Tuesday, September 23, 2008
Recollections and Editions
"I should have no Objection to a Repetition of the same Life from its Beginning, only asking the Advantage Authors have in a second Edition to correct some Faults of the first. So would I if I might, besides corrg (?) the Faults, change some sinister Accidents & Events of it for others more favourable, but tho' this were deny'd, I should still accept the Offer. However, since such a Repetition is not to be expected, the Thing most like living one's Life over again, seems to be a Recollection of the Life; and to make that Recollection as durable as possible, the putting it down in Writing " (3). I found this quote incredibly intriguing. If the recollection of one's life is the closest thing to living one's life again, what happens if those recollections are faulty? Does it change the events in one's life? It is interesting that Franklin uses the idea of authors correcting errors in a second edition. If an autobiography is like a second edition of one's life, do those authors writing about their lives change events to have a more pleasing outcome? How do you know what is true and what has been edited? In Part One of Franklin's autobiography he enumerates many errors that he made during his life. By including these errors, the reader can more easily trust that what he is writing is truth. If the author's memory is incorrect (and we don't have a second voice to make the correction - i.e. Mary Jemison's misrecollection of events and Seaver's comments on them) then can it be said that the author is editing one's life, even if it is not on purpose? As imperfect beings, how can we trust someone's memory of their own life to be accurate and clear enough to write an autobiography?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
On my first read through, this passage intrigued me as well, yet I formulated an entirely different interpretation. I read the quote as Franklin looking back and reflecting on his life. Would he have lived it over the exact same way if he had the chance? Or, would there be decisions he would change now that he is older, wiser and looking back? Since reliving ones live is impossible, the next logical step is to do the next best thing - immortalize one's life in writing so you (and others) can "relive" your life.
However, Sarah's interpretation made me look at it again. Jumping off her idea of memory, can Franklin selectively choose or forget certain events that he would not want to relive nor want the audience to relive? How can the reader know retrospectively 200 years later what was left unsaid? We cannot ever know and hence just have to trust that Franlkin pens a fair portrait of himself. Simlar to with Stein, the gaps in the story are as important as those that Franklin conscoiusly includes.
This also connects to Mary Jemison, with her faulty memory that Seaver inserted corrections for throughout the text. Without the benefit of an intermediary between the person who lived the story and yourself, how can one possibly know what is truthful and what is false? And does Franklin deliberately change anything in his recount of his life or are any errors simply mistakes in his memory? Again, like with Stein, we are forced to take things with a grain of salt and perhaps not assume that everything is one hundred percent truthful or accurate.
Post a Comment