24 August 2026

Looking Back on Lot's Wife


Lot's Wife [La Femme de Loth]
Monique Bosco [trans John Glassco]
Toronto: McClelland & Stewart, 1975
151 pages
De temps à autre, un mot, une phrase, entendus malgré moi, me frappent comme un autre soufflet immérité.
– La Femme de Loth, Monique Bosco, 1970
There was a time in this great land when translations of French-language books were published with near exclusivity in hardcover. There were no second printings and there were no paperback reissues. I'm thinking of titles like In Quest of Splendour (Pierre le magnifique), Orphan Street (Un Chaîne dans la parc), and The Scarecrows of Saint-Emmanuel (L'épouvantail).

Lot's Wife met the very same fate.

I was a child when La Femme de Loth was published. I was an adolescent when it appeared in English translation. I was adult when I first read Lot's Wife. I was an older adult when I wrote Monique Bosco to ask about her working relationship with the translator. This was when I was working on A Gentleman of Pleasure, my biography of John Glassco. The letter I received in response was generous and gracious. She'd had very limited correspondence. Though they were both living in Montreal they'd never met.

I never met Monique Bosco, either. She died two years after posting that letter, just short of her eightieth birthday.

Author photo on the jacket of Lot's Wife.
I wish our correspondence hadn't ended there. She was a remarkable woman and this novel is one of the best to come out of 1970s Quebec. It was an extraordinary decade.

Lot's Wife opens with the narrator addressing a physician. These aren't the very first lines, but they are my favourite:
You're used to passing terrible sentences on people. Your technique is remarkable. First deliver the blow: the illness may be fatal. Then announce the remedy: amputation. The solution is hailed with positive joy. Those condemned to an imminent death are equally "reasonable." As a reward, the pretty joys of the invalid world are danced before them.
Though not obvious at first, the physician was her married lover. He's ended their decade-long affair and has sent her off for two weeks in Venice to recover, as if from surgery. What we're reading is the narrator's writing. She's writing because she cannot sleep. She cannot do anything but write. The text, disjointed and at times confusing, consists of 240 numbered segments that skip back and forth in time. The shortest, not more than two or three sentences, tend to be self-revelatory. The longer touch here and there on past events in her life. The total is addressed to her former lover.

She was the unwanted child of a Jewish mother and Catholic father, both blessed with good looks she did not inherit. Her earliest memories are of Paris. As clouds of the Second World War begin drifting westward, the small family relocates to New York. This proves a disaster for two reasons, the least of which has to do with her parents' broken English and inability to find employment. The second has to do with a dark episode she had always kept hidden.

Fortunes change with a chance encounter with a family friend. This results in relocation to Montreal where the narrator's parents thrive while striving to avoid any and all news of the country they left behind.

As the narrator grows into womanhood and the Nazis occupy Paris, her parents show the first signs of middle-age. Self-absorbed, they cling to what remains of youth with such desperation that they attempt to recast their daughter as more of a friend than a child. Their campaign is cut short when both die in an automobile accident on the way back from a ski trip in the Laurentians. Their adolescent daughter survived because she'd been left alone in their Montreal apartment.

Much of what the narrator writes she's told no one, not even the physician. She shares it now through her writing – the humiliations and horrors of a short-lived marriage included – though she knows it won't make a difference. The only person she has ever loved, the person she still loves, has cast her aside. She goes over her past because she cannot imagine a future. She doesn't want a future:
God was right. Those must be saved who value life enough to flee, following their noses, letting flames devour the wreckage behind them. Lot and his family. His daughters are young, their life is all before them. But for the old wife, it is her whole past that is being swallowed up. So she turns her head, trying to see what is happening – and what has happened. She looks back, breaking the commandment. Poor old woman. In the Bible you have no name. Lot's wife, that was enough.
It's not until the second half of the novel that the narrator reveals that her name is Hélène. The physician's name is Pierre. She was not his wife, though she very much wanted to be.

Monique Bosco published seventeen volumes in her seventy-nine years, consisting of novels, short story collections, and verse. La Femme de Loth is the best known, having received the 1970 Governor General's Award for French-language Fiction. A half-century after publication, Lot's Wife remains the lone translation of her work.

More, please.

Dedication:

Trivia: Curiously, McClelland & Stewart rejected Lot's Wife as the title of the translation and kept pushing the nonsensical The Woman of Lot. The pressure was such that in desperation Glassco offered an alternative: You Found Me Beautiful.

The critic's rave: Glassco's translation was well received. The only negative review I've found came from Pat Barclay. In the 
19 July 1975 edition of the Victoria's Times-Columnist, Barclay writes that it "brings with it the whiff of the original French in its clipped yet dramatically effective phrasing. I found it dreary, depressing, almost maudlin – yet at the same time impressively well planned and presented."

The critic concludes:


Two things:

It's Hélène, not Helene.

No committee "one mad spring day in 1970, decided to select Lot's Wife [here I assume the critic means La Femme de Loth] as the winner of a Governor General's award [sic]" for the simple reason that La Femme de Loth was released in the autumn of that year.

Object and Access: A slim hardcover with black boards and a jacket by David Shaw. Does the woman depicted not resemble Margaret Atwood?

As I write, five copies are listed online with prices beginning at $9.95. Mine was purchased in 1999 from The Word in Montreal. Price: $60.


La Femme de Loth was first published in 1970 by Robert Laffont. I was surprised to learn that the novel is no longer in print. It was last published in 2003 by Bibliothèque québécoise.


Related posts:

14 August 2026

Fun With Translation!



Day fourteen of Women in Translation Month and I've yet to participate. What with car troubles, appliance breakdowns, other unforeseen expenses, and health issues (not mine), it has been a summer of distractions. All is capped by the most violent and most frequent thunderstorms I've ever experienced. The most recent passed not two hours ago.

In lieu of a review, I present something light.

Published in 1974, They Won't Demolish Me! is Sheila Fischman's translation of Roch Carrier's Le deux-millième étage, which had been published the previous year. It was her fourth translation of Carrier. Many more have followed.

Thirteen of the eighteen Sheila Fischman translations of Roch Carrier in my collection.
Floralie, Where Are You? appears twice. The first is a copy signed by the author.
The second belonged to John Glassco and bears his signature.
Le deux-millième étage isn't one of Carrier's best-known works, but I think of the translation often as it contains a nod and a wink to her friend and fellow translator John Glassco. This comes on page 68 of They Won't Demolish Me! 


The original French, which appears on page 88 of the 1973 Éditions du Jour edition reads:


Such a subtle change, one letter for another. Having written Glassco's biography and editing his selected letters, I'm certain it was done with both great affection and a sense of fun.

How could she resist!

11 August 2026

Books I Was Reading On This Day Over the Last Ten Years: A Top Ten Tuesday List


Tuesdays begin like any other day. I rise before the sun, make a carafe of coffee, then return to bed to read The New York Times on my laptop. My wife has made me promise to wake her with news that Donald Trump is dead. The Environment Canada website is next, followed by The Globe & Mail. I then take a tour of my favourite book blogs. On Tuesdays I make a point of visiting That Artsy Reader Girl. For six years now, Jenna has been hosting Top Ten Tuesday in which she suggests topics to we fellow bookish people. A few examples: 

Books I Disliked But Am Glad I Read
The Longest Books I've Ever Read
Books I'd Give Different Titles To 
Much as I've enjoyed the responses, I'd never participated. This changed with today's prompt: Books I Was Reading On This Day Over the Last Ten Years.

It was interesting to revisit summer reads from years past. Published in 1872, James De Mille's The American Baron was the oldest. I Am Not Guilty was by far my favourite of the ten titles. Read in 2019, I liked it so much as to return it to print the following year as part of the Véhicule Press Ricochet series.


I was less impressed by the author's 1949 Harlequin Lost House, which is not to suggest that there aren't others deserving revival... Well, maybe just one. Long time readers will know which:

2025

Onoto Watanna [Winnifred Eaton]
New York: Harper, 1901

2024

James De Mille
New York: Harper & Bros, 1872

2023

The Weak-Eyed Bat
Collected Millar: The First Detectives
Margaret Millar

New York: Syndicate, 2017

2022

Lost House
Frances Shelley Wees
Winnipeg: Harlequin, 1949

2021

One Day's Courtship and The Heralds of Fame
Robert Barr
New York: Stokes, 1896

2020

The Darling Illusion
Margerie Scott
London: Peter Davies, 1954

2019

M'Lord, I Am Not Guilty
Frances Shelley Wees
New York: Doubleday, 1954

2018

Doors of the Night
Frank L. Packard
Toronto: Copp Clark, 1922

2017

Caught in the Snare: The Sequel to Edith Percival
May Agnes Fleming
New York: Street & Smith, [c. 1917]

2016

The Mystery of the Folded Paper
Hulbert Footner
New York: Collier, n.d.

For the record, I'm currently reading Lot's Wife, John Glassco's 1975 translation of La femme de Loth by Monique Bosco.

As I write, Donald Trump is still alive.

Related posts:

05 August 2026

Between Exhaustion and Expression



Shackles
Madge Macbeth
New York: Waterson, 1927
282 pages

The first three pages of Shackles take the form of a letter written by the author to her friend Aimée. Do not read it before the novel itself! It contains a doozy of a spoiler.

Shackles is the sixth of Madge Macbeth's thirteen novels and has a novelist as its main character. This was almost enough for me to set it aside.

Are novelists really so common?

The novelist at the centre of Shackles is Naomi Lennox. She lives in a fairly comfortable house with barrister husband Arthur and semi-invalid relation Uncle Toby. There are no children, which given Arthur's nocturnal expectations is something of a miracle. 

Uncle Toby has recently returned from a trip south where he was surprised and extremely pleased to encounter people who new his niece's writing. He was even asked for an interview with one of the local papers! Arthur is not so impressed – in fact, is not impressed at all. A selfish, petulant, and stubborn man, Arthur resents the fleeting minutes his wife finds to steal away to her desk and is dismissive of the results.  

Shireen Dey is Naomi's closest friend. She too is a novelist – a very successful one. Her home life is quite different. Husband David, who she calls "Doolydear," not only takes care of the house but manages her career. He has recently sold the rights of one of her novels to the motion picture people. Lively, full of life, and aware of her limitations as a writer, I quite liked Shireen until she exposed herself as a racist. This occurs in an exchange which pretty much encapsulates Arnold's views of his wife's writing. Arnold speaks first:
"Man’s sphere throughout the ages seems to me to have been one of protection, provision. My simple philosophy is expressed in the idea of service. So far as I can see it, men have served their women faithfully – even to paying the supreme sacrifice in times of war. Is it too much to expect – say fifty per cent service in return?”
   “I admit,” Shireen answered, “that there are too many women in whom the commutual sense, the reciprocal sense, is lacking. They want to eat their cake and have it, too. Like the slaves in the South, they achieved freedom too suddenly. They don’t know how to use it. Mentally, physically, economically, they are parasites. They will not last. Think of the others, however; of the women whose mental development and chosen sphere of endeavour – whose creative ability – justifies them in demanding the identical type of freedom that is accorded men. What of the woman artist, musician, decorator, physician, lawyer? Suppose, to drive home my argument more clearly, you were a novelist, would you not claim the independence necessary to pursue your vocation?”
   Arnold observed that unless he were one of the great masters of literature, he could not imagine himself engrossed with the business of writing, at all. Comparatively few men, he ventured, devoted themselves exclusively to literature of that sort.
   “In other words,” Shireen cut in, “you mean to imply that they do something useful as a regular profession and scribble as a hobby or a pastime?”
   “That expresses pretty closely what I mean."
Would it surprise you to learn that Naomi has a lover? She's been seeing Hugo Main. A man of strong opinions on all sorts of things, he's really quite a bore. The best that can be said of Hugo is that he admires Naomi's intellect. Whether there is more to the attraction is uncertain; the two never share anything more than a kiss and an embrace. Hugo pressures Naomi to run away with him to New York, promising to be her own Doolydear.

Can she do it? Will she do it? What Naomi wants most is the freedom to work on The Book of the Hour, her second novel. She takes a bold first step one night remaining at her desk when Arnold expects her in bed. The second step comes in engaging a maid. What with the money brought in through her writing they can afford it. Besides, her hire, Jennie McQuaig, will free up time to be more productive and bring in more money.

It is impossible to read Shackles today without thinking of A Room of One's Own (1929). Is it not remarkable that the novel was published three years earlier? How has it escaped Virago's notice?

Macbeth writes in the book's opening letter:
Woman is passing through a cultural transition. Instinctively, she is bound to the old order of things; intellectually, she clamours for the new. And vacillating, she stands between them.
That doozy of a spoiler concerns the ending. Were it not for the letter I wouldn't have seen it coming. 

See if you don't agree.


Trivia: In the January of last year, I put together a list of the very best Canadian novels of the 1920s. I held it to nine because I'd yet to read Douglas Durkin's The Magpie (1923) and Barney Allen's They Have Bodies (1929); one of the two was sure to make the cut. I've since read The Magpie. Sure enough it made the list, rounding out the top ten. Shackles too deserves a spot. In adding it, I'm bumping Madge Macbeth's pseudonymous roman à clef The Land of Afternoon (1924).

The list as it now stands (in chronological order):
Shackes - Madge Macbeth
I'm certain there'll be more changes. Despite my decades-old interest in Allen – see my reviews of The Toronto Doctor (1949) and The Gynocologist (1969) – I still haven't read They Have Bodies.

Object and Access: Yellowing pages bound in tan cloth, I purchased my copy in 2019 as part of a lot. It once belonged to Emma Bailey, but which Emma Bailey? The 1921 Canadian census records thirty Emma Baileys living in Canada. The 1931 census features twenty-seven, which narrows the field very slightly. 


As my copy is the first American edition, there is a possibility that Emma Bailey may not have been living in Canada. The true first edition was published in Ottawa in 1926 by Graphic. A Toronto bookseller has two copies for sale online, both with dust jackets, both at $250. So as to encourage a sale, I'm sharing an image of the one I'd choose.


My birthday is in twenty-four days.

The least expensive jacketless copy is listed at US$41.50. As I write, just one Waterson copy is listed for sale online. At US$72, it too lacks a dust jacket. 

Shackles returned to print in 2005 as part of the Tecumseh Press Early Canadian Women Writers Series. Twelve years later, Invisible Publishing followed with its own edition. Both are still available, meaning that after many decades out of print today's reader has two editions from which to choose.