Letter from Boston

Elizabeth Wurtzel

By MASAKO YAMADA

I initially heard about Elizabeth Wurtzel several years ago, when she wrote her first novel "Prozac Nation." It was a novel that was heralded as a successor to Sylvia Plath's "The Bell Jar." I had read, and enjoyed, "The Bell Jar" as a teenager, but I wasn't particularly interested in reading another loose autobiography about a beautiful, brilliant, suicidal young woman. So I didn't read this book.

Now that I've heard her speak, however, I have to admit that I'm interested in what she has written. Wurtzel has recently been in the headlines again for her new book, "Bitch," and as part of her promotion tour, she came to the Boston University bookstore.

Having just read a two-page article on Wurtzel in Newsweek, I was eager to hear her speak. Perhaps I wanted to be trendy. Or, perhaps, I wanted to be a part of the group of critics that have condemned her. I haven't read either of her books. But I had heard so much about her self-absorbed style of writing, her unabashed use of her sex appeal, her drug addiction and her extraordinary gifts (Harvard student, staff member for The New Yorker, writer of a best-selling novel, model-like looks), that I assumed she had no substance underneath all the hype. Perhaps I wanted to believe this.

I can't claim anything about her writing skills, but I must say that I found her fascinating as a speaker. She didn't lecture us, but rather read passages from her book and gave us little explanations on how she felt about them. It was like listening to a friend gossip.

Some might claim that opinions alone aren't enough to write a book (especially a literary or an academic book), but I found her gossip interesting. She spoke of many hot females who have been in the news — Nicole Simpson, Amy Fisher, Alanis Morissette, Hillary Clinton — and about what makes them intriguing.

I didn't find her so-called self-absorption offensive at all. If anything, I liked that she explicitly laid down many of her comments as opinion, not as fact. She said, "I think it's fine if Hillary wants to support Bill, but I don't understand why people think she's this new feminist first lady. She's the same. All first ladies have dealt with children's issues.

"First ladies don't get paid. I don't think future first men will quit their jobs to have teas." Although it looks like a bitter comment on paper, it sounded reasonable in person. I think it has something to do with her very open way of speaking.

She heavily criticized a book called "The Rules" (a popular dating manual that gives women time-tested advice, such as, "Never call a man first," and "Make him pay for everything."). But she acknowledged that the rules are probably sound advice for a certain type of woman who wants an engagement ring from a certain type of man.

Her open character carried over to the question and answer period as well. Interestingly, most of the audience members were women, but one of the first people to ask her a question was a man. He told her that he had loved her first book and an article she'd written in George, but that he felt a bit uncomfortable saying so, given her critical tone toward men. She very casually asked him if he had a girlfriend, and he sheepishly answered, "No." I doubt he wanted to reveal that much about himself (especially since he was the one asking the question), but it was as if he were forced to tell the truth.

She later went on to say that the editor of that George article was the guy to whom she lost her virginity. I was amazed by the openness of this talk and I think the audience members were too. Cynics might say that we were all being manipulated by a charismatic, attractive woman — but I think we were moved by something more vulnerable, and more real.

Shukan ST: May 22, 1998

(C) All rights reserved