Thanks, Grade School Teachers, For Teaching Me The Absolute Basics. Yet Again.

The many theorists who we have read this week have all taken this idea of autobiography and tore it to shreds. All of their attention on cracks and contradictions on autobiography have completely changed my notion of what I thought to be, just an “individual writing a story about his or her life.” I thought it was simple. No loop-holes. No contradictions. No gaps. Simple. But thanks to many of the academes writers of the Smith & Watson edition of Women, Autobiography, Theory, I now have to struggle through an explication a fifth-grade term.
I have now taken the term to mean “an individual writing a story which focuses on his or her life, not necessarily meaning the story is strictly only about that person.” Susan Stanford Friedman’s article entitled “Women’s Autobiographical Selves: Theory and Practice” has made a hefty impact on my definition. In her article she says “Isolated individualism is an illusion…” (Smith, Watson) and we discussed in class, that that means that we always tell the story of someone else even if we don’t intend to. Our reasons for reading autobiographies, therefore, change as well.
Before this week of class, I was taught that people read autobiographies for numerous reasons which include getting to see the raw detail of a first-hand experience, seeing a perspective different from your own or making sense of your own experience. The theorists we have read, Friedman included, take this basic idea of “why” and alter it. Sure we read autobiographies for the previously stated reasons but we’re also reading for more than just the author’s story. We’re reading for the story of their children, of their family, and of their friends. We’re reading about their community and how they reacted to the situation in play. Feminist theorists take these concepts for why we read autobiographies and draw attention to the specific autobiographics or “cracks” that lie within the works.
Feminist theorists might find promise in the missing pieces of the autobiographical works because it shows that parts of the story can change over a course of time. Betty Tells Her Story is a perfect example of how the story’s tone and details can change only within a matter of hours. This showcases how credibility plays a factor when reading autobiographies. If their small details of their stories can change, what goes to say that the big details won’t be distorted?
After discussing the concept of autobiographies in depth this past week, I’m not too sure it if will make reading these narratives more or less difficult. I shall see. 