thursday, july 29, 1943

dearest kitty,

mrs. van daan, dussel and i were doing the dishes, and i was extremely quiet. this is very unusual for me and they were sure to notice, so in order to avoid any questions, i quickly racked my brains for a neutral topic. i thought the book henry from across the street might fit the bill, but i couldn't have been more wrong; if mrs. van daan doesn't jump down my throat, mr. dussel does. it all boiled down to this: mr. dussel had recommended the book to margot and me as an example of excellent writing. we thought it was anything but that. the little boy had been portrayed well, but as for the rest. . . the less said the better. i mentioned something to that effect while we were doing the dishes, and dussel launched into a veritable tirade.

"how can you possibly understand the psychology of a man? that of a child isn't so difficult [!]. but you're far too young to read a book like that. even a twenty-year-old man would be unable to comprehend it." (so why did he go out of his way to recommend it to margot and me?)

mrs. van d. and dussel continued their harangue: "you know way too much about things you're not supposed to. you've been brought up all wrong. later on, when you're older, you won't be able to enjoy anything anymore. you'll say, 'oh, i read that twenty years ago in some book.' you'd better hurry if you want to catch a husband or fall in love, since everything is bound to be a disappointment to you. you already know all there is to know in theory. but in practice? that's another story!"

can you imagine how i felt? i astonished myself by calmly replying, "you may think i haven't been raised properly, but many people would disagree!"

they apparently believe that good child-rearing includes trying to pit me against my parents, since that's all they ever do. and not telling a girl my age about grown-up subjects is fine. we can all see what happens when. people are raised that way.

at that moment i could have slapped them both for poking fun at me. i was beside myself with rage, and if i only knew how much longer we had to put up with each other's company, i'd start counting the days.

mrs. van daan's a fine one to talk! she sets an example all right -- a bad one! she's known to be exceedingly pushy, egotistical, cunning, calculating and perpetually dissatisfied. add to that, vanity and coquettishness and there's no question about it: she's a thoroughly despicable person. i could write an entire book about madame van daan, and who knows, maybe someday i will. anyone can put on a charming exterior when they want to. mrs. van d. is friendly to strangers, especially men, so it's easy to make a mistake when you first get to know her.

mother thinks that mrs. van d. is too stupid for words, margot that she's too unimportant, pim that she's too ugly (literally and figuratively!), and after long observation (i'm never prejudiced at the beginning), i've come to the conclusion that she's all three of the above, and lots more besides. she has so many bad traits, why should i single out just one of them?

yours, anne

p.s. will the reader please take into consideration that this story was written before the writer's fury had cooled?