I’m not one of those who are snobbish about historical novels. Au contraire, I admire anyone who can spin a believable yarn set in the past, and tend to ignore all but the most glaring of inaccuracies and anachronisms. After all, the historical novel is for entertainment, not a scholarly text to be scrutinised. The following are, in my view, the ‘best’ (by which I mean most entertaining and transporting) books of the genre that I’ve read.
Given that I’ve been reading the autobiographies of people worthy of note on ODNB, it’s unsurprising that quite a few of them went to boarding school. Despite growing up on Enid Blyton, I never really fancied the idea, put off by thoughts such as ‘but if you’re being picked on, you can’t get away!’ and ‘ugh, sharing a room and never being alone ever!’ With these ideas, I’m similar to some late-nineteenth/early-twentieth century only children, but not others.
I’m still ordering and reading autobiographies of only children by the pile. So far I’ve been through autobiographies by people born between 1850 and 1920ish, and I’m going up to 1945, so I’ve still got a little while to go. But autobiographies are commonly seen as a dubious historical source, not even worth bothering with. Here are some thoughts I’ve come up with over the course of my reading.
I’m coming to the end of a four-week trial of Nvivo. Having tested it out, with the help of Bazeley and Jackson’s guidebook, on my notes from early-twentieth century psychology/sociology articles about only children, I’m going to keep it for my oral history and autobiography work. This week’s blog is about my experiences of Nvivo, and using computers in my work in general.
Sometimes, you come across an autobiography that transports you to a closeted, miserable-sounding childhood, and you can’t help but feeling really sorry for the author. I’ve read more than thirty autobiographies of only children now, and while a lot of them described themselves as isolated, they at least seemed to have some companionship of their own age laid on sometimes. Scholar and author Joan Evans’ (b. 1893) descriptions of her childhood sounded a lot worse than most.
I confess - I’ve never read anything by Antonia White (b. 1899) or Dodie Smith (b. 1896). I really enjoyed reading their autobiographies though - very interesting, and more differences and similarities emerging between the experiences of different only children.
Autobiography-reading is chugging along nicely, and I should hopefully reach at least the statistically-okay number of thirty from people born in the nineteenth century (as opposed to people who actually write in the nineteenth century, as we’re talking people born after about 1850 here!). Physical illness seems to be a recurring theme, with 14/20 autobiographers so far talking about it in some form. This is interesting, partly from the contemporary/near-contemporary view that only children were less healthy, but also from the vague idea I’ve picked up regarding Victorian/Edwardian fetishisation of illness - I’ve done no reading whatsoever on the subject, but do wonder if illness is such a noticeable feature of autobiographies of those who had siblings, and whether those without siblings really were more fragile, had more anxious parents, or were onlies _because _their illnesses had put their parents off having further children.
Last week I happened across this tweet, asking whether we see ourselves as doctoral students or doctoral researchers. I found it a very interesting question to ponder!Thus far, I’ve automatically referred to myself as a student whenever the occasion to provide my occupation has arisen. In much the same way, I automatically tick ‘Miss’, even though my sensibilities say my marital status is nothing to do with anything - a hangover from youth, possibly (and I get to avoid the whole ‘Miss/Ms’ thing when I become a doctor, yay!). And in some ways, I am a student. The big one is that I’m producing a piece of work, someone’s judgment on which will or won’t result in a qualification. I have a student ID, get student discount and take am automatically a member of the Student Union, whose events I partake in. I socalise with the student body rather than the staff, and were I to become a department committee member, I would be representing students. Any grants I apply for are designated for ‘students’, and I can take advantage of conferences and events aimed specifically at ‘students’.
The reading of Victorians’ autobiographies so far has been a very male-centred activity. There’s no mystery as to why - men got to do more interesting things than women, and were probably more likely to think their experiences were worth writing about, too. This week, I got to read the autobiographies of two only-child actresses - Julia Neilson (1868-1957) and Nancy Price (1880-1970). Despite the twelve-year age gap (and the almost identical gap between the publication of their autobiographies), it’s pretty likely that they crossed paths as they moved in the same circles, though I can’t find any conclusive evidence to back that up. They had in common that rare thing - being allowed to continue working on the stage after marriage - and that’s probably how they amassed enough experiences to write autobiographies.