Alice Munro - Writing Her Lives

apologizing for not getting the manuscript back sooner and thanking Weaver for his “encouragement and criticism.” She then details the changes she has made to reach the needed length: she “rewrote the first two pages entirely” and made more cuts later in the manuscript, but “in case the revision is not satisfactory I am sending also the original two pages” in case he would like to make alternative changes. 16
    This exchange of letters is interesting in itself, certainly, but it is most significant in the way it begins the Weaver-Munro relation: for his part, Weaver is supportive and interested, but he is also critical – there is no mistaking what he has to say about “The Widower.” For hers, Munro shows herself understanding of his editorial needs, willing to make changes to “The Strangers” and, though she is just nineteen years old and this is her first such exchange, professional. Years later, in 1984 when Weaver was reaching retirement age and his program
Anthology
(successor to
Canadian Short Stories)
was celebrating its thirtieth anniversary, Munro wrote to Marian Engel seeking her support for a plan to have him made an honorary member of the Writers’ Unionof Canada. She says that she has “been thinking how a long … relationship can still be there, still sustaining, after other relationships so much more intimate & important have burned right out.” Thus Weaver has been to Munro since she began her professional career in 1951. For her part, whenever Weaver has been singled out to be celebrated, Munro has been there. In a 1979 profile of Weaver in
Books in Canada
, Mark Abley wrote that “when Alice Munro is read and remembered, Weaver will be forgotten.” Clearly, Abley was wrong. 17
    When he received the revision, Weaver wrote that Munro “had done an extremely good job on the re-write” of “The Strangers,” and he was sorry that its broadcast on June 1 had to be postponed by their reporting on the Massey Commission. He had wired her with this news, but in his letter of June 1 he offered more information. Since they had arranged to do a series of half-hour stories until the program’s summer break, “The Strangers” had to wait until October 5. He tells her that the cheque for the story will be arriving in three weeks, asks for clarification about her relationship with the Canadian Writers’ Service, and solicits other stories. Munro wastes no time responding, since on June 8 she replies and submits “The Liberation” for Weaver’s consideration. He replies about five weeks later, buying the story outright and saying that he sees no point in cutting it – they will pay her ninety dollars and save it until they have a half-hour slot available. Weaver continues, “I was very pleased to hear from you again, and I hope you will continue to send us fiction from time to time. ‘The Liberation’ is really a very nice story and it is fine to know that you are continuing to work in this field. Incidentally, it is a small point, but if you intend to do very much free lance writing I think you will soon discover that editors much prefer to receive manuscripts double-spaced. This makes it a good deal easier to tell at a glance [how] long a piece is.” In and of itself, such a suggestion is of little import. But this letter shows Weaver adopting the role of advisor that he played crucially to Munro for the next twenty years, until she made other contacts in the literary world. Weaver was her literary lifeline: he encouraged, made practical suggestions, responded, and generally cared for Alice Munro the writer. And he did so for scores of other writers besides. 18
    By the time Alice and Jim Munro were married and heading for Vancouver, Weaver had considered and rejected two more stories, “The Unfortunate Lady” and “The Uncertain Spring.” The latter, Weaver wrote, showed that Munro was “steadily improving as a writer.” Weaver did not buy it only because he already had her long story, “The Liberation,” on hand. During 1952 Munro submitted at least two more stories, “The Shivaree” and “The Man from Melberry”; these were also rejected.
    For his part, Weaver compliments Munro on the descriptive sections and on character analysis, but “the three of us” who read the stories “were all agreed in feeling that [the stories] were not entirely successful.” Weaver goes on to say he is sorry about this, and he hopes Munro will send him “more fiction quite