When I heard Anna Marie Tendler was coming out with a memoir, I knew what I wanted to write. I knew I was going to write about it. A memoir from an incredibly successful artist about the time leading up to the creation of what has become their seminal work? How could I resist? So I started reading it and two biographies to round out my concept. The idea was so simple, and I thought, “surely this’ll be an easy one to knock out.”
And now I’ve read it.
Oooooh boy.
Okay okay. We can do this.
Like many, my introduction to Anna Marie Tendler was through her marriage to John Mulaney. I love stand up comedy. I watch it on a near daily basis. My family quotes stand up on a near daily basis.
My sister and I quote Mulaney constantly, my personal favorite being to send my sister the above quote paired with an image of a bat or opossum (she’s very petite). I will frequently shout, “NOT FUNNYYYY” to her. We’ve even played “What’s New Pussycat?” over and over and over again to prank my father.
But for all that I’m a fan of John Mulaney, I’ve always liked Anna Marie Tendler significantly more. Like me, she collects and wears vintage. I adored her lampshades, desperately wanting to save up and buy one for myself. I love Anna Marie Tendler because I could see a lot of myself in her, and I adored seeing a couple where the husband adored his wife so much and the wife seemed a bit like me. It was almost validating, in a sick parasocial selfish sense.
Anyone that knows John Mulaney knows that a huge part of his humor was to talk about how much he loved his wife. There were countless tiktoks of girls putting on makeup to the sound of John Mulaney’s comedy talking about how the ‘bar is SO LOW’ and he LOVES his wife.
We all know where this is going.
When news broke out about Tendler and Mulaney separating, I took it as a personal blow. How could they do this to me? Like I said, my perspective was purely selfish. I always thought I was immune to the concept of parasocial relationships. Turns out I’m just as much of an idiot as people mad at Chris Evans for getting married.
What followed, for anyone not tuned into this side of celeb drama (if you can call it that) was the discovery that Mulaney was then seeing Olivia Munn, who then became pregnant, and Mulaney would go on television to give an interview where he set a very strict narrative. In this narrative, Mulaney definitely didn’t cheat and all of this happened after his divorce and after his recovery from drug addiction.
John Mulaney is always the one to define the timeline and relationship. We do not have an interview on television of Anna Marie Tendler giving her timeline of events, or her experiences through the divorce. We don’t even have her timeline about the nuances of their relationship. There is no video of Anna telling us about her excursion to Best Buy with Mulaney. What we had, instead, was her newest artist venture that cemented her in the hearts of so many. We have her photography.
Rooms in the First House is in many ways Tendler’s side of the story, using symbolism to give us clues into her psyche and emotional state following the very public divorce with Mulaney.
Men Have Called Her Crazy is Tendler’s tell-all memoir about her time institutionalized for self-harm, depression, anxiety, disordered eating, and suicidal ideation. The book is written with the understanding that the readers is aware of the marriage between Tendler and Mulaney and it’s unfortunate end, but doesn’t directly address it.
In her series Rooms in the First House, Tendler did a portrait of herself posed as Anne Boleyn, a portrait she has declared she will never sell. I was fascinated by this, and decided that as I read the memoir, I was going to also read biographies on Anne Boleyn and find that connection to write about here.
And then I finished it…
I’m not one to write book reviews, so I’m not sure how to approach this. It’s not like I’m here to give a star rating or anything like that. The main thing I can tell you is after reading it I felt gross. There were a few lines at the end that made me close the book and walk away. I was so frustrated by the ickiness that I put on an audiobook that I knew would make me laugh from a British comedian. (It worked)
It’s hard to articulate my feelings on this. I can go into Anne Boleyn, especially now that I’m a Tudor nerd and have bought multiple books on the Tudors because of this, but I kept having this nagging feeling. I knew what was happening to me. When a book affects me negatively, then I enter into a reading slump. This would not do. I wasn’t having it. So I forced myself to keep reading. I tried to push through it, debated just not writing about it and pretending I never read it.
Why the hell was I so bothered by this?
Before I go into this chunk of a post, I want to first admit that I am my own worst enemy here. I’m going to make some points, sure, but I don’t want anything to be taken super seriously. I mean, I’m literally going to be talking about the Tudors. But I think it’s important to acknowledge that I took my opinions on the book personally because of my perception that in some weird way I was friends with Tendler. And I’m definitely not. I adore her work, but I’m not in her world. Like I said, I thought I was above parasocial relationships, that being in my thirties I wasn’t about that, but I realized I was wrong. So yes, that factors into a bit of it.
My intent was to explore the book in conjunction with her art, to find where they intersect. I could easily do this with Marina Abramovic’s memoir, but I wanted something that was present, something breathing and alive, and Tendler was the perfect artist for that job. Or so I thought.
Reading about Tendler’s time institutionalized was fascinating. It was the aftermath that I struggled to connect with. It wasn’t until nearly two weeks later when I was reading a biography on Andy Warhol that I realized what it felt like. If that connection seems odd, you’re not wrong. I make really weird connections sometimes. But before we dive into that, let’s look at some art, shall we?
Anne Boleyn may seem an odd comparison to Anna Marie Tendler, until one looks at the finer details. I have to thank Tendler for getting me on the Anne Boleyn bandwagon, because now I have a newfound knowledge of Tudor England that came right upon watching My Lady Jane. Even Antonia Fraser (arguably my favorite biographer) has written about the Tudors.
Her self portrait does not aim for historical accuracy, which Tendler could no doubt master. We find out in her memoir that she’s able to identify a vintage coat someone wears from afar, and she was working on her Masters in Fashion and Textile History. The post on Instagram is labeled with the following:
“The Moost Happi 🌸 Anno 2021 (portrait at 36 years of age)”
The reference is directed at Anne Boleyn. Making references is the magic of Tendler’s work. She leaves clues and bits and pieces for you to dig into, to niggle your brain. Nothing is quite overt unless you’re in on it, as if we are friends and sharing an inside joke. This quote was an inscription on a portrait medal of Queen Anne Boleyn in 1534. It read:
“A.R. The Most Happi. Anno 1534.”
We do not know the exact age Anne Boleyn was at this time, only that she was officially queen for one year. She may have been in her late twenties or early thirties. This is vital because while Anne Boleyn was at her happiest, having finally achieved her goal of being queen after years of trying to secure an annulment between Henry VIII and Catherine of Aragorn, she lost many childbearing years.
Anne Boleyn was not popular like she is now. Catherine of Aragorn was beloved, a Spanish princess that had earned her place as queen in the eyes of the people and was so loved even though she hadn’t borne them a male heir. There was a lot of tension in this time, what with the War of the Roses not being too far off in memory, Martin Luther starting to turn on the Catholic Church, and some anxiety at the concept of a woman leading England. There had been one queen, and that didn’t go over well. Henry VIII’s obsession with having a son was largely due to his anxiety that a daughter would not be able to handle growing tensions and potential civil war. So this wasn’t a light matter to the tudors. (though still sexist)
For Anne to win over the hearts of her people, she needed to father a son. She didn’t. Of course, her daughter would go on to be one of the most revered queens in British history, if not the most revered, but they didn’t know that yet.
Catherine of Aragorn was the kind of woman Henry VIII expected of a wife. She was passive, soft mannered, feminine, and very submissive. At least, as long as he wasn’t trying to annul their marriage she was. While I don’t laud the musical for accuracy, I do think the way SIX portrayed Catherine in her solo song is pretty spot on.
Anne Boleyn was confident, brash, excitable, and not afraid to be tough. She would not stand down from Henry VIII, and was very involved. Their marriage was explosive and passionate, Anne becoming less popular not just because of her station that seemed to the eyes of those around her as unearned, but she was not afraid to meddle and hurt her enemies. Anne Boleyn intended to be involved in politics. She had opinions, wasn’t afraid to criticize Henry to his face and courtiers, and would not remain meek and quiet like Catherine. But perhaps most frustrating to Henry VIII was the fact that Anne was openly opposed to him having affairs.
“[Anna Marie Tendler] recurred throughout the stand-up routines of her ex-husband, the comedian and former Saturday Night Live writer John Mulaney, as a loving but sharp-edged caricature: a “dynamite 5-foot Jewish bitch,” the “Alpha” of the household, the person who planned their wedding and reputedly harassed Mulaney until he committed to her. In a 2018 episode of Comedians in Cars Getting Coffee, Jerry Seinfeld and Mulaney go rug shopping, supposedly at Tendler’s instruction, and Seinfeld’s disapprobation at being sent on an errand by someone’s wife cuts through the segment. “Do you like doing this?” he asks Mulaney in disbelief. The subtext throughout is that Tendler is a harridan, a domineering scold.” - Sophie Gilbert for the Atlantic (emphasis added)
There is some speculation that Anne’s feelings about being a mistress and Henry having mistresses is because Anne Boleyn’s sister Mary was a mistress to the king and she felt bad for how Mary was discarded. This seems hardly likely since she personally banished Mary for marrying a man of lowly rank without her permission as queen. I would argue it’s a mix of her own ambition and maybe something simpler, Anne wanted fidelity.
Prior to their marriage and just as their courtship started, Anne Boleyn refused to sleep with Henry. She didn’t want to be a mistress, but a wife. In her frustration, prior to their marriage, she reminded him that in the time between them meeting and getting married she ‘lost her youth,’ AKA her much of her child bearing years. (note: she did announce her pregnancy with Elizabeth right before they married to seal the deal so evidently that was either immaculate conception or they were sleeping together at last.)
In essence, Anne was always going to play a losing game unless she had a son. When Henry VIII took an interest in her, there was no one who could really compete. She was not married, a bit of an issue as Henry frequently sought affairs with married women, and she could not say no. It’s a bit like the Bethsheba Paradox, where she is a woman with no power being pursued by a man of the highest power whom she cannot say no to, but to whom saying yes to will damn her. But saying no could also be disastrous.
Ultimately, her ambition mixed with Henry’s intense longing for her were what led to Henry VIII’s ‘Great Matter.’ Frankly I’m impressed she could string him along for so long. Evidently, though Anne Boleyn gets her way, it’s short lived. She was only queen for 1000 days.
Where do we see Anna Marie Tendler in this? Honestly, I’m not surprised at the connection. There’s a quick wit to Anne Marie Tendler, an intelligence that’s ready to pounce and surprise you even in her most delicate moments in the memoir. Anne Boleyn was not much different. There’s a physical similarity as well. Anne Boleyn was skinny and petite, her dark hair and dark eyes would challenge those she was conversing with. We see this same physicality in Tendler, the petite brunette with dark intelligent eyes.
What I find most haunting in the photograph is her eyes. How can you not feel the radiating heartbreak in Tendler’s eyes? (and to think a past boyfriend called her photography ‘performative.’) It’s not mere aesthetics that has Anna Marie Tendler referring to Anne Boleyn’s most famous portrait (that we’re not even sure is accurate by the way, since we have no surviving images from her lifetime. The portrait referenced was done in 1550, well after her death in 1536.).
This portrait was done after Henry VIII got his one wish: a son from Jane Seymour. And, in an almost scarily similar circumstance, Mulaney left Tendler for Olivia Munn whom he has a child with. I do wonder if his decision to announce his marriage to Munn around the exact same time that Tendler’s memoir came out was coincidental or not. I like to believe it’s not, and Mulaney was just excited to announce his new family.
Mulaney has had the first and last word on everything. Mulaney gets to stand on stage with his charismatic personality and make a joke about ‘getting mixed reviews’ at the birth of his son. Mulaney gets to firmly insist on a timeline, joke about an intervention from his famous friends, and pose with Olivia Munn while holding a Golden Globe.
So we see that Tendler is Anne Boleyn, Mulaney is Henry VIII, and Olivia Munn is Jane Seymour. That may seem harsh, and I admittedly like John Mulaney way too much to compare him to Henry VIII, but we as the viewer understand this when we look at Anna’s portrait. We know exactly what she’s saying when she cannot use the words we want to hear for our own parasocial enjoyment.
In Men Have Called Her Crazy, Tendler’s words are careful but full of fury. She’s clearly angry, and does little to hide it. It permeates her writing, impossible to ignore. Her vitriol is aimed at men, and she’s not shy about this. By contrast, she’s shy about her marriage and only eludes to it (such as discussing how the last year was the ‘worst of her life,’ or that she attended meetings for people married to a person battling addiction). We don’t know if her hatred of men is about Mulaney because he’s completely absent from the text. We just know she really really really hates men.
It’s not that she isn’t necessarily justified. To say she isn’t is to deny the Agnes Varda quote about being an angry feminist, and I’m not in the habit of denying the genius of Agnes Varda.
I cannot connect this hatred to Anne Boleyn. For one, she was in no position to state such things if she felt them. One has to remember her circumstances and the time period in question. But remember how I said I was reading that Andy Warhol biography when I realized something? How the book left me feeling icky? Let’s go there. Let’s sink our teeth in.
See, I was reading about Warhol being shot by Valerie Solanas. That’s when it hit me. Valeria Solanas! SCUM! That’s what it reminded me of! To be clear, Valerie Solanas and Anna Marie Tendler are nothing alike. Like, they maybe have two things in common MAX. But just follow along, okay?
Valeria Solanas is, if you ask me, a tragic figure. Yes, she did wrong. She shot Andy Warhol, somewhat unprompted. He even complimented her right before she shot him. She intended to kill him. She intended to kill a lot of people. Well, not people. Men.
Valerie Solanas was born in New Jersey on April 9th, 1936. Starting from a young age, she was repeatedly molested by her father. This was never dealt with head on, so it continued. Instead, it was swept under the rug. I can tell you from working in law that even if it was dealt with, as in brought to court, that doesn’t mean it would have resulted in jail time for her father. In one case I had, where a similar circumstance happened to a client, the father was convicted and given two years of jail time for molesting his young daughter. And that was in the 2020s. This would have been in the 1930s/40s. So that gives us some perspective on Valerie’s situation.
Her parents divorced, but that did not make Valerie’s life easier. From a young age (no doubt a repercussion of her sexual assault at the hands of her father), Valerie started acting out. It got to the point where she behaved with violence towards others and was sent to live with her grandparents. Her grandfather, according to Valerie, was a drunk who would repeatedly hit her.
At age 15, she moved out of her grandparents house and was homeless. Valerie would become pregnant and give her child away for adoption. Despite these obstacles, Valerie still managed to graduate high school even with being away. In fact, she would go on to get a bachelors in Psychology (one of the few things she has in common with Tendler). She was also a lesbian and not at all shy about her queerness in 1950s/60s America.
In New York, she was once again homeless and resorted to prostitution as a means of income. It was during this time that she wrote her play “Up Your Ass” and tried to convince Andy Warhol to produce it. “Up Your Ass” was so controversial Andy Warhol thought it was a trap, and basically strung her along with it before eventually losing it (the manuscript was found in 2014). She tried to get it published (prior to meeting Warhol) and the publisher not only denied her, but they refused to mail it back to her out of fear of ‘offending the postal service.’
While she waited on Warhol to produce her play, Valerie would set to work on her most famous piece, SCUM Manifesto. SCUM stands for Society for Cutting Up Men. SCUM manifesto, which you can read and even purchase by the way, is a short piece (what with it being a manifesto to begin with). It details Valerie’s radical feminist beliefs that come down to women being superior to men and why men must be killed. I wish I were kidding. It’s not equality or misogyny, but a secret third thing (kill all the men because they’re just aborted women).
I’d been thinking about Valerie Solanas a lot recently as she keeps popping up on Hot Lit Girl accounts with women reading and praising her for being “ahead of her time.” So I read it. Why not? I already read two biographies for this piece. What’s one more
First things first, Valerie Solanas was not ahead of her time. It’s misandric garbage, though readable and entertaining garbage. She argues that science can stop aging and make people (namely ‘females’) immortal. But essentially men are the reason why this hasn’t been thoroughly studied and made public. I… Yeah I’m pretty confident that’s not true.
Now and then she does say something that’s poignant, and one has to remember she wrote this in the 1960s predating many social justice movements that have shaped our society to this day. So yes, there’s something there. I can’t deny it. But it’s also so far beyond neurotic and outlandish that it’s not surprising it was almost published in its day because it was viewed as satire. It feels satirical. (Solanas was paranoid and rescinded her rights, instead resorting to self-publishing. Her paranoia eventually led to her downfall, which is covered with great care by Olivia Laing in The Lonely City)
Anna Marie Tendler doesn’t share this history. In her memoir, she details her dating history, which does venture into uncomfortable territory. Her refusal to mention or directly discuss Mulaney may have been a deliberate choice or against her will. It’s one of the most remarked aspects of the book in reviews, largely betraying the readership as seeking celeb gossip rather than her story of recovery. I don’t know if she could talk about Mulaney or not, nor do I think it would make much of a difference. This is about the only tidbit I found:
I’d be remiss not to mention the notable absence in your book. A lot of people are going to be reading between the lines.
I was just like, I didn’t need to talk about it to write a great book. I didn’t have to rely on the one thing that people may have known about me. And I also wanted to write a story that people could relate to. When you write a book, you get to choose what’s in there. - From an interview in The Guardian with Betsy Reed
The most alarming story Tendler shares is of a relationship with a much older man while she is still a teenager and with whom she has sex with for the first time. She states the experience more or less matter-of-factly, and while institutionalized admits that while it was consensual, she is bothered by it.
Much of these flashbacks, outside of one boyfriend, indicate a pattern of Tendler’s dating habits that aren’t healthy and lead to her forming attachments with toxic men (the exception shown is not Mulaney). They also share something that has been quick to earn her ire in reviews, which is how she has allegedly relied on men financially rather than getting a secure job. Outside of directly mentioning relying on Mulaney’s finances, we are largely left to speculate on much of her finances outside of maybe a few examples. But it makes the final half of her memoir all the more alarming.
Anna Marie Tender's apparent financial reliance on men (and therefor her emotional and mental reliance) puts her at odds with Solanas. The connection to Solanas, if you can even call it that, comes later.
I can understand discussing the patriarchy and anger towards that. Hell, I feel that. Or being angered towards specific men. Yet, I really had a hard time with the end. It was just too much. It was too much not in the ‘you’re too much’ way (cause like, same), but it got to a point where I had to look up her age because I thought this was way too immature.
Towards the end Tendler remarks: “I don’t hate men. I still want to fuck them.” I had to step away. You’re joking right? That’s an actual joke, right? She follows that with “I still want to love them,” by the way. Adding that bit doesn’t negate those first two sentences. In an interview she stated the book was about “the endless source of [her] heartbreak and rage—men.” My guy. My guy.
Listen, if I were in my twenties, I’d maybe be ready to jump on the hate bandwagon. Working in law and entering my thirties makes me a little too pragmatic for that. I still feel anger, I still have my moments of rage. But I’m not going to ever be the kind of person who hates men. I have no rage towards men. Towards the patriarchy? Of course. To men? What am I, Valerie Solanas?
As you can probably guess, it was after reading about Tendler’s rage that I was reminded of Solanas and made the connection. It’s a feeble connection at best, and if anything it does illustrate to show us that for all that I didn’t love Tendler’s above comment, she’s not an extremist and shouldn’t be viewed that way.
I read the SCUM Manifesto and was surprised at how much I laughed. It’s so jarring it’s comical. There’s a reason why Valeria Solanas has been parodied for her theory, though to parody her does deny the harsh realities and sadness that took over her life. She’s more of a tragic figure than we give her credit for.
“The male is completely egocentric, trapped inside himself, incapable of empathizing or identifying with others, or love, friendship, affection of tenderness. He is a completely isolated unit, incapable of rapport with anyone. His responses are entirely visceral, not cerebral; his intelligence is a mere tool in the service of this drives and needs; he is incapable of mental passion, mental interaction; he can’t relate to anything other than his own physical sensations. He is a half dead, unresponsive lump, incapable of giving or receiving pleasure or happiness; consequently, he is at best an utter bore, an inoffensive blob, since only those capable of absorption in others can be charming. He is trapped in a twilight zone halfway between humans and apes, and is far worse off than the apes became, unlike the apes, he is capable of a large array of negative feelings -hate, jealousy, contempt, disgust, guilt, shame, doubt-and, moreover he is aware of what he is and isn’t.” - Valerie Solanas (SCUM Manifesto)
According to Valerie Solanas, men aren’t just The Worst but basically aborted females and need to just die because we literally don’t need them. They’re useless. It’s so unabashedly ridiculous, so heavily steeped in absolutes that don’t make sense. Given the time period she grew up in, and the abuse she faced, it’s not necessarily surprising, but again, that doesn’t make it right. Now let’s look at Tendler:
“I hate men. I hate men so much. Men are the cause of all my problems. Men are the cause of everyone’s problems. They are stupid and they are arrogant. They think everything they say is true and right. I hate them so fucking much I don’t know if I can fuck them anymore…. Men are the worst. They are the goddamn fucking worst.” - Anna Marie Tendler (Men Have Called Her Crazy) (shortened)
Oy vey. This, by the way, was follow by a callous comment by her then boyfriend. The very one who didn’t like her photography. To quote a kid I was arguing with on Among Us recently (don’t ask), “Can you even see bro?” I cut off a whole part of it that goes into detail because I’m exasperated. This is later followed by an argument Tendler has with said boyfriend about how unsure she is about having sons, which leads to him calling her opinion as misandry and her insisting misandry isn’t real. (She hasn’t read SCUM Manifesto)
Even if it’s a reaction to a cruel comment - and the comment was cruel - it’s still dealing in absolutes that are ridiculous and ultimately unfair. Men are not the cause of everyone’s problems. I realize part of why this kind of commentary bothers me is because it’s the kind of thing I saw all the time in abuse cases. Abusers will say these very things to their spouse, berating their gender/race/religion/immigration status and speaking in these kinds of absolutes. Yes, what he said was wrong and cruel and terrible, but take that out on him, not on everyone else. When you construct this narrative, you’re only feeding into prejudice that isn’t just destructive towards the group you’re attacking, but to yourself as well.
There’s also the sense that because we know nothing of her marriage to Mulaney, we have no idea how this shaped her opinion of men. She says she hates men, but never mentions the one man who was arguably the center of her life for so long. Did Mulaney make you hate men this much, is this part of your reaction to the divorce, is there something we’re not seeing, or did the divorce break some sort of illusion? I have no idea. It’s not even my business, really, but it leave us with so many questions as a result.
Is this the Priscilla Presley Paradox? Can Priscilla really be honest about anything bad that happened between her and Elvis when it’s Elvis Presley, the King of Rock. One has to remember that Priscilla has made a fortune out of us talking about Elvis, and whether or not that accounting into any part she may have played in the Sofia Coppola film should be met with some understanding of this. (I’ve not read the film and while I own the book, I’ve yet to read it) The artist Celia Paul wrote about her relationships with Lucian Freud and if you read the reviews you’ll see a ton of men furious that she would try to ‘steal his thunder’ or use him ‘for fame.’ So one has to wonder if this plays some part in Tendler’s anger, if she cannot talk about Mulaney or feels trapped in the idea that if she were to talk about Mulaney no one would believe her and everyone would hate her. Damned if you do, damned if you don’t.
Though, perhaps Solanas felt that as well with regards to her father. She wasn’t in a position to talk about the sexual abuse, and if she did, would anyone believe her? Or would everyone hate her?
The above quote, despite the indication that Tendler has likely not read Solanas, alone seems to be seeped in the Solanas narrative. Yet, herein we see the distinct difference between Tendler and Solanas. This isn’t a ‘I hate men men must burn’ book like Solanas wrote. This is a woman who is angry, a little bitter, and still healing. Yes, both women may both hate men, and there may be some justification for their anger, but they are on entirely different paths. Tendler exhibits this herself:
“I believe men have the ability to look outside themselves, to question how their actions affect the women around them, and to exist with more awareness to others’ experiences, should they want to do that. I have been lucky to know a few men who do. They are sensitive and communicative and empathetic. They give me hope.” - Anna Marie Tendler (Men Have Called Her Crazy)
Before you get too excited, this is followed by the “I don’t hate men, I still want to fuck them” line so ya know. There’s room for improvement. Yet, you’d never see this sort of behavior from Solanas.
The big difference between these two women is that one sought healing. Anna Marie Tendler saw herself in crisis and took action to heal. Valerie Solanas did not, and likely could not. Part of this is based on the time period and her circumstances (remember Valerie Solanas was dirt poor and Tendler bought a mansion in Connecticut), but if the opportunity was there, would Solanas take it? I honestly doubt it.
What I’m saying is that I think for all that I disagree with her vitriol, Anna Marie Tendler is headed in a good direction. I think she has a long road ahead of her, and I’m certain that road will be filled with more incredible photography.
I want to be fair to all the women mentioned here, mostly because I believe in women and our incredible ability to adapt and heal. My friends and family have asked if the memoir changed my perspective on Tendler and Mulaney, and while it has, I’ve expressed that I don’t think my reaction to the book is characteristic of either persons. It’s just me being me. I can talk about the writing, the pacing, all those things, and give you very blunt and honest feelings, but I think the most vital part of books is how they stay with you, shape you, and make you feel. Or, in this case, how they make you think.
I did want to make one final note about the memoir. It’s odd to me that she mentions disordered eating and even states her weight (baffling problematic) but never anything that was done to work on that. If anything, her time after seems to imply that she was still super skinny and almost relishing in it. There’s never any mention of the work she takes to manage her disordered eating, or dismantling the behavior and unhealthy mentalities that led to this behavior. Having struggled with disordered eating in my past, I found this odd and alarming. I don’t care that you hate men, I care that you’re taking care to provide your body with nutrients and understand that your worth is not found in a scale.
A common critique I’ve seen is there needed to be more time between the event and this book. I suspect her decision to write it was partially as a final note on her healing from the divorce in particular, a cathartic experience to help her let go of the past. And I can’t discredit that if so. But I also suspect it was to capitalize on the time. If Anna Marie Tendler came out with a book in ten years, would any of us care? Even if we were fans, would we want a ‘tell-all’ memoir of a famous comedian’s ex-wife turned successful artist? I want to say yes, but I’m not sure I’m being honest with you or myself. I agree with this argument, though. I do think what’s lacking here is mostly perspective.
So where does this leave our Contemporary Tudor Wife? Thankfully not beheaded. Hopefully inspired to create more art. Maaaaybe no longer blaming men for everything? I want her to scream, I want her to shout, I want her to be loud to cry and say she’s been hurt, and well, she did. My feelings and dislike toward what she said are ultimately reflective of me, and frankly she doesn’t need me to agree or like it. She needs to find that satisfaction within herself. It sounds like it really was cathartic for her. In that I can at least say:
I had hoped the book would delve into her art, how she healed through art and creation and found her niche, but that wasn’t what happened. While it does mention things here and there, she says little of her work and process and how it supports and sustains her outside of financial success. I had hoped I could write about a contemporary Tudor wife and her journey towards photography, but Tendler chose to write about her ire towards men. Ah well, it’s not my book. At least it’s not scummy.
Never have I clicked on an essay so quickly!
I read Tendeler's memoir and had a lot of similar feelings as you. I had also hoped for a deeper look into her creative life and see her explore that more deeply, along with maybe trying to understand and begin healing from her ED and Anxiety, etc.
You made so many unique connections and helped me to see a few things differently about her work and what she was communicating through that, which was likely more effective than the memoir because of things she possibly couldn't write about. I also, found it odd that Mulaney announced his marriage basically the day her book was released...not a coincidence.
Your brain is amazing! Truly love how you make connections to history, art, etc. LOVED!
i gasped at tendler’s “i hate men” quote 😭 like why on earth did they publish that lmao. i haven’t seen a single good review for this book! as for the tudors, have you read the six wives of henry viii by alison weir?? sooo good