In the News
The Bay State Banner reports the symposium honoring the centenary of Child's birth offered a day-long sampling of Child fervor, drawing an overflow audience as well as Internet viewers. In Cambridge, as on TV, Child was disarmingly natural and free of pretension, engaging and curious, whether shopping for cheese or meats or chatting with nearby ladies at her hair salon.
The MacArthur Foundation awarded its $500,000, no-strings-attached fellowships, known as "genius grants," on October 1. Former Radcliffe Fellow and MIT professor Junot Diaz, who won the Pulitzer Prize for Fiction in 2008 for his novel, The Brief Wondrous Life of Oscar Wao, was announced as a winner.
Pulitzer Prize-winning author Diane McWhorter RI '12, who spoke as part of the W.E.B. Du Bois Institute's Colloquium Series, said she decided to re-issue her prize-winning book, “Carry Me Home,” after she discovered new materials on the subject. Introducing McWhorter was Jane Rhodes the Joy Foundation Fellow at the Radcliffe Institute.
The Boston Globe reports one of the coolest events in Boston last week was a daylong symposium on the life and legacy of the inimitable Julia Child, who would have turned 100 in August. Hosted by the Radcliffe Institute for Advanced Study's Schlesinger Library, the event featured friends of Paul and Julia Child from the couple's years in Cambridge, who discussed Child's first TV kitchen.
“You have a ratatouille garden!” Julia Child exclaimed to her hostess, Jane Thompson,“we’ll have ratatouille for dinner.” Thompson was one of many friends and family who recalled Julia Child stories to an adoring crowd in the Radcliffe Gymnasium, all celebrating what would be Julia Child’s 100th birthday.
Food blogger shares the four most wonderful things about Julia Child that she learned from the Radcliffe Institute's Julia Child Centenary Symposium.
Marilyn Morgan, archivist at the Radcliffe Institute's Schlesinger Library, highlights the role of women in advertising since the late 1800s. She comments "The female viewpoint opened a door for early ad women, but in the end it held them back". The nature of the work done by these advertising women proved limiting, as agencies then pigeonholed them as suitable only for certain types of assignments. And the very ads they worked on—projecting an image of women as homemakers—reinforced rather stereotyped views about women that restricted their advancement in the work world.