Tell Me True
Page 1
Tell Me True
TELL
ME
TRUE
Memoir, History,
and Writing a Life
Edited by
PATRICIA HAMPL
and ELAINE TYLER MAY
Borealis Books is an imprint of the Minnesota Historical Society Press.
www.borealisbooks.org
Selection of essays © 2008 by the Minnesota Historical Society. All rights reserved. No part of this book may be used or reproduced in any manner whatsoever without written permission, except in the case of brief quotations embodied in critical articles and reviews. Page 231 constitutes an extension of this copyright page. For information, write to Borealis Books, 345 Kellogg Blvd. W., St. Paul, MN 55102-1906.
The Minnesota Historical Society Press is a member of the Association of American University Presses.
Manufactured in the United States of America
10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1
The paper used in this publication meets the minimum requirements of the American National Standard for Information Sciences—Permanence for Printed Library Materials, ANSI Z39.48-1984.
International Standard Book Number
ISBN 13: 978-0-87351-630-3
ISBN 10: 0-87351-630-3
Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data
Tell me true : memoir, history, and writing a life / edited by Patricia Hampl and Elaine Tyler May.
p. cm.
ISBN-13: 978-0-87351-630-3 (cloth : alk. paper)
ISBN-10: 0-87351-630-3 (cloth : alk. paper)
Ebook ISBN: 978-0-87351-703-4
1. Autobiography. 2. Biography as a literary form. 3. History in literature. 4. Truth in literature I. Hampl, Patricia. II. May, Elaine Tyler.
CT25.T448 2009
809'.93592—dc22
2008016607
Contents
PATRICIA HAMPL & ELAINE TYLER MAY
Introduction
FENTON JOHNSON
The Lion and the Lamb, or the Facts and the Truth: Memoir as Bridge
ANNETTE KOBAK
Whose War?
HELEN EPSTEIN
Coming to Memoir as a Journalist
JUNE CROSS
All in the Family
MICHAEL PATRICK MACDONALD
It’s All in the Past
ELAINE TYLER MAY
Confessions of a Memoir Thief
ALICE KAPLAN
Lady of the Lake
MATT BECKER
The We in the Me: Memoir as Community
PATRICIA HAMPL
You’re History
CHERI REGISTER
Memoir Matters
CARLOS EIRE
Where Falsehoods Dissolve: Memory as History
SAMUEL G. FREEDMAN
Making Memory
ANDRÉ ACIMAN
Rue Delta
D. J. WALDIE
Public Policy / Private Lives
Acknowledgments
Contributors
Tell Me True
PATRICIA HAMPL & ELAINE TYLER MAY
Introduction
So what’s the story? That homely question isn’t seeking mere entertainment, certainly not fiction. It’s asking for the truth. Or at least, a reasonable rendition of facts, reliable strands of information. But once this search produces a narrative, truth reveals its essential malleability in the face of storytelling. Writers of nonfiction face this conundrum daily. It’s an occupational hazard—and an occupational fascination.
Memoir and history regard each other across a wide divide. In effect, they’re goalposts marking the extremes of nonfiction. The turf that separates them—and of course connects them—is the vast playing field of memory. Though both forms are narrative and require the storytelling arts, they reverse each other—memoir being personal history, while history offers a kind of public memoir. A tantalizing gray area exists where memory intersects with history, where the necessities of narrative collide with mundane facts. The record always retains blank spaces—whether the record emerges from archival sources or from personal memory. Onto that blank space writers in both genres bring the remnants of the past they select in telling their stories.
This space is the uncomfortable location where the historian and the memoirist do the work of interpretation and imagination. History properly claims the authority of documentary record. Memoir, especially in recent times, angles forward with strong claims for the individual voice. History charts the big picture, memoir offers the intimate portrait. Like opposing teams on the same field they seem—and sometimes are—charging against each other.
And yet.
When a little girl’s diary, faithfully kept in the threatened secrecy of her hidden life, stands as the greatest testamentary document to the worst recorded events of the twentieth century—we know postmodern readers, not to mention postmodern writers, have narrowed the space between private and public, between the writing of history and the accounting of a personal life. Authority has shifted from facts to voice. Not that one cancels the other. Nor is this shift simply bad news or good news, but a very complicated story in itself. That story—about the record of history and the voice of memoir, about the documents of an individual life and the articulation of a shared past—forms the puzzle the essayists in this collection attempt to address.
The writers here—historians, journalists, poets, and fiction writers—are also memoirists. They—we—are caught in this complex rhythm, not masters of it. That is the point of this collection. For it is right here, in the contemporary tango of history and memoir, that crucial questions of narrative authority in our times are being resolved. Or perhaps not “resolved,” any more than the mysteries of the past can be “solved.” We have gathered testimony from the field—of play, of battle, of the writing of history and the writing of a life—from practitioners who have to contend with these devilish problems at the level of the paragraph and the sentence. Consider these essays, then, as dispatches from the front lines. The front lines of narrative documentary writing in our times.
The evermore pervasive use of the first-person voice in forms of nonfiction—journalism, history, even biography—that were once pristinely shrouded in distant (“omniscient”) third-person narration held aloft by citations and sources, is no small cultural shift. Who tells the story can be as crucial as the story told. What does it mean to the writing of history that the first-person voice has claimed new authority, that memoir is sometimes seen not as “material” for history, but as history itself? And what does it mean to literature that memoir has become the signature literary genre of the age? Where is fact? Where fiction? Where is the “truth” in the disputed ground of nonfiction storytelling? Where does documentary authority reside—in the footnote or the footprint?
History has always relied on personal documents. Nothing new there. Letters, diaries, even family account books and ledgers have long been the gold standard of authenticity in history writing. These are the most primary of primary sources. But when autobiographical writing claims historical rights of its own—not as a “source” but as an act of history—then the equation has changed. So too in literature, when the personal story claims the authority of nonfiction while clinging to the gripping suspense and charms of fiction. Where are readers to place their trust?
Every writer consciously (or even unconsciously) reaching from the margins to the center for political and social power instinctively presents the personal story—the mem
oir, in effect—as a radical document, to be read as personal and public. Surely the most important autobiographical work of mid-twentieth-century America is The Autobiography of Malcolm X. A personal story, but one properly read as history, taught as history. The women’s movement in its various strands also gave rise to an astonishing array of memoirs in the late twentieth century and beyond. And the Holocaust and the Gulag have provided a vast bibliography of memoirs, so much so that they have created new fields of social and historical study rooted in autobiographical documents and personal testimony.
“The personal is political,” the women’s movement of the 1970s asserted with almost gleeful fervor. But with the rise of the memoir in the final quarter of the twentieth century, not only politics in the present, but the aloof enterprise of history began to take on a strikingly personal voice. Meanwhile the novel, for two hundred years the narrative sovereign of literature, began looking over its shoulder at the upstart memoir.
The question of documentary record and personal voice has even reached opinion pages and editorial columns usually reserved for questions of foreign policy and domestic concerns. It’s almost impossible to imagine the novel, as a form, calling down stern oracular judgments from the editorial board of the New York Times. But the memoir has found itself there in recent times more than once, caught red-handed in fabrications by rogue autobiographers, bringing the entire genre into question. Historians, too, have recently been called on the carpet for playing fast and loose with the facts, or with the words of other scholars.
These tabloid-delighting occasions are only a faint indicator of the dynamic, often dismaying power of the first-person voice in our times. Who tells the story, in what diction (neutral? lyrical?), and from what point of view? Is the narrative self properly obscured or revealed? Whether adrift in the broken images of memory or immersed in archival shards, through interviews, investigative travel, sifting through forgotten family albums in a dusty attic or ferreting out the assiduously buried evidence of nations seeking to elude history’s sniffing nose—writers of memoir and history struggle, sometimes unsure of what genre they’re writing in, genres that seem to be up for grabs. The grabbing can get quite strenuous, and brings us to the very question: where does history stop and memoir begin? What are the rules of this game?
But of course it isn’t a game. Nothing less is at stake than the search for our individual and shared truth.
These questions brought us together as editors from the two disciplines facing each other across the disputed space filled with events and memory—history and creative writing. During the spring of 2007, we were able to bring together all the essayists in this book from across the United States and England for a remarkable series of panel discussions and readings on the University of Minnesota’s Minneapolis campus. The participants of those spirited gatherings were invited to write essays based on their commentaries and their experience as memoirists—each given, in a sense, the final word.
But there is no final word to the questions that brought us together then or that bring us together again in this volume. If these individual testimonials establish anything, it is the signal value of the exchange. We are not, after all, opposing teams stampeding to claim the same turf. The movement is far more intricate than that. Perhaps it is more useful to imagine memoir and history standing on opposite sides of a mesh net, the shuttlecock of meaning and interpretation flying back and forth. Our purpose here is to keep the volley going.
FENTON JOHNSON
The Lion and the Lamb or the Facts and the Truth: Memoir as Bridge
• • •
WITH AN EXCERPT FROM
Geography of the Heart: A Memoir
FROM Geography of the Heart: A Memoir
On a discouraging night not long after Larry’s death, I wrote my next-older sister, who had herself helped a lover through his death from leukemia. “Tell me, O older and wiser sister,” I wrote, “how long will this grief last?” Older and wiser, she wrote back: “Grief is never over. The time will come when you control your grief rather than the other way around. You’ll draw upon those memories when you need and want them, rather than having them show up uninvited. But your grief will never go away, which is the way it should be. It and Larry are part of who you are.”
I am a man of few landscapes. Twice I have moved away from San Francisco and twice I have returned, not because of its tolerance or its fog (though I value both) but because I wanted to be near old friends. Looking back, I see that I was trying to re-create in a big city something like the blood family among whom I’d been raised, where on each walk to school I passed two centuries of my genealogy lying in the churchyard.
Now I am not much past forty, but of those whom I returned to be near, many are dead. Even in this city of small neighborhoods, many of the men from whom I learned to respect myself will not unexpectedly round the corner some bright autumn afternoon; I run little risk of the pleasant dangers of random encounters with my past, except in the recesses of my heart.
These days I visit with those dead men, my friends and lovers, though (as my sister predicted) on my terms, not theirs. The imperative to live presses its demands and I comply. Though I commonly have vivid dreams, I seldom dream of them; I never dream of Larry, a fact that saddens me. Maybe after I finish this book, I tell myself, that will change.
But writing is a contemplative profession. In exchange for solitude and various financial and psychological insecurities, I am given the luxury to daydream, and when in midafternoon I release my mind to wander, this is the place it often chooses to visit:
A large grassy bank cradled in the oxbow bend of a river flowing through a deciduous place, curving past a hardwood forest of oak and hickory and walnut—the landscape of my childhood asserts itself, though here and there a redwood pierces this temperate forest’s profile and the stream runs clear and gravel-bottomed; I have lived many years in northern California. Mitt-leaved sassafras in the undergrowth—the air smells of cinnamon as I push through. The riverbank is populated with men, men who have loved me and whom I’ve loved, and men whom I’ve wanted to love: men I wanted to date but hadn’t the courage or time to ask; men who rejected me, men whom I rejected; men I saw only once, on an airplane, in a bar, on a crowded bus, on a nearly empty beach, in a foreign land, in a classroom, in a church. Many of them are surely ill or dead, but they are all here, sons of the mothers of the world, alive and full of joy on the grassy bank of my heart, here at the cusp of their lives and somewhere in their midst sits Larry, my Larry. Young enough still to be beautiful, old enough to know the meaning of the coolness beneath the sun’s warmth; old enough to know that every shadow promises night; old enough to know death. I cross that river to join them. We are gathered by a river where we have knowledge of time outside of time, of death without death, and there on the grassy green bank of my east-west heart, in the endless low-slanting sun, we give ourselves over to making memory and remembering.
• • •
The Lion and the Lamb or the Facts and the Truth: Memoir as Bridge
In 1894, a rural Kentucky entrepreneur sold New York businessman A. W. Dennett the frontier log cabin in which he claimed Abraham Lincoln had been born almost a century earlier. To quote Mark Twain, who makes a cameo appearance in this story: How singular! Yes, and how lucky! since Dennett parlayed the cabin into a business, transporting it around the country for exhibition as the Lincoln birthplace. Each time the cabin was broken down and reassembled, it lost an inch or two to the process; after several years of touring, it was placed in storage, considerably worse for the wear.
Then a committee of leading Americans, among them Twain, President William Howard Taft, Ida Tarbell, William Jennings Bryan, and Samuel Gompers, came together in a campaign to build the cabin a suitable home. To draw up the plans, they engaged John Russell Pope, later the nation’s leading neoclassicist, architect of the Jefferson Memorial
and the National Archives in Washington, D.C.
Pope designed a Greek temple for the Kentucky woods, a massive structure of rose granite and marble rich in numerology (one step for each year of Lincoln’s life; a column for each of the original colonies) but with a minor problem: the interior rooms were too small to accommodate the cabin. Pope designed his monument to house not a real log cabin but an imaginary cabin that conformed to his conception of Lincoln’s humble origins. But the corpses of history must conform to their tombs, so the sponsors lopped off several more feet of the cabin in order to squeeze it into Pope’s mausoleum.
I know all this because I was born in Kentucky, a few miles from the Abraham Lincoln Birthplace National Historical Park. Taking the word of its guides as gospel, I grew up believing that the cabin—now reduced to the dimensions of a good-sized backyard tree house—had been the first home of our most beloved president. Ever sensitive to tourists and taxpayers, the park service stood by the myth until enough time had passed, at which point it quietly recast its brochures in the passive voice, describing the cabin as “traditionally held” to be Lincoln’s birthplace. Today its web page reads, “an early 19th century Kentucky cabin symbolizes the one in which Abraham Lincoln was born.”
Is there meaning to be found amid the murky facts surrounding the mud-chinked cabin that a wily Kentuckian assembled from logs he claimed to have found scattered about the original Lincoln farm and that he sold to a gullible (or enterprising) Yankee businessman? If the highest aspiration of human culture—of science and art, history and memoir—is not fact but truth, where does the story of the Lincoln birthplace cabin fall?
I was born in the Kentucky hills in 1953, a peculiar historical moment in a peculiar historical place. In the late 1920s and 1930s my mother regularly saw movies at the small theater in the county seat; at ninety years old she still warbles lyrics from the musicals of the day, a living testimonial to the power of music to aid and prompt memory.