saying, ”Right on.” Jam Levi told Louise this when she phoned with the news of Muriel’s death. Louise ends the letter by saying that she will mail Daniels anything she has on hand that might interest her. Louise wishes Daniels good luck on her book. Louise has also handwritten more questions and comments on the sides of the letter, such as “Why have you decided to write your book?”
• Letter from Carolyn Stroebe to Louise Kertesz

  An original, typewritten letter from the University of California in Santa Cruz, dated January 9th, 1980. The letter is from Carolyn Stroebe to Louise Kertesz. Stroebe introduces herself by saying that she is a graduate student working on her doctoral dissertation, an extension of her Master’s Thesis, titled “The Giving and Taking of a Poem: A Psychological Impression of the Life and Work of Muriel Rukeyser”. The dissertation will be based on psychological data provided by Muriel during a University of California studies of creative individuals in 1958, on an interview that Rukeyser gave Stoebe in 1979, and on impressions from people who knew her. Stoebe had just finished reading Louise’s book on the life and work of Muriel Rukeyser for the first time, and the book had proven to be one of her most important resources. Stroebe would love to talk with the author. She will be interviewing people in New York in May, but she doesn't think she can afford to travel to Michigan this year. If Louise decides to grant Stroebe an interview, they could perhaps meet at a later date. Stroebe wonders if Louise can help her by filling out a few psychological measures which call for Louise’s perceptions of Muriel. The forms will be brief and would not take a great deal of her time, Stroebe would be grateful. In closing, Stroebe says she is looking forward to hearing from Kertesz.
• Obituary for Muriel Rukeyser titled "Muriel Rukeyser, Poet of Social Protest, Is Dead at 66"

  An original copy of an obituary for Muriel Rukeyser by Wolfgang Saxon, called “Muriel Rukeyser, Poet of Social Protest, Is Dead at 66” dated February 14th, 1980. It contains an outline of Rukeyser’s life.
• Article titled "The Fear"

  An original copy of an article. Dated June 19th, 1978, called “The Fear” by Muriel Rukeyser. The article is about Julius and Ethel Rosenberg, alleged spies for Russia, who had died by execution 25 years before the publication of the article.
• Postcard from Marge Piercy to Louise Kertesz

  A postcard, dated January 5th, 1981 from Marge Piercy to Louise Kertesz. The postcard is short, an dsays, “Thank you very much for understanding what I wrote you about your fine book. Thank you also for sending me the poem”.
• Postcard from Carolyn Kizer to Louise Kertesz

  A postcard dated July 1981. The postcard is from Carolyn Kizer to Louise Kertesz. Kizer starts the postcard by thanking Louise, and saying what an angel someone named Esther is. She looks forward to the book, and suggests some places that could review it, such as the Ohio Review, Iowa Review, or Georgia. Kizer says that William Prichard goes to the top of her ‘hit list’ and that she is ashamed of the Hudson Review, but hat no one “...reads the bloody thing any more” Kizer states that if only Prichard had called Fred Morgan was one of the great bores, but Kizer says ‘Fat chance’. A postscript says “What a fine press L.S.U. is!”
• A ripped piece of paper

  A ripped piece of paper from a notepad labeled 1 PM Wed. with miscellaneous info handwritten on it. Some information is on the back of the sheet as well.
• A ripped piece of paper with Bill Rukeyser's phone number

  A ripped out sheet of paper from what could be a notepad with Bill Rukeyser’s name and presumably his phone number handwritten on it.
• Notecard with Bill Rukeyser's name and phone number

  Small note card that has handwriting on it with Bill Rukeyser (Muriel’s son)’s information on it, and what looks like a phone number and his job.
• Photocopy of a review of Louise Kertesz's book

  A photocopied sheet, dated May 1981, that contains a copy of a review of Louise Kertesz’s book by Annette Colodny from American Literature. The review is not complimentary, and someone, presumably Louise, has underlined parts of the review that say, statements such as, "Instead, she chose to waste precious space quoting and responding to criticisms or reviews long since faded from memory (if indeed, we never attended to them in the first place) One of the most jarring parts of the review states that, “So, too, in a way, does Muriel Rukeyser in Louise Kertez’s The Poetic Vision of Muriel Rukeyser. The timing of the Kertesz study happily coincides with the publication of Rukeyser’s Collected Poems (New York, McGraw-Hill, 1979) and, less happily, with the year in which we wish to commemorate the achievement of a woman whose passing we have only to recently mourned. The problem with the book is that it fails to do full justice to that achievement”.
• Letter from Richard Eberhart to Louise Kertesz

  An original, handwritten letter, dated August 21st, 1980. The letter is from Richard Eberhart to Louise Kertesz. In the beginning of the letter, Eberhart tells Louise that he was happy to meet her and her husband and talk about her stunning work on Muriel. To Eberhart, it was an unexpected pleasure that happens too seldomly. Eberhart wishes he could help get the book reviewed, but he doesn’t review books any more. He used to review in the 50’s and 60’s, but nowadays, nobody asks Eberhart to review. If Eberhart has any clout, he will use it. He also says that heavy books take a long time to review articles. Eberhart still receives good ones about his Of Poetry and Poets from Illinois Press that was published in 1979,and he suspects that Louise will get reviewed in the quarterlies in 1981. Perhaps Louise will be content, since the main joy is in the work itself, or the labor of love, in knowing that her book will be ensconced in 1000 libraries and be read for decades, off and on. The book will be a ‘grand mine’ for miners in Rukeyser in the future. When Eberhart returns to Hanover, he will see if the first copy is still there and ask Louise what she would like to have done with the 2nd. Eberhart ends the letter by saying, “Now if you would give me about three years of your life and do an RE as splendidly as you did MR”.
• Letter from Dwight MacDonald to Louise Kertesz

  An original, typewritten letter, dated March 1st, 1979. The letter is from Dwight Macdonald to Louise Kertesz. Louise had sent Macdonald a letter on November 24th of last year, and he apologizes for replying to the letter so late. Macdonald will give Louise permission to use his quote in her book if she includes a disclaimer that says, “Asked permission to publish the above quote, Mr. Macdonald agreed on condition his full position on the “Poster Girl” episode be stated, thus, “I just confess this, while I deplore the brutal tone, especially against such a gentle and decent person as Muriel and myself, would have used more of the rapier and less of the battle-axe, I have to agree, on re-reading it, with the general content of the R.S.P.;s attack on the political morality and literary taste of ‘Poster Girl’-who is of course Muriel as she behaved in World (sic) War II and not as she does now, politically and aesthetically.”. Macdonald says that he hopes it is not too late, or Louise objects to printing it. Macdonald says that if Louise refuses to print it, she is “...a damned fool, my dear Ms. Kertesz, for refusing a choice bit of Macdonald prose-as well as a bigot”. However, he really doesn't fear this. Instead, he fears it is too late to submit it. There is a handwritten postscript on the letter that asks, “What is MI?”. The letter is also filled with typewriter errors, crossed out sections, and added. handwritten words.
• Letter from Richard Eberhart to Louise Kertesz

  Original typewritten letter, dated December 20th. 1978. The letter is from Richard Eberhart to Louise Kertesz. In the letter, Eberhart tells Louise that he has received her letter from December 14th, and he is glad that Rukeyser will be coming out. However, Eberhart is troubled by a phone call that he received from Father Morton if St. John the Divine last night asking who to substitute for Muriel next Sunday for a dialogue at his church about “water”. He said that Rukeyser fainted recently at Sarah Lawrence, and she is now in the hospital. Eberhart hopes that Rukeyser will get better, and will be able to enjoy Louise’s book when it comes out. Eberhart would also like to give Louise a blurb for the book jacket if she wanted one. He has also written to the press, showing them what he has written about the book, and he could make a blurb from that. What Eberhart wrote to the press has been enclosed in the letter. Eberhart ends the letter by asking Louise whether or not that would be in order.
• Kenneth Rexroth's introduction to Louise Kertesz's book on Muriel Rukeyser

  Original copy of Kenneth Rexroth’s introduction to The Poetic Vision of Muriel Rukeyser, dated December 5th, 1978. There are underlines, marks, and additional notes on the introduction papers.
• Louise Kertesz's notes from taped interview

  Original copy of Louise Kertesz’s notes from an interview with Rukeyser on cassette tapes dated July 11th, 1977.
• Letter from Muriel Rukeyser to Louise Kertesz

  An envelope dated May 21st, 1979, with a letter dated May 11th, 1979/ The letter is from Muriel Rukeyser to Louise Kertesz. Rukeyser begins the letter by thanking Louise for her note. Rukeyser also tells Louise to not mind the two month delay and to hope that LSU catches up. Furthermore, Rukeyser says that she will be glad to see MOVING TO DETROIT. Rukeyser ends the letter by saying that she is doing well and that she may be ready to leave the hospital.
• Letter from Louise Kertesz to Muriel Rukeyser

  Original letter, dated February 17th, 1978 , paper clipped to a preface to a book (Possibly Rukeyser’s Collected Poems?) written by Muriel Rukeyser. The letter before the included preface is from Louise Kertesz to Muriel Rukeyser. Louise begins the letter by thanking Muriel for the Preface to the book. Louise then states that the Preface was “...beautiful and so recognizably yours”. And that it speaks directly to Rukeyser’s “one reader”, to Louise and to each person who will hold Rukeyser’s book.. Louise then states that the fact that Muriel did not cut the poems, and that “...retaining for us the large castings forth in their original bold, hopeful gestures—that is also recognizably you”. Louise thanks Rukeyser for her truthfulness to “how this formed” for you which will encourage many to cast forth, which has encouraged me and put heart into her imagining. As Louise read the Preface over and over, she felt like “my lifetimes” was not a typo, and that Muriel Rukeyser creates the creative. Louise ends the letter by saying that knowing Rukeyser’s poems is one of the greatest gifts of her life. There is a postscript to the letter that asks whether or not Rukeyser is still coming to Mount Holyoke College in the Spring.
• Two pages of notes, stapled

  Undated. Two stapled pages of notes regarding the language of flow and other writerly thoughts.
• Letter from Louise Kertesz to Muriel Rukeyser

  An original, typewritten letter dated October 24th, 1979. The letter is from Louise Kertesz to Muriel Rukeyser. Louise begins the letter by saying that she had phoned Rukeyser earlier today, but she was told that Rukeyser was out of town. Louise is hoping that Rukeyser is doing well. Louise asks Rukeyser if she has received the page proofs. The proofs were in such poor shape that Louise will be receiving corrected page proofs and Louise is to be the final proofreader, at her request. The press went with electronic composition for her book, which is their first experience with computer set type, and they have had many problems. The galleys were full of errors. Louise had received the reviews that Rukeyser had sent her a few weeks ago, and she wondered how she could answer them, since Louise’s book is an answer to all of these reviews. Louise was particularly shocked at William Prichard’s review in The Hudson Review, and Louise was amazed again at the “...shallowness, the stupidity I encounter from time to time in reading past reviews of your books”. There is a rich vein of that running in “contemporary criticism” Louise then states that in B.R. Cohen’s review in the Buffalo Newspaper she (?) didn't read attentively, and seems to have paraphrased several reviews of Rukeyser's books, reviews they might have read while they were researching these series of articles. One review they may have referenced is Thomas Stumpf’s review of Breaking Open in the Carolina Quarterly. Louise sent copies of these reviews to Michael True who said he would try to place a review in The Chronicle of Higher Education. True will see that the reviews that Rukeyser sent Louise are like several others that are present in Louise’s book. Louise hopes that True will reference these reviews in his review of Louise’s book. Louise is mailing to Rukeyser at her 50thy St. address a copy of Moving to Detroit. There is a shorter version at 90 pages. Louise is now querying publishers, with a sampling of the poems. Louisiana didn't want the manuscript,saying only that it was too long. It took them 5 and a half months for them to say that. Perhaps they didn't want to offend Louise, but Louise is sure that Rukeyser will be more candid. She is looking forward to Rukeyser’s response, when she gets time to read it. Louise ends the letter by saying that she is thinking of Rukeyser, and she hopes that all is well.
• Letter from Louise Kertesz to Muriel Rukeyser

  An original typewritten letter dated September 11th, 1979. The letter is from Louise Kertesz to Muriel Rukeyser. Louise begins the letter by saying that it was good to talk with Rukeyser last night. Louise had written to her editor, Marie Blanchard, at LSU Press, and Louise had requested that they send Rukeyser a copy of the page proof when it is available. Louise is waiting for the review that Rukeyser spoke of on the phone. Louise was pleased to see the Thomas Lask review in the Times. Louise thinks that Lask can use her book for better reading in some of the poems, such as “Pouring the Milk Away”, which he did not read in the context of all of Rukeyser’s work. Lask stated that “Every experience has to be significant”, while Kenneth Rexroth argues that the poems show “...a philosophy of life which comes out of [your] own flesh and bones”. Louise states that “...with your history and response to the times, every experience is significant, is political and personal. Louise does want her book to be useful to Rukeyser’s readers, and Louise has been encouraged by Eberhart’s comments that it will be. Louise informs Rukeyser that Michael True of Assumption is receiving a copy of the page proof,and he says he will try to place a review in The Chronicle of Higher Education. Margaret Weeks at The Chronicle had also been informed by the Press of True’s interest in a follow-up of hsi review of Rukeyser’s Collected Poems. Some time ago, Louise and the Press had asked Jane Cooper if she would receive the page proofs in order to review the book. Louise received no response from her. Louise had also contacted Grace Schulman and William Meredith, offering page proofs for advance comment. Louise does not know if they responded. Denise Levertov also declined a request for advanced comment. Hayden Carruth will be getting a copy of the book for a review. If there is anyone else that Rukeyser would recommend for a review, Louise will contact tahem. Louise ends the letter by saying that she hopes that Rukeyser is well, and she hopes that she will be pleased with the book when she sees it..
• Letter from Louise Kertesz to Muriel Rukeyser

  Photocopy of a typewritten letter, dated June 24th, 1979. The letter is from Louise Kertesz to Muriel Rukeyser. Louise begins the letter by saying that she enjoyed talking to Rukeyser again, and that she had missed that. Last night, Louise had remembered a letter that Rukeyser sent her long ago. Louise is enclosing it in the envelope to remind Rukeyser about it. Louise had forgotten about it and her reply because Louise had decided some time ago to give no details in the manuscript about the birth of Rukeyser’s son that were not given in the poems. Louise did not mention his father’s name as his father. His name was only mentioned in the list of people in California that Rukeyser knew. Louise enclosed xeroxes of the galleys on which Muriel’s son’s birth is mentioned. Rukeyser should remember that she had seen the material before in the manuscript. Rukeyser had given the statement that the father “did not recognize the family”. If Rukeyser still wants that material. Louise would be glad to offer it. Louise hopes that Rukeyser’s son will not find that objectionable because it would be hard to alter it at this point. Louise sent the information to Rukeyser now to honor her agreement and to allay any anxiety on anyone’s part about what will appear in Louise’s book. Simply put, nothing will appear in Louise’s book that was not said in Rukeyser’s poetry. Louise ends the letter by saying that she hopes that Muriel has a good visit in California and that the birth of another grandchild will bring her great joy.
• Letter from Muriel Rukeyser to Louise Kertesz

  Original, typewritten letter, dated November 1st, 1978. The letter is from Muriel Rukeyser to Louise Kertesz. In the letter, Rukeyser tells Louise that she had found a copy of the picture of the Christmas reading in San Francisco for Amnesty International in December of 1977. The picture is distorted at the edges, so that Kay Boyle, who was standing on the left of Rukeyser, doesn't look right at all, but Rukeyser supposes that since she sat in the middle,she looks like herself.
• Page of notes labeled "Muriel"

  Page of notes that are labeled “Muriel”. They are numbered and appear to ask questions. The notes are on the back of a page of what looks like a college essay.
• Letter from Muriel Rukeyser to Louise Kertesz

  Original typewritten letter, dated July 5th, 1978. The letter is from Muriel Rukeyser to Louise Kertesz. In the letter, Rukeyser had enclosed nine pictures from Louisiana State. The letter says that Louise has the Korean picture and the group at Yaddo. Rukeyser asks that Louise send her photographs along with Rukeyser’s. Rukeyser also requests that Louise write out an agreement form stating that the pictures are owned by Rukeyser and that they will be returned as soon as the printer is done with them. Rukeyser also asks that dotted lines that are marked Date and P for the press to be included and signed by their representative. Rukeyser asks whether or not these photographs will be enough, Rukeyser wishes Louise’s family the best on their move to Detroit. Rukeyser is going to England for three weeks, beginning August 15th, but that the address provided will reach her all summer and into the fall. Stapled to this letter is a page that presumably describes all of the pictures Rukeyser sent to Louise.
• Letter from Muriel Rukeyser to Louise Kertesz

  Original, typewritten letter, dated December 20th, 1977. The letter is from Muriel Rukeyser to Louise Kertesz. Rukeyser thanks Louise for her letter,and that she will be glad to see Louise on January 2nd for as long as she can manage. Muriel hopes that Louise’s husband will come in for a drink afterwards, Muriel doesn't want to have dinner, but wants to meet Louise a little bit the next day on 50th Street, Rukeyser had written to the FBI for her dossier, and she hopes it will arrive in time for their meeting. Rukeyser ends the letter by wishing Louise a Happy New Year.
• Letter from Muriel Rukeyser to Louise Kertesz

  Original, typewritten letter, written on October 9th, 1977. The letter is from Muriel Rukeyser to Louise Kertesz. Muriel states that she hopes that Louise has sent out the manuscript by now, and that Monica McCall has written to Mr. McGuire, and that she hopes that Louise hears good things. Monica says that she will give Louise any names she wants. Muriel asks Louise to let her know when she plans to come to New York. Rukeyser hopes to see her and she is now planning poetry readings that will take place over the winter, so knowing the dates that Louise is coming will help her plan out her final schedule. Rukeyser will answer Louise’s questions on the interview when they meet, or on tape. If it comes to the very worst, Rukeyser warns that she may be ‘slippery’ when it comes to making such a tape. Rukeyser is still avoiding a great deal, and by nature she would avoid that anyway.
• Letter from Muriel Rukeyser to Louise Kertesz

  A short, original handwritten letter dated June 24th, 1977. The letter is from Muriel Rukeyser to Louise Kertesz. Muriel says that Louise’s book is “astonishing and beautiful. Muurel states that she has written to Bernard Perry to hasten things along with publishing. Muriel also asks if Louise wants to try another press. Muriel ends the letter by saying that she is looking forward to seeing Louise,and that her health is slowly bouncing back..
• Letter from Louise Kertesz to Muriel Rukeyser

  Original typewritten letter, dated June 24th, 1977. The letter is from Louise Kertesz to Muriel Rukeyser. Louise thanks Rukeyser for their long conversation yesterday, and that she is very eager to see her in person. Louise is happy that Muriel sounded so well and strong, and that Louise doesn't want to overstay her welcome when they meet. Louise plans to take the bus on July 11th, arriving at Fort Authority a little before noon. Louise will come right over. She can stay until 5, which is when she will have to go to Penn Station to commute to New Jersey, where she will be staying with friends until the following morning, arriving at Rukeyser’s at about 9 and staying again until 5. During the second day, Louise would like to examine the materials that they have discussed which she will detail later in the letter. If it would be desirable, Louise is planning to see her again on the third day, as Rukeyser suggested. Louise’s family is prepared to bear her absence for a fourth day if she and Muriel could use the time. Yesterday, Louise sent Susan Hernandez at Indiana University Press her pages on Rukeyser’s three latest books of poetry and pages about Harlot. Louise also sent the press a letter which asked if they would give her a definite answer soon so she can look for another publisher if she has to. Louise would appreciate it if Rukeyser could call her friend at Indiana University Press. The reason that Indiana University Press was on the top of the list of publishers is that John Gallman, the director, worte Louise many months ago after reading the first chapter of Louise’s book, saying, “Place Indiana at the top of your list of interested publishers”. He also invited Louise to send the manuscript in January. In case she needs it, Louise asks if Rukeyser can give her a letter that she can use with other publishers, and if Rukeyser can have the letter ready by the time Louise meets with her in July. In the next few days, Louise will prepare and send Rukeyser a chronology of her life that she assembled from information that Rukeyser had given her and from printed information from various sources. When Louise and Rukeyser meet,Louise would like to verify that chronology and expand it if necessary. Louise will also send her additional questions that she hopes Rukeyser can answer when they next meet. If Rukeyser has no objections, Louise would like to bring a tape recorder with her which she will use with Rukeyser’s permission when it seems appropriate. As for the material that Rukeyser offered to let Louise see, Louise says it would be best to look at them in her apartment, but Rukeyser can also arrange for the library to have them available on Tuesday the 12th. The letter cuts off here, and no information about what Louise wanted to see is given. It is highly probable that the letter went on for another page
• Letter from Louise Kertesz to Muriel Rukeyser

  Original typewritten letter, dated June 17th, 1977. The letter is from Louise Kertesz to Muriel Rukeyser. Louise hopes Rukeyser is feeling well, and tells her that she mailed her a few pages on The Traces of Thomas Harlot, and that she is writing now to ask a few questions about those pages. Indiana University Press, who had Louise’s manuscript since early February, told Louise that the editor in charge went on vacation, and that the manuscript is in the hands of two or more experts. Louise will let Rukeyser know if she hears anything from them. Louise is now working on a conclusion to the manuscript which involves reading the critic on the so-called “new poetry” of postmodernism”, the particular sensibility which is unlike that of “modernism”. The more Louise reads, the more she sees that Rukeyser was writing this ”new poetry” even in her first volumes. When critics were complaining in the Forties that Rukeyser wasn’t ironic, they were measuring her works by standards that she found unsatisfactory even before Olson, Duncan, and Snyder, who are poets spoken of as the first “postmoderns” Louise had said something like that already, but she thinks she would like to close with a more pointed discussion of these matters, using critical terms which are now being applied. Letter is on the same page as a course selection sheet for a college.
• Letter from Louise Kertesz to Muriel Rukeyser

  An original (?) typewritten letter, dated September 16th, 1976. The letter is from Louise Kertesz to Muriel Rukeyser. Louise begins the letter by saying that she hurried to answer Rukeyser’s letter sent on September 11th. Louise confirms that all passages in her manuscript about Rukeyser’s son and his birth will be sent to him, whenever Ruleyser wished, and that none of the passages will be published without his consent. Louise thanks Rukeyser for answering her questions. Louise would like to discuss some of them further, to take up the ones that she sent Rukeyser at the beginning of the summer, and to talk with her about the manuscript. Louise asks when Rukeyser would prefer for Louise to come and see her. Her Christmas vacation is December 18th to January 6th. Her Thanksgiving recess is November 24th to November 28th. Louise has a long weekend from Saturday evening, October 16th to Monday evening on October 18th, or she could come to see Muriel on any Saturday or Sunday. Louise’;s preference is Christmastime, only because she will have several days without class preparations then, and so she would have time to consider the manuscript and the questions further before meeting with Rukeyser. However, Louise could come before Christmas if Rukeyser wishes. Rukeyser only has to let Louise know and she will make plans. Some sections of the letter are crossed out, with additional writing included.
• Letter from Muriel Rukeyser to Louise Kertesz

  An original, typewritten letter, dated September 11th, 1976. The letter is from Muriel Rukeyser to Louise Kertesz. Rukeyser stated that the questions that Louise sent on August 25th had arrived today, and she praises the depth of perception and the beauty of Louise’s work and Louise’s commitment to her project have convinced her to commit more to Louise’s book. Rukeyser stars that she will answer all of Louise;s questions,and that Louise;s readings are all accurate. Louise’s book was the first work that put together the meaning and Rukeyser’s poetry. Muriel hopes that Louise will come to New York soon, maybe even Christmas, if possible. Muriel also tells Louise that “The Gates”, from the book of the same name, is now in American Poetry Review. Muriel then gives Louise one, very imromat condition, that all passages of her manuscript mentioning her son and his birth be sent to him,and that none of the passages should be published without his consent. Muriel ends by saying the book seems extraordinary, and that it is not a thesis/
• Letter from Louise Kertesz to Muriel Rukeyser

  Original handwritten letter, dated August 25th, 1976. The letter is from Louise Kertesz to Muriel Rukeyser. Louise begins the letter by saying that she was happy to hear from Rukeyser and receive her letter with reviews for Body of Waking. Louise also thanks Rukeyser for her fond wishes for her and her family, and that they are almost settled in their new home,which they like. Louise is sending Rukeyser Chapter 3. Part 2 of her book under separate cover, Chapter 4, and the beginning of Chapter 5. Louise has not finished totally with Waterlily Fire, since there are several reviews she has not obtained. Louise will also have to stop working for a while, in order to prepare for her classes. Muriel had asked Louise on the phone if the manuscript was a thesis, which leads Louise to think that it might sound like one. Louise will work on it so it won't sound like a thesis. Louise had written a thesis on Thoreau and Mythology some years ago, since she has a Ph.D. in English from the UNiversity of Illinois, and she will work on the style of the manuscript when she begins to revise for coherence. Louise is sending Rukeyser a few more questions, which will be included in the envelope of this letter. Louise would like to see Rukeyser again, perhaps during Christmas vacation. Louise will continue writing while she can, beginning with The Orgy. The high point of her fall will be writing about The Gates. Louis tates that she is surely among the people who are eager to see the new poems. The letter is on the back of what looks like an essay on the other side.
• Letter from Louise Kertesz to Muriel Rukeyser

  An original, typewritten copy of a letter , dated July 12th 1976. The letter is from Louise Kertesz to Muriel Rukeyser. Louise begins the letter by saying that she hopes that Rukeyser had a good trip to California. Louise watched the Tall Ships on July 4th and was thinking about what a good view Muriel Rukeyser would have from Westbeth. Louise hopes that Muriel’s trip compensated for not being in her grandstand seat. Louise had attached the second part of Chapter 2 of her book in the envelope, with the footnotes and the first part of Chapter 3. Chapter 3 will deal with Rukeyser’s books from the 40’s. Louise had given Rukeyser the first part of Chapter 2 in rough copy,and she is leaving it that way for the time being. Louise palms to get Chapter 3 and a good part of Chapter 4 done that summer. As Louise’s manuscript grows, she sees that it needs an overhaul for coherence. Before that time, Louise hopes to talk to Rukeyser again and to get relevant biographical details. She is also trying to get Chapter 1 published in a shortened version. In Mid August, Louise and her family are moving to 17 Payson Avenue in Easthampton, Massachusetts, about 4 miles away. Louise has accepted a position on the faculty at the school that she taught at recently. It is a boarding school, and she won't have to prepare meals, so she is counting on a lot of extra time to work on her book. In any case, she will also work on the book on Spring vacations. Sara’s lump seems to be resolving itself according to the surgeons, and now they are expecting it to just go away. Louise ends the letter by sending Rukeyser her best wishes,and she hopes that she is well. A postscript says that the second part of the letter consists of questions.
• Letter from Muriel Rukeyser to Louise Kertesz

  An original, typewritten letter, dated July 7th, 1975. The letter is from Muriel Rukeyser to Louise Kertesz. In the letter, Rukeyser thanks Louise for sending Muriel her essay on Thoreau. Rukeyser also provides an answer to Louise’s question,and suggests that she should write to M.L. Rosenthal; at N.Y.U. and ask to borrow a copy of his thesis. Muriel ends the letter by saying that she is enclosing a copy of American Poetry Review.
• Letter from Muriel Rukeyser to Louise Kertesz

  Original handwritten letter, dated October 10th, 1975. The letter is from Muriel Rukeyser to Louise Kertesz. Rukeyser thanks Louise for reading her work, Theory of Flight, with the deepest understanding , and for the grace of your work. Rukeyser states that she will answer Louise’s questions, and asks if she has sent them. Rukeyser had just come back from Korea and is trying hard with P.E.N. for Kim Chi Ha. Muriel ends the letter by saying that Louise’s book means a lot to her.
• Letter from Louise Kertesz to Muriel Rukeyser

  An original, typewritten letter, dated April 4th, 1976. The letter is from Louise Kertesz to Muriel Rukeyser. Louise begins the letter by saying that she was happy to hear Rukeyser read her poems in Worcester, and to see an audience respond to the poems like she did. She was moved by her poems, and was sad that she had to leave at 5 o'clock.. Louise had spent the day there, expecting that Rukeyser would be there in the morning, but had to leave early since her family expected her home at 7 pm for bedtime. Louise asks Rukeyser to tell her when she will read the poems again, so she can plan ahead of time to be ether. Louise then says that her family is planning to spend her vacation, which will last 4 to 5 days, with the kids and her mother in New York City in June. Louise’s mother was an immigrant, and in the 1920’a, she was married on the Taormina docked in N.Y., and she has always loved visiting the standardards, and the Statue of LIberty. If Rukeyser will be reading her poems in New York, Louise wants to be there. Louise will phone Rukeyser before they come to see whether or not Rukeyser can spare them some time. It would give Louise and Chris, her husband, great pleasure if they could take her to dinner. Louise will enclose questions with this letter. Louise states that Muriel was very kind to suggest taped replies. If Rukeyser would prefer, they can wait until a meeting in mid -une. Louise then thanks Rukeyser for her warm encouragement, and that she is very deeply committed to her work. Louise will be teaching Moby Dick for the next several weeks, but she is teaching Rukeyser’s works Breaking Open and The Speed of Darkness in another class. Louise ends the letter by saying that she is hoping that Rukeyser is doing well, and that she looked wonderful yesterday, and hopes that she had a good spring. Incomplete copy of letter on the back of the sheet.
• Photocopy of previous letter

  A photocopy of the previous letter.
• Letter from Louise Kertesz to Muriel Rukeyser

  An original, typewritten letter, dated April 15th, 1975. The letter is from Louise Kertesz to Muriel Rukeyser. Louise states that it has been wonderful talking with Rukeyser on the telephone. Louise has been intensely involved with Rukeyser’s work, and Louise has been with her work during her hours of reading and even throughout the day when she watches her children do chores. Louise sent Rukeyser samples of her writing. The book reviews are from Northampton’s Daily Hampshire Gazette. The long article, which Louise doesn't expect Rukeyser to read fully or even send back to her, is intended to show that Louise can do scholarly work. It is an excerpt from her dissertation. Louise does not apologize for it, but the style is often stiff because she was bent on academic demonstration. The work that Louise proposes to Rukeyser’s writings will be through and documented, but Louise plans to write in a style that reflects her deep personal response to her work. Louise also sent Rukeyser Stephen Stepanchev’s review of Waterlily Fire. The bibliography had misled Louise into thinking it was a long study of Waterlily Fire. Once again, this gives Louise evidence of the need for a substantial study of Rukeyser's writings. Louise asks if Rukeyser will give her Sylvia Bowman’s address so that she can write to her immediately about her project, or does Muriel think she should wait until she has a chapter or outline to send. Louise has been writing to New York University to try to get them to send our local library copy id M.L. Rosenthal’s 1949 thesis entitled “Chief Poets of the American Depression: Contributions of Kenneth Fearing, Horace Gregory, and Muriel Rukeyser to Contemporary American Poetry”. Louise had offered to buy a copy of the dissertation, but she hadn't had any response from the English Department or from the reference department of the Bobst Library at New York University.Louise asks what she can do to see the dissertation. Louise also asks Muriel Rukeyser to send her a copy of American Poetry Review in which her work is featured in an article. Louise will send it back to Rukeyser. No library around Louise carries that publication. At the same time. Louise would appreciate it if Rukeyser returned some newspaper clippings. Louise ends the letter by thanking Rukeyser for her encouraging telephone calls. Louise wants to give her very best to that study because she admires Rukeyser’s work and her vision, and also due to the fact that Rukeyser’s response has heightened her enthusiasm.
• Photocopy of previous letter

  A photocopy of the previous letter.
• Letter from Louise Kertesz to Muriel Rukeyser

  Original, very fragile, typewritten letter, dated March 18th, 1975. The letter is from Louise Kertesz to Muriel Rukeyser. While Louise was preparing a talk on contemporary women poets several months ago, she was surprised to find that no substantial study had been done on Muriel Rukeyser’s work. Since then, Louise had been reading her poems, from Theory of Flight on, and Louise is engrossed in the biography of Gibbs. Louise has compiled a long bibliography of the reviews of Rukeyser's work and of the studies of Rukeyser’s work in journals and in books such as Gregory and Zaturenska’s A History of American Poetry, Rosenthal’s The New Poets, Beach’s Obsessive Images. For Louise, reading through this material, which was helpful at times but far from satisfying, compelled her to write a book-length study of Muriel Rukeyser’s work. Louise asks Muriel if she knows whether or not anyone has been working on a study already, Rukeyser’s account of Josiah Gibbs Sr. 's experience with Gesenius prompted Louise to ask Rukeyser. Louise is a former college English teacher at home with two small children. Louise holds a PhD, earned in 1970, from Illinois. Contemporary poetry by American Women is Louise’s main interest. Louise would like to devote her scholarly energies to demonstrate the vitality of Rukeyser’s work and give it its proper place in literary history. The task that Louise is setting for herself is a great one, which is to understand the development of Rukeyser’s work in its historical, political, and philosophical contexts and in a context in which the work of women poets is not slighted. Louise will learn a lot, and hopes to teach it well. If Rukeyser’;s says that no one else has undertaken a study of her work, Louise will begin her own. Louise ends the letter by saying that she hopes that Rukeyser will receive questions from Louise as the work progresses.
• Question sheet regarding "City of Monuments", "The Book of the Dead", and "Reading Time"

  Original question sheet, undated. The questions are about “City of Monuments”, “The Book of the Dead” and “Reading Time”. Rukeyser’s answers are stapled to the question sheet.
• Three-page letter from Muriel Rukeyser to Louise Kertesz

  Original typewritten three page letter answering Louise Kertesz’s questions from Muriel Rukeyser. Answers are about On Face, and Breaking Open.
• Question sheet titled "Questions 5 July 1977"

  A three page question sheet labeled “Questions 5 July 1977”. The page contains questions about Speed of Darkness, someone called Matthiessen, whether or not Rukeyser was writing poetry around WWII, all the details about Rukeyser’s teaching experience, such as when and where she was a teacher, and Rukeyser’s actions in 1947 and the 1950’s, among others. Louise has written notes on all three pages of the question sheet.
• Letter from Louise Kertesz to Muriel Rukeyser

  An original, two page letter, dated June 27th, 1977. From Louise Kertesz to Muriel Rukeyser. Louise had written Rukeyser to send “The Chronology of Important Dates” that she would like to verify with Rukeyser the next time they meet. Louise had also sent her many questions on sheets enclosed in the envelope. In her “Chronology of Important Dates’, Louise would like to include the date of any of Rukeyser’s awards, significant changes in residence, or Rukeyser’s work with organizations such as the Writers’ and Teachers’ Collaborative. Louise had also found Denise Levertov’s poem dedicated to Rukeyser. Louise has also been reading Levertov’s work Sorrow Dance, and had noted the “unknown”, the “waking” and the “transformation”, and also the attempt to see “Paradise in the dust”. In Levertov’s work, there were also focuses on the sacred body and anti-war emotions. Levertov's poems shared the spirit and vocabulary of Muriel’s. Louise asks Muriel if she could get in touch with Levertov and find out whether or not Levertov would be receptive if Louise wrote Levertov about her poetry. If so, Louise asks Rukeyser if she could give her an address. Louise had also read Gary Snyder, and his work Earth House Hold and Turtle Island. Snyder is associated with the ‘Beat’ poets, and he uses Buddhist terms, but his vision of the world as one living creature, or “the body of the soul”, and of “singing/the proof/the proof of the power within” is another indication to Louise that what the “Beats” started singing in the late Fifties had already appeared in Rukeyser’s poetry in the 30’s. Louise hopes Muriel will talk with her about this when they meet. Rukeyser’s letter had arrived the same day, which listed the names of people who she knew in San Francisco. Louise thanks her for her letter, and for writing to Bernard Perry. Louise also says that Rukeyser’s statement for the Copernicus award was wonderful. As for Rukeyser’s question, which was, “Do you want to ask another press?”, Louise replies that she has no experience in these matters, so she is trying to hear from Indiana after sending them an impatient letter, trying to contact a literary agent and have him handle the manuscript if he wants to (the same literary agent had plated two books on film for a friend of hers), and finally, waiting for Rukeyser to talk to McGraw-Hill about her manuscript, as Rukeyser said she might do. Louise will follow the path that is available. If Rukeyser could suggest another press or agent, Louise would look into those as well. Since Indiana is taking so long and does not seem to care very much, Louise feels justified in choosing another press if she can, even before Indiana answers. So if an agent takes Louise on, she will let him do his work. Louise ends the letter by saying that she will write again in a few days with more questions for Rukeyser and her meeting in July. Louise hopes Muriel continues to do well. There is a sentence of handwriting on page two of the letter.
• Stapled sheet titled "Questions June 10, 1977"

  A typewritten, original copy of a stapled sheet called ‘Questions June 10, 1977’ . There are fourteen questions, and the first question is, “Who is “Mr. Crystal” These are questions about ‘Breaking Open’ and ‘The Speed of Darkness’. Louise has handwritten some notes by each of the questions.
• Paper titled "Draft of answers to questions of August 5th, 1976"

  A typewritten, original copy of a paper called ‘Draft of answers to questions of August 5th, 1976’, which was stapled onto the question page,. Written on with a green marker or pen.Presumably, these are Muriel Rukeyser’s answers to the questions.
• Two question pages

  Two original, typewritten question pages, dated August 25th,. 1976. The first question on this page reads, ‘Are any of the Mexican poems in Beast in View addressed to Octavio Paz?’ Page is written on with a red pen. Some of the questions are checkmarked.
• Notes page, "A Poet of Eros"

  Note page, undated, labeled ‘A Poet of Eros’
• Two pages of original handwritten questions

  Two pages of original, handwritten questions. The first page is written on with black, blue, and red pen. One of the eight questions on the first page is ‘You do indeed write all night long?’ The second page is written with black and blue pens. The first question on this page is, ‘Was the film ever made?’
• Question sheet

  Another question sheet, labeled ‘Questions’ and ‘Never Answered’ A question in this sheet reads, ‘I would like to see Houdini and All the Way Home. May I have xeroxes?’ The sheet is written on with red and black pen.
• Three-page question sheet

  Original three page question sheet, dated August 25th, 1977. Questions include, ‘Did Einstein see the manuscript (or part of it) of Willard Gibbs before he declined to write a preface to your book?’ and ‘How much did you know about Bruno before you wrote “Theory of Flight”? Can you tell me about a paper you wrote in college about Bruno?’. Someone, presumably Muriel Rukeyser, has written answers to some of the questions in blue pen.
• Undated notes

  Notes, undated, titled ‘High School + College’. Contains questions about Muriel’s poetry and any links it has to her high school and college days.
• Letter from Muriel Rukeyser to Louise Kertesz

  Original typewritten letter, dated February 24rth. 1978. From Muriel Rukeyser to Louise Kertesz. Muriel thanks Louise for her letter and what she says about her preface. The letter says that Muriel will be at Mount Holyoke for the two days of Glascock judging, and that she would love to see Louise during that time. Muriel is being driven to Boston as the event ends on a Saturday. The letter ends with Muriel saying that she hasn't heard a word about Louise’s book.
• Sheet of notes, potential poem

  Sheet of notes. Undated. May contain a poem.
• Sheet of notes

  Sheet of notes. Undated. Written in cursive. XEROX written in all caps and circled.
• Sheet of notes

  Sheet of notes. Undated. List of names and includes the phrase "XEROX + take along".
• Sheet of notes with names of people

  Sheet of notes. Undated. Has names of people, such as Jane Cooper and Kenneth Rexroth.
• Four pages of handwritten notes

  Four pages of handwritten notes, original copy. Unknown date. Numbered. May be answers to a question sheet.
• Envelope from Muriel Rukeyser to Louise Kertesz

  Envelope, dated July 14th, 1975. From Muriel Rukeyser to Louise Kertesz. No letter inside.
• Envelope from Muriel Rukeyser to Louise Kertesz

  Envelope, dated October 12th (?) 1976 (?). From Muriel Rukeyser to Louise Kertesz. No letter inside.
• Envelope from Muriel Rukeyser to Louise Kertesz

  Envelope, dated June 24th, 1977. From Muriel Rukeyser to Louise Kertesz. No letter inside.
• Envelope from Muriel Rukeyser to Louise Kertesz

  Envelope, dated April 25th, 1976. From Muriel Rukeyser to Louise Kertesz. No letter inside.
• Eleven pages of handwritten notes

  Eleven pages of handwritten notes, unknown date. Seems to be written by Muriel Rukeyser.
• Letter from Muriel Rukeyser to Louise Kertesz

  An original handwritten two page letter to Louise Kertesz from Muriel Rukeyser, dated August 9th, 1976. Muriel states that whatever happened to Louise’s daughter is wonderful news, and sends good wishes to Louise and her family. Monica McCall had found a copy of Body of Waking'' in her office, along with a copy of “Houdini”. She is willing to let Louise use them. The second part of the letter states that Muriel will be in London from the 19th to September 3rd at a poetry conference.
• Three pages of handwritten notes "Tape Jan. '68"

  Three pages of handwritten notes, dated January of 1968, unknown day. The notes are called “Tape Jan. ‘68”. They may be a transcription of a cassette tape. May be written by Muriel Rukeyser.
• Letter from Clive Bush to Louise Kertesz

  An original, typewritten letter, dated March 2nd, 1981. The letter is from Clive Bush to Louise Kertesz. Clive begins the letter by saying that he has meant to write to Louise after reading her book on Rukeyser, but that time and various other pressures have interfered. Bush enjoyed the book, and he was interested in the reception of Rukeyser;s work and was relieved that Louise had not gone overboard with abstractions in her commentary. Bush thinks that it is a good book and that would open up further interest in Rukeyser’s work, but that it won't “fit” with the various obsessions of the Academy. He does hope that the book succeeds in spite of that. Clive also requests that Louise helps one of his students form Warwick University who has decided to travel the United States this summer in the hopes of meeting women writers and interviewing them Since Muriel had died, he had no one to turn to for advice about her, and he asks if the student can write to her for information about Rukeyser. The student’s name is Sarah Barclay. Bush is currently a visiting fellow at Yale for the year, and he is trying to finish a book on Henry Adams, William James. And Gertrude Stein. He was also planning on traveling this summer and he hopes to spend some time meeting and interviewing some poets himself in July and August. He also may spend a month teaching at Naropa. He has no idea where Farmington Hill is but it seems on the way to Colorado. He wanted to meet Louise and talk about Muriel and other poets if a time and place could be arranged during this summer.
• Letter from Clive Bush to Louise KErtesz

  Original, typewritten letter, dated March 10th 1981, from Clive Bush to Louise Kertesz. Bush thanks Louise for her letter, and for agreeing to help Sarah (no last name). Bush states that everything that he has read about Detroit is worrisome, but he understands that Louise wants to get out of the suburbs, which he states that Muriel stated that nothing ever happens in the suburbs. Bush wonders when Americans will realize that “...you can’t for ever “move out” from your crimes and mistakes”. Bush states that he visited Wayne State University in 1988, and that he started with someone who had visited his University, Warwick, in England, the year before. His name was John Reed, and Bush wonders if he was still there. Bush has written to Modern Literature Review to see if they would be interested in a review of Louise’s book. Bush will let Louise know what happened. He says that basically academic publishers and few others give a damn about pushing books, and soon there will be no academic books of merit at all. Bush states that his book,which was extensively reviewed, didn't sell. He will write one more book,and then spend the rest of his energy on lithographs and poetry. Bush ends the letter by saying that he will be visiting his brother in Chicago some time in early July, and that Detroit is five hours from the bus in Chicago. He wonders if Louise will be in Detroit at that time.
• Paperclipped collection of one envelope and two letters

  A paperclipped collection of one envelope and two letters. The envelope is dated March 2nd, 1981. It is to Louise Kertesz from Clive Bush.