Between the Acts discussion

A Death in the Family Between the Acts
The Morality of Posthumously Publishing Unfinished Work
A Death in the Family, James Agee//Between the Acts, Virginia Woolf

A Death in the Family is an autobiographical novel by James Agee that was posthumously published, even though it was not entirely finished. What do you guys think about publishing an author’s unfinished work after they’ve died? Does it make a difference if the work is autobiographical in nature?

Furthering that thought:

Like A Death in the Family, Between the Acts by Virginia Woolf was also published, unfinished and posthumously. But whereas the reason A Death in the Family wasn’t completed was because Agee unexpectedly died of a sudden heart attack, Virginia Woolf took her own life, leaving a finished manuscript for Between the Acts, but not a final revision.

Keeping in mind that although she technically finished the novel before the onset of a significant and what would be her final depressive episode, that was worsened by the poor reception of the her most recent previously published work, a biography she wrote about her late friend and artist Roger Fry; do you think she would have wanted Between the Acts to have been published at all?

I can’t help but wonder if Between the Acts was Virginia Woolf expressing the profound isolation she felt in her depression through writing… If the voices of the citizens are the voices she wrote about to her husband in the letter she left him… if overwhelmed Miss La Trobe who writes a play and orchestrates a pageant that no one truly understands then is criticized and applauded at the same time represents how Woolf felt over her long career… or if in turning mirrors on the audience in the pageant in the final scene entitled “Ourselves,” she is turning a metaphorical mirror on the would be reader, asking, “what are you going to do? What will you contribute? How will you make meaningful connections?”

I for one am truly grateful that Between the Acts was published as it is a stunning book with beautiful writing(a given with Virginia Woolf), but I can’t help but wonder if it wasn’t meant to be shared.

What are the implications of publishing the unfinished or unshared work of writers and other artists who take their own lives before they can be published or otherwise made public? Or even posthumously published diaries and journals that were meant to be very private things in the first place?

You can see my reviews for Between the Acts and A Death in the Family on my Goodreads’ profile: https://www.goodreads.com/user/show/8...

Check out https://biblivio.tumblr.com/ for my full reflections, favorite quotes from the books I read and updates on what I’m reading next.

I absolutely love your point about the parallel between Woolf's career and the pageant. I personally think that posthumous publishing is a very case by case basis. Sylvia Plath, for example, I believe would have wanted to be published posthumously, and would be extremely proud of the figure she has (deservedly) become in literature. Woolf, on the other hand, was not so self-centered (in my humble opinion), and may have wanted to retain her colossal, intellectual status as well as her privacy. I believe if Woolf wanted it to be published, she would have made it known before she took her life. But selfishly, I am grateful for the opportunity to have read her last great work. I guess it boils down to what we hold more important- Woolf's wishes or the opportunity to add to the universal collection, discussion, and reproduction of high quality literature. I am not sure which Woolf would hold more important.