Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

franhawthorne t1_j6miqdj wrote

I'm trying to figure out the psychology of someone who wants personal letters made public... eventually. Is the person protecting the privacy of the other recipients and senders of the letters? In that case, why ever make them public? More likely, is it ultra-egoism and a need to control? (C'mon, do you really think the famous people are preserving the letters for History?)

3

bofh000 t1_j6nmxzu wrote

Many writers used letters as a literary outlet, some used them as a literary device.

3

franhawthorne t1_j6npkae wrote

Thanks for pointing out these other types of letters. If the letters are a literary outlet, I wonder how often the authors specify that their publication must be delayed for decades? When letters are used as a device within a book -- such as for an epistolary novel -- that's a very different matter, of course.

2

cultureicon t1_j6obdaf wrote

I happened upon a letter telling her it's up to her what to do with them, but they should probably be withheld a good number of years because they discuss other living people.

Letter from 6 July 1932. Couldn't copy and paste on mobile.

2

franhawthorne t1_j6og1j6 wrote

Thank you for telling me about that letter. It still leaves me with the basic question: Why publish the letters at all? I understand that if you're as famous as TS Eliot, you assume that every little thing you ever wrote will be fascinating to biographers and literary scholars, and I suppose he's right, but it just strikes me that at some point this becomes more egotistical and less useful to historians. Oh, I'm just being cranky!

2