One thing that stood out to me in Heilbrun's essay--like an ink splatter on a piece of starch white paper--was her example of May Sarton's novels. She briefly explains that this female author penned a book about her experience with buying a house and living alone, but realized after that she didn't reveal any of the "anger, passionate struggle, or despair of her life," (Heilbrun, 13) unintentionally being less than honest. Her next book, Journal of a Solitude, deliberately exposed the pain that she hid before, paving a new path for women in literature.
This was 1973, the turning point for modern women's autobiographies. This is something that is important to me in particular, because when I write for myself--even though I know there is a very small chance that someone else will see it--I put limitations on what I can say. I put my thoughts in an imaginary box and only extract the ones that I consider to be appropriate, significant, meaningful ones. Ones that "deserve" to be written about, rather than allowing myself to bask in the glory and comfort of pouring out my feelings and making them concrete.
What many people don't understand is that it's the raw, real, ugly truth that is most alluring and absorbing and relatable. It makes us trust the author, think of her as a friend, want to share the writing with our friends. It's what makes both sexes respect the author and want more. In general, it has seemed to bring about more equality, because it proves that the woman is real, just like the men of the world.
Heilbrun says something I find to be influential toward the middle of her article: "Power is the ability to take one's place in whatever discourse is essential to action and the right to have one's part matter" (Heilbrun, 18). In many cases today, whatever is "essential" is done, whatever actions that are necessary are taken. It's easy to forget about the crossroads in history where everything changes, especially since some milestones are undefinable and unattainable without the others beside them, boosting them up, but Heilbrun's and Campbell's writing are both steps in the right direction -- toward an equal future in literature and life.
Campbell, Karlyn Kohrs. "Agency: Promiscuous and Protean." Communication and Critical/Cultural Studies 2.1 (2005): 1-19.
Heilbrun, Carolyn. "Introduction." In Writing a Woman's Life. New York: Norton, 1988. 11-24.
That anecdote about May Sarton's books struck me too. She had strived to create a truthful piece of work but she unconsciously stripped that truth away and left a text that was tailored to society's norms of what an autobiographical account should be. It's interesting that despite the breakthrough she had later on in realizing how she edited herself was a turning point for that discourse but yet women are still editing themselves as such because of societal pressure, most of this in an unconscious manner. It makes me wonder about the power of the audience as an agent, especially considering that there may never be an actual audience yet this fictionalized, abstract "audience" still wields power and prescribes agency.
ReplyDeleteI agree with the idea that truth is what an audience craves but perhaps a better word may be authenticity. People crave for people to be authentic and genuine, to derive from a place that is truth but maybe not necessarily truth in itself. Many rather watch the movie based on the true story rather than go to the source itself, you know? Also people I feel, have preconceived ideas about truth and authenticity and what they believe is "believable". This is done because at times the truth can make people very uncomfortable, a good possible reason as to why Sarton had censored herself. Women were and still are typically told to censor themselves for the benefit of others because the truth is uncomfortable, whatever that may be.