Privacy

Now that I've had some time to formulate my thoughts into cohesive sentences, I think I can explain why I personally feel uncomfortable reading Belton's journals. First off, I'd like to thank Erika for her marvellous presentation. I had had only a superficial knowledge of Don Belton and his work, and your insight enlightened me and brought up questions that I would have never thought to ask.

I can certainly see the academic and historical value of reading or even publishing Belton's journals, as outlined by Professor Irmscher. After all, I had no problem with reading Florence DeShon's incredibly intimate correspondence with Eastman - which is precisely why I couldn't figure out why reading Belton's journal bothered me so immensely. 

I'm still not quite certain of the reason for this personally stark difference in "acceptable" acts, but I believe it has to do with my distaste for heavily biographical reading of literary works. I came up against the same issue when we were studying Woolf's letters and comparing them to the Mrs. Dalloway page proofs. We claimed that the omission of Clarissa's "escape" was a reflection of Woolf's own suicidal tendencies; while I concede that the evidence is there, I just don't think that is a valid conclusion. In my experience, authors are always separate from their works, even if there is overlap or the authors "recycle" their personal experiences through characters. The characters, after all, are just that - fictional beings. Even in journals, the writer can create a narrative persona that speaks, acts, and even lives like the author, but who isn't the author exactly, but simply the author's reflection and interpretation of his or her life and the experiences he or she goes through. I believe someone mentioned Sylvia Plath in class today as an example of "acceptable" journals to read. If I recall correctly, Sylvia decorated the borders of her journals; all signs pointed to the conclusion that she expected them to be read someday. Even though they contain intensely personal insight into her life, she knew that the Sylvia in the journals was not Sylvia Plath, but represented a fictionalized doppelganger, the protagonist of a fictional story that ran parallel to reality, but did not entirely represent it. 

At this point I feel like I'm rambling, so I'll bring it back to Belton. I don't think we can use the journals to shed light on the "real" Belton, nor can we use them to interpret his unpublished poetry or the other works he left behind. Belton was a master of language and this is evident upon reading his journals. It follows, then, that even though he did not want anyone to read them, he still knew that the sensitive information would be sensitive only to a certain few, like his colleagues, and that the Don Belton in the journals was his portrayal of his own life. I guess I'm not so concerned with the privacy issue as I am with the use of the journals.