Jane

>I found the article fascinating. I knew Pamela Travers in two roles (other than her MP writing, which I had adored as a child, a great deal due to the fact that the main Banks child is named Jane.)

I wrote a lot of pieces--mostly poetry--for the first issues of PARABOLA, the magazine she began with Joseph Campbell. Got to meet her at various parties. Imperious--yes. But very knowledgable.

She was also godmother to a friend of mine, and when she was Writer in Residence at Smith, we went to one of her At Homes. It was hardly as described in the article. She was again imperious, ran the dicussions like a martinet, bristled when one Smith student said she hadn't read the books, but had seen the MP movie. "Then you have nothing to say," was PT's reply.

However, my husband and I were there with our new infant daughter, who began to whimper to be nursed. We rose to leave and PT insisted I go into her bedroom, sat me down on her rocking chair, covered me with a laprobe, and admonished "Now you are NOT to leave till that child has been happily fed."
Mary Poppins indeed.

Life Magazine was there photographing, and if you look at the pictures, one shows PT waving something around on her finger. It is my baby's teething ring.

Jane

Posted : Dec 29, 2005 07:18

DesignBuff

>I saw the London production of Mary Poppins. It was, as Julie Andrews noted, 'darker than the film.' More energy and attention devoted to Mary's magical powers. Mary is less saccharine; bordering on smug and self-satisfied.

The dishware comes to life. As does the entire set; theatrical alternative to animation.

Posted : Dec 27, 2005 06:19