Historian @KevinLevin mentioned a new biography of Lee coming this fall. I have no knowledge or opinion of it. But some historians asked, "Do we really need a new biography of Lee?" The answer is easy: always—if done right. The reasons are complicated. 1/7
penguinrandomhouse.com/books/253141/l…
penguinrandomhouse.com/books/253141/l…
Of course, I wrote about a man who is even more frequently chronicled and even more unpopular than Lee—though he contributed materially to Lee's defeat. I'd argue it was worth doing. I see four reasons for new biographies of old subjects.
2/7
indiebound.org/book/978030747…
2/7
indiebound.org/book/978030747…
First, new questions. I explored Custer in Reconstruction, his role in politics, his place in intellectual, environmental, & economic history. Unexpected contexts change how we see familiar figures, leading to surprising historical insight—though they don't rehabilitate.
3/7
3/7
Second, new characters. A part of asking fresh questions is looking at other people in the subject's life—trying to sympathetically their perspectives. The real hero of my bio is the self-emancipated Eliza Brown, who fought successfully for advantage & power for 6 years.
4/7
4/7
Third, new sources—often found through new questions. This is not *necessary*. If it were, we'd be defining biography as mere fact-grubbing (no need for more books when we "know" it all). But it can be important. What I found in Freedmen's Bureau records for Texas in 1865–66!
5/7
5/7
Fourth, audience. The subject is a biography's billboard, its entryway. Non-academic readers never *have* to read a book; they want to start with something, someone, they know. But it doesn't end there. The trick is to tell them something they never expected to learn.
6/7
6/7
From a purely scholarly standpoint, certain figures get excess attention, yes. But let's remember that usually they held power, & we'll always interrogate power. Biography is a hybrid of literature & scholarship. It promises a story, a life story. But it can deliver far more.
7/7
7/7
*correction to 4/7
“sympathetically *inhabit* their perspectives.”
We regret the error.
“sympathetically *inhabit* their perspectives.”
We regret the error.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
