THE ASYLUM - Emilie Autumn's Official Forum

_________________
Help! Help!
I'm being repressed!

Oh, and I completely respect that. I know a lot of people found the book great and helpful. To me, it was actually... nothing more than I had already come up with on my own.

But I respect your opinion. = ]

_________________
I am no longer an active part of this website. I have lost interest and respect in this artist, and no longer wish to be on a site related to her.

_________________
Help! Help!
I'm being repressed!

Perhaps i missed where these statements were said, can you direct me ? (not disagreeing, just not remembering any such statements being made)



Its a word filter that is automatically set to change Emily with a "y" to emilie

_________________
Kill me once, shame on you. Kill me twice, well, that's very impressive.

I'd have to hunt the mentions down. She had twittered, said in live shows, and on in a few interviews how she was so excited for people to get the book, because it was going to throw the truth about bipolar in your face. Or something similar.

_________________
I am no longer an active part of this website. I have lost interest and respect in this artist, and no longer wish to be on a site related to her.

well i do believe it said somewhere that the asylum could indeed MAKE you go mad. as in,she wasn't crazy until she was surrounded by crazies and was put on crazies' medication.

_________________
UVFA/CCT/CMPC

Here it is:

Of course, for those who can't want to wait to get past the Asylum gates, EA's debut autobiographical novel, "The Asylum for Wayward Victorian Girls," is soon to be released in 2009. Written and lavishly illustrated by EA, "The Asylum..." book is more than a gorgeous volume that will take up most of the space on your coffee table -- it is also one of the most complete accounts of bipolar disorder ever penned, and will take readers behind the doors of both modern day psych ward and Victorian insane asylum in this true life horror tale of madness, murder, and medical experimentation.

This is from Emilie's official website and MySpace. I think this was how it was advertised for the press.

I thought the book was a nice read, and I was very eager to find out what Emily-with-a-Y would be going through next. Though I must say, I expected more background information on Emilie's personal life, and what happened during her actual stay in the psychiatric hospital. I didn't learn anything about Emilie that I didn't know before I opened the book (mind you, I was at a bookreading last year and she told all in my opinion shocking things there). Anyway, I think it's a great book, but it's more a novel than an autobiography.

_________________
Out of the ash/I rise with my red hair/And I eat men like air. - Sylvia Plath, "Lady Lazarus".

Isn't Emily with a "y" meant to be a like a big metaphor? You can understand the story line, it's just with different characters, set in a different time etc. Like, when we find out about the Count and Emily with a "y" and how she jumped from the bridge to escape him, could that not be seen as Emilie trying to escape all the horrible things that happened to her by suicide? Each letter mirrors Emilie's life but, instead of straight out saying this happened, then this and then this, you have to think about it, look a little deeper to try and find out what it could possibly mean in terms of Emilie's own life. Then you get a little break with the hospital entries.
Am I making sense or am I talking the biggest pile of rubbish or repeating what someone else has said. (I haven't read the comments) ?

_________________
This Is What The Young Girl Muses
As She Battles Shame And Loses
Leaving Nothing But Bruises
Made By Unseen Tools...

Yes, I know that is what the book is about. I get that. But much of what happens in the book could not happen now adays. And yes, I now she is a metaphor, I get that. But it is still not what I was expecting. I was hoping more for how Emilie was feeling, her opinions. Not With A Y's opinions. Yes, they are the same, but when you take it out of the time, out of the context, it really has two different meanings... You can say you were taken to an asylum in the victorian era, ripped out of your life and world and taken away in a carrage and turned into a number. Yet that is not completly what happens. It is what it feels like what happens. And the thing is, I know what it feels like, I was looking more the comparisons of how things were the same then and now. Not how the feelings were the same.

Because really, the practices, the doctors, the buildings, the medications, how they treat you, what methods they use on people coming from different backgrounds with the same mental illness, the options they give you, the fact that they legally have to keep you updated on your treatment and you have to give your consent for everything, you have the option to change doctors at any time, all of this, everything has changed, grown, become different. It really is the patients who haven't chagned. I feel like I can say this because I am one of those people. I have been one of those people. But the whole book felt as though it was making then and now the same by making it all into the 'then'. Not paying attention to the changes. She took things that happen now and changed them to what it would be like then. I understand it works for the story, but it really doesn't teach anything.

And she had talked several times about how this book would teach. (Yes, again, I know she said it would teach about her, but she also said it would teach you about how little things would change, etc). And I didn't learn much. I just got out of it that if you are in a hospital now, it is horrible because nothing good happens because nothing has changed. And so much has.

_________________
I am no longer an active part of this website. I have lost interest and respect in this artist, and no longer wish to be on a site related to her.

@FilthyVictorians: Yes, I get that the whole point was for Emily with a "y" to metaphorically represent Emilie and her life story, but a lot of the time it was difficult to discern where Emily with a "y"'s story ended and Emilie's began. (However, I've only read the book through once, so I may have missed some things.) I would have appreciated more of Emilie's story as herself, rather than as her alter ego, just so that we have some solid facts about her hospital stay and especially her life. Instead we just have to guess for the most part which parts of Emily with a "y"'s story are true to EA's life and which parts are just a story, EA's hospital stay doesn't really go into much detail at all, and the suffering in her life beforehand that I wanted to read about was just sarcastically glossed over in one paragraph on page four (aside from the three diaries, which were my favorite parts of the book). Now, I know that the events she mentions on page four would have been very painful to write about (her family dying in the fire, her trying to drown herself, etc.) and I don't blame her at all for not wanting to write about it or to choose to write it as Emily with a "y" instead of Emilie, but from my understanding that was the whole point of the book- to tell us everything, to tell us more than we ever wanted to know...

_________________

Thank you. You worded that much better than I did.

I know how alter egos work. They are you, but they have their own back story. With a Y has a different back story, a different story. Her life reflected Emilie's but WASN"T Emilie's. I too was hoping more for *why* Emilie chose to write the music the way she did, live her life, make the choices. I too agree that one paragraph was very...feeble. I know it is hard to share things such as that, but I have opened up and told my life story to complete strangers. It helps me, it helps them. It just seemed that it was less of an autobiography like she said it would be, and more of a novel about With a Y. Taking some of her life and injecting it in With a Y, but not all of it.

The journal entries were my favorites, too. They were raw, they were *real*. You could tell it was her, not her becoming an author. I have always preferred when someone writes from the heart, not creating something to write. Most of the book seemed it was just about this person she created. Not her.

With a Y *is* Emilie, but Emilie is *not* With a Y.

EDIT - Thank you Aphrodisiac for finding that for me. = ]

And she DID say that the book would teach you more than you ever wanted to know...

Yet it really didn't teach anything...

_________________
I am no longer an active part of this website. I have lost interest and respect in this artist, and no longer wish to be on a site related to her.

I believe the word being searched for here may be "allegory" - a figurative representation of abstract ideas, usually told through narrative.

The Asylum is an allegory, for what happened then, for what happens now. I don't think we should expect Emilie to tell us "more than we ever wanted to know" or lay herself, naked and open, on the table before us so we can judge and pick over her story and debate over whether her life or perspective are as difficult or complex as ours. That's... a lot to ask of someone. There is a lot of bravery involved in telling your story; what she wrote is more than I could have done, and there are people who are very much a part of my life that still don't know my whole story. Emilie has told a very great deal of her experience. Some through the hospital entries. Some through the with-a-y letters. Most of it isn't explicitly told at all, which is sort of the point of an allegory. It may take 3 or 4 or 5 reads to sort it out, to pull out the things you didn't see the first time because you were still working through the basic storyline and more obvious conceits. I've been through a great many of things Emilie describes, as well as a great many of my own ordeals and troubles, which I'm sure is something many of us have in common around here, and I still enjoyed her perspective.

The best comparison I can think of to explain what I was trying to say is actually just Emilie's music. The first time you heard one of her songs, you probably had a pretty good idea what it's about. Listen a couple more times, you'll know the basic premise and storyline pretty well. Read or watch an interview, and you'll find out that, while you weren't wrong, you're probably weren't entirely right - there's just a little bit more to it. Study the particular historical event or social concept she's writing about, and something else clicks. Then she'll turn around and weave it into something completely new, whether it's The Asylum book or her live show or whatever, and it starts to mean something else. How many people listen to 306 and think it's just about a dead girl? Or TGIP and wonder if she's a bit conceited?

You certainly don't have to like the book, and your perspectives and opinions are just as valid as those of anybody else. But if it seems like she's holding back on her opinions, perspectives, or personal experiences... it may simply be time to re-read. Perhaps with an eye turned towards the traditions of allegorical social commentary of the pre-/Victorian era, which do require a rather particular sort of unravelling. Just my thoughts, of course.

_________________
(I think I made you up inside my head.)

localkaty

I understand what you are saying. I am not saying it was a bad book.

What you guys don't seem to realize what I am saying is that the book was not what she advertised it to be. It was not about the historical events, the comparisons. It did not talk much about bipolar as an illness. It was about a story she wrote.

Yes, I know what you mean with learning more about her music each time you listen, etc. That is the case with any musician. But at the same time, she said that she would be teaching new things, telling us things we didn't know or whatever. Yet what the book was, was telling a story about someone else. But the book was more of a novel. A story. Taking some reality and injecting it in the novel. Though the reality is truth, it is not the basis of the story.

I don't expect anyone to write a book that involves splitting them down the middle and rubbing their soul on the page. But...what *was* in the book was little more than a story, in my opinion. Yes, I get what you were saying about there is similarities, yet if the truth is exaggerated and made larger and blown out of perspective and made into a different time period and changing the names and changing the characters, it is hard to tell what is the truth. Hard to know what is the truth we see or what the real truth is. To know when there is truth to find or if you are reading too deep into it. And hard to tell if she even knows the truth anymore...

If that makes sense.

I am not saying I don't still love EA, or that I didn't like the book as a story, or I don't like her music. I was expecting -

"...one of the most complete accounts of bipolar disorder ever penned, and will take readers behind the doors of both modern day psych ward and Victorian insane asylum in this true life horror tale of madness, murder, and medical experimentation."

This was not what was in the pages. It does not account for bipolar. It showed what happens when under high stress and depression. Many people with bipolar can relate to her story, but their brains do not work this way. I have been in so many bipolar support groups/therapy sessions, even during my stays in Asylums, and they have taught me more about bipolar because they spoke about how it effected them, what it did to their lives, even in small ways that seem stupid. It takes the reader into a world that does not teach about the truth of psych wards. It taught the horrors of someone under stress. It was bias. Truth is unbiased. It talked about a horror story yes, but ... it was still a story. To me, I read 'complete account' I don't think story. I think something closer to the journals. I don't expect every one to be her whole soul, yet I had hoped it would talk more about her, not With a Y.

I was talking to my mother about this today. She also loves EA, has gone to concerts with me, and is going to read the book soon. But listening to me talk about it, she noted that it sounded more like this character that has been played out in her head is taking over her. That it is not so much Emilie rather With a Y. (Though they are the same person, they are very different.) Because she saw the exact thing in me many times before.

So I know I'm not just talking out my ass. (Though I do know I seem to ramble occasionally.) I know what I am saying. And I love literature, I love books, I love to learn. So I do know what it is to use a character to get a point across.

_________________
I am no longer an active part of this website. I have lost interest and respect in this artist, and no longer wish to be on a site related to her.

What I'm trying to say, and maybe not doing very well, for which I apologize, is: that's the way you're supposed to feel at first. The allegorical tradition she's writing in is deliberately constructed so that you can walk away after reading it and feel like you've read a story, which may have some metaphors and comments about something else, but is generally just a story. Seeing the real story, the truths she's telling you, involves a lot of deeper looking and finding connections where you didn't see them at first; not because you missed them, but because you weren't really supposed to find them right away. It creates an entertaining world that you can take as-is, or delve into, at your own discretion.

I really like that particular style of writing, and would have been rather disappointed if she'd written in the Hornbacher/Wurtzel tradition of "this is what happened to me and this is what I felt and this is what I think about it". A lot of people disagree, and prefer more open stories with clear connections. I don't think one has any more intellectual or literary merit than the other. All I'm really saying is that the things you seem to be looking for weren't left out through oversight or misunderstanding... they're in there. You just aren't really meant to find them right away, not until you've finished enjoying the story. The Asylum isn't a collection of journal entries, alongside a fictional story of a Victorian girl who has a similar life, any more than Jekyll & Hyde is about alchemy, Star Wars is about outer space, Oroonoko about the slave trade. With-a-y's story isn't running alongside or mirroring Emilie's, it is her story. Just because it has a Count, and a leech, and hysterectomy, and Emilie's doesn't, doesn't mean they aren't the same... it just means a Count, a leech, and a hysterectomy may not actually be those things. May not even be a person, an object, and a procedure.

I'm not sure if they still do this, but one way they used to get small children who had suffered abuse to begin speaking about it was to give them a doll or a picture that resembled them, and ask them to make up a story about that child's life. Not because the story they'd tell would directly reflect their own, but because they would use that premise to say what was otherwise unspeakable. It's a self defense mechanism... sometimes, the only way to tell your story is to claim it for somebody else.

_________________
(I think I made you up inside my head.)

localkaty

No, they don't do the thing with the doll anymore.

If she wasn't ready to write the autobiography, don't write an autobiography. If she wanted to talk about it, call it a story based on reality. Because if she cannot separate the two - No you cannot have an allegory in an autobiography. It does not work. Trust me.

And I know what you are trying to say. I completely understand that. But I stick to what I was saying before. Even if it IS an allegory, it is not what it was advertised to be.

"It does not account for bipolar. It showed what happens when under high stress and depression."

It tells her story, but it does not talk about the TRUTHS of bipolar, the hospitals. It is bias.

It is a story. Even when you get through all the metaphors, no one really knows what is the truth. She didn't get a hysterectomy, because in modern day you cannot with out a good medical reason. And if she did, we would all know. That scar is not something you can hide easily. Yes, it is a metaphor for something else, but when you come down to it, Emilie is the only one who knows what for.

The book is therapeutic for her, yes, but it doesn't tell the reader what it was advertised to be.

No where am I arguing that it is not a good book, that it is not a good story. I am arguing it was *Not what it was advertised to be*. I feel I have been very blatant about that. I do not want to argue wether the metaphors mean more once you read the book a zillion times.

Like you said, Star Wars is not about outer space. But they also didn't advertise Star Wars as being 'a complete account of becoming orphaned'. It does not take one tiny part of the story and say that the whole book is about it. But thats what happened with "The Asylum..." Most of the book is not about bipolar. Hell, it is really only talked about a few times, allegory or not. It is about a person. ONE PERSON. One story, one character. Not the condition.

Again, I am not arguing her writing style, what she used to get a point across, wether she is a good artist, any of that. From the beginning I have been saying .

Take this. You read this -

Of course, for those who can't want to wait to get past the Asylum gates, EA's debut autobiographical novel, "The Asylum for Wayward Victorian Girls," is soon to be released in 2009. Written and lavishly illustrated by EA, "The Asylum..." book is more than a gorgeous volume that will take up most of the space on your coffee table -- it is also one of the most complete accounts of bipolar disorder ever penned, and will take readers behind the doors of both modern day psych ward and Victorian insane asylum in this true life horror tale of madness, murder, and medical experimentation.

What do you expect? To get a third opinion, I asked an outside source. My boyfriend, who has heard her music though I don't think is as into it as me, but whatever. I asked him 'when you read that, what do you expect.'

He told me 'mostly text, some photos.' So I asked 'what kind of text?'

'A first person discussion. Talking experience as it happened.'

An allegory is not 'as it happened'.

Through reading the book, through picking apart the allegories, you don't find a 'complete account of bipolar', you find a complete account of a character someone wrote to escape their problems. Again - I'm going to keep saying this because no one seems to understand this - I am not saying she can't write that way. What I am saying is that if she wanted to write about her life, she wanted to write about everything that happened, wanted/needed to do it in a fashion where she changes names, changes characters, changes settings, changes time periods ... FINE. Just don't call it an account for bipolar. Call it your own story.

Because the REASON I found the book dull like I said in the first post, was because it was not what it was hyped up to be. Again, think of the Star Wars reference.

_________________
I am no longer an active part of this website. I have lost interest and respect in this artist, and no longer wish to be on a site related to her.