An autobiography gives you more of an impression and idea of what was really important though words, ideals, and memories. However, unless a person writes a memoir of all the important dates of his or her life it is sometimes hard to remember dates and names of important places and events. However, you definitely get a sense of what made this individual "tick" what his or her likes and dislikes were. You know what they believed and the struggles they overcome to achieve greatness. Ben Franklin did a fantastic job remembering events and all his triumphs and good fortunes throughout his life. He recalled his childhood and parents. He gave his mother credit for having healthy children due to her suckling or what I believe we call breastfeeding today. I'm amazed at his determination to be able to improve the 13 virtues he continued to practice and become a better man. He practically invented or was with the men who brainstormed the ideas for a firehouse, libraries, and hospitals. He was willing to use words in a way to get what was needed at the time of war by saying "other materials or grains" meaning ammunition without spelling it out. He was among the great thinkers and doers of his time. A truly amazing individual who took risks and was not afraid to think outside of the box.
A biograghy on the other can be interpretted wrongly or slightly different then the individual it is written about. It often requires research and double checking of dates and events. Most biograhies are written at the end of a person life. Dealing with his or her accomplishments which also requires a good memory or notes for dates, places, and times, of important events. I think it would be extremely important for the person writing the biography to really get to know this person if possible through interviews and time so they know the man behind the story.
I have to agree with the way you phrased the difference between autobiographies and biographies. I never thought of them as having such a different way of looking at a person's life, but it makes sense. If you write down or speak a story that is happening at the time, it will sound much different and have much less "perspective" than the same incident will have while being described a decade - or even a year - after the situation being described.
ReplyDeleteGood post!
I'll throw in my devil's advocate two-cents: Can you rely on an autobiography being accurate? Isn't it as subject to interpretation as a biography? Does the person writing it have an incentive to be forthcoming about his/her bad points as well as accomplishments? Can someone accurately remember events from early in their life?
ReplyDeleteRhonda
Rhonda I read your comment to Crystale's blog. Readers surely cannot rely on the accuracy of an autobiography or a biography. Autobiographies are written from that persons point of view. In this world whose point of view is right? Mine, yours, Franklins, Hawkes, Hakims? We read autobiographies to understand someone else's life through their point of view. The autobiography itself might be accurate to the person who wrote it, but not necessarily accurate in anyone else point of view who is reading it.
DeleteGenerally speaking, biographies are even less accurate. However, parts of the biography are accurate to the author only because it is written how they interpreted the information they gained from interviewing. Again accurate?? -- Not really.
Does anyone have an incentive to be forthcoming about their bad points?
Can humans ever accurately remember events throughout the entire life? They might think it is accurate; but, again what is really accurate in remembering ones memories? Something I remember from last week and tell you today will come our different if I told you about the same event in a year from now. Time moves forward and our interpretations are constantly changing depending on what we experience along the way. Time gives us experiences that change interpretations of past memories. This is just a fact of life!!!
I completely agree that a biography requires so much research. I do think it also gives the researcher a greater appreciation for the person who is being researched. The researcher is reading many other perspectives. You are encouraging me to read Ben Franklin, it sounds very worthwhile! Thanks! Chris
ReplyDeleteCrystale, I agree with what you said about Franklin being a great thinker and doer of his time period. He was a true intellect. He definitely chose his words wisely and took great care in wording his sentences when debating something or speaking in general. I know somewhere is his autobiography he mentions that he was not a very good speaker. However, compared to the way many people spoke back then he was way ahead of his time. Remember he was inspired by the Socratic Method. I would love to hear Franklin and VP Biden debate.
ReplyDeleteFranklin was a great risk taker who learned from his mistakes and gained a huge amount of knowledge by making mistakes. Page 113 in his auto, "But such mistakes are not new; history is full of the errors of states and princes." If we don't make mistakes we don't learn a thing. I tell my students this all the time. Making mistakes is how we learn!!
Very well said, I couldn't agree with you more. I've read several different biographies on the same person and some of the key facts and dates are changed a little and in some case left out. A person, like Ben Franklin, who kept the details of life and wrote about them is a much more accurate and interesting read.
ReplyDeleteI may be stealing some of your center ideas! Very cute!!!
ReplyDelete