I think the circumstances matter greatly. In those terms, I can only speak to Plath, because those are the circumstances I know the most about. I think the publication of her Unabridged Journals was about as ethical as that kind of publishing can be, in that her children were in charge of it, once their father died, and the editor (Karen Kukil) had decades of training in transcription and archival studies, and had been in charge of Plath's papers at Smith College for a long time, by then.
Moreover, Plath was very clear about her aims, as a writer-- she was writing with the ambition of being widely read and revered, and actually says many times in her letters that probably someday these will be published. She doesn't, to the best of my memory, say that in her diaries, but it's hard for me to imagine her being dismayed that she's become an iconic writer and cultural figure.
One quick note-- no one accused Hughes of burning or losing the last diaries or Double Exposure. He admitted to doing both, actually, in two different published essays, the first of which acted as the Foreword to Plath's Journals, a heavily abridged edition he published and edited in 1982. So, not an accusation. Just his own words. I can send you a scan of the essays, if you want to read them.
Thank you for this feedback! I agree with you that Plath wouldn’t be dismayed by the fact she became a famous writer/ cultural icon. But I had no idea that Hughes actually admitted to burning them!?!? I would love to see the scan of those essays.
There are people who have consented to have their diaries released. I think that may have been Joan Didion’s choice knowing what we know of her. I don’t feel comfortable reading people personal diaries unless they made the choice themselves. Kafka wanted his burned and they still released them.
I agree it’s a complex topic tbh. I’ve heard that kafkas diaries are amazing. I’m itching to see if the foreword to Didion’s diaries tells us if she wanted them published or not, hoping for another Patricia Highsmith situation.
I keep a diary and i am mortified when i think of the fact that it might be read by others in the future. Especially those I have been unkind to. There's some hypocrisy in my words because I have the complete diaries of Kafka at home.
There's a reason authors published their other works and NOT their diary. Its so sad that their diaries are everywhere for the world to intrude into
Two responses. First, I’ve never read Millay. My, what a magnificent writer. I will be reading her now. Any particular novel you suggest I start with? Second, I couldn’t help thinking about The Diary of Ann Frank. I believe it would have been unethical to get that diary from being published for a host of reasons, the most glaring being the circumstances of her life and death. That said, I recommend the edition published after her father’s death that includes more of her sexual explorations. Finally, thank you for your fine, thoughtful essays.
Milay never wrote a novel, but wrote a plethora of poems and plays I reccomend you check out!! I agree with Anne Frank I read her diary when I was 13! But not the unedited version I definitely will check that one out.
I can’t thank you enough. I never made it to the library. I clicked onto the link and had a transcendent experience. First thing I did was look up Renascence. Then I read a poem that took my breath away and returned my soul to me. Thank you once more. I can’t believe I never knew Millay’s work. Thank you Marissa and Paolo for introducing her to me. I will buy the book and read the poems fast, slow, daily.
I’m so happy to hear that. She was an intense person, very gripped by the issues of her day, and her writing is distinctive and moving. I especially like her sonnets.
For me it’s not that complicated. If they didn’t consent to it and gave no indication while they were alive, that it was a work they intended to publish, then yes, it’s unethical. You can make the argument that many achingly beautiful works would be lost to the sands of time if everyone honoured the wishes of artists. That’s true. But the quality of the prose isn’t an ethical pass.
Neither does this mean that I’m likely to turn my gaze away from writing that has been published against the authors wishes. I’m as nosey as the next person and itch to know their inner lives. But I think we all have to get comfortable with the fact there’s a tension between the two competing ideals that a) the world needs these works of art (or to put it another way - the work, itself is owed exposure due to it’s brilliance) and b) that the person who created the work intended for it to never see the light of day.
Also, as a final point, I think there’s a relative recency bias to these conversations where we talk about writers from the 20th century onwards. It would be interesting to explore this further. Like Marcus Aurelius’ Meditations were personal diaries and now we pore over them as works of philosophy. Jane Austen fans frequently vent their frustrations that her sister destroyed the writer’s letters after her death, but perhaps we need to view it as a supreme act of empathy by a loving sibling.
Also, this is also what I felt reading Kafka’s letters to Milena. They were otherworldly and beautiful, but I felt like I was intruding. It didn’t help that we don’t know Milena’s answers, so he is the only one to stand judgement on what is said between them.
I agree that it does feel intrusive. At least with fiction and poetry, there is a “fictional” aspect of it that serves as a blanket, protecting the author somewhat. The diaries are unfiltered. I have at least four diaries and I would dread any of my family members reading them, let alone the rest of the world. Still, Plath had to know somewhat that her diaries were part of her legacy.
This is such an interesting topic, and it made me think of when I read Henry and June, a curated collection from some of Anais Nin's journals that was published after her death. I loved the book, but it always struck me as bizarre that someone could take the absolutely most personal creations of a person (I've noticed as well it's usually a woman) and edit/publish them in any way they wish. In any case, I really enjoyed reading your essay, and I'm curious to know what you think about some of Didion's most intimate diaries being published soon.
(p.s. So cool to read something randomly by someone who is also from Venice!)
Reading about this reminded me of a conversation we often have as Arab readers when reading Ghassan Kanafani’s love letters to Ghada Al-Samman. Now those letters were published by Ghada herself after years of Ghassan’s assassination without his wife’s or children’s consent. Also she only published his letters to her, and we never get to see her side of the story.
She also did the same thing with another poet (publishing his love letters to her after his death) which made people hate her
I was a beta reader for Carolyn Cassady's posthumous poetry collection, based on my connections to some of the people in that circle. I think her family treated the material with respect, there was nothing that would embarass her, and it showed another side of her that she had kept private until her daughters found the poems.
I think the circumstances matter greatly. In those terms, I can only speak to Plath, because those are the circumstances I know the most about. I think the publication of her Unabridged Journals was about as ethical as that kind of publishing can be, in that her children were in charge of it, once their father died, and the editor (Karen Kukil) had decades of training in transcription and archival studies, and had been in charge of Plath's papers at Smith College for a long time, by then.
Moreover, Plath was very clear about her aims, as a writer-- she was writing with the ambition of being widely read and revered, and actually says many times in her letters that probably someday these will be published. She doesn't, to the best of my memory, say that in her diaries, but it's hard for me to imagine her being dismayed that she's become an iconic writer and cultural figure.
One quick note-- no one accused Hughes of burning or losing the last diaries or Double Exposure. He admitted to doing both, actually, in two different published essays, the first of which acted as the Foreword to Plath's Journals, a heavily abridged edition he published and edited in 1982. So, not an accusation. Just his own words. I can send you a scan of the essays, if you want to read them.
Thank you for this feedback! I agree with you that Plath wouldn’t be dismayed by the fact she became a famous writer/ cultural icon. But I had no idea that Hughes actually admitted to burning them!?!? I would love to see the scan of those essays.
There are people who have consented to have their diaries released. I think that may have been Joan Didion’s choice knowing what we know of her. I don’t feel comfortable reading people personal diaries unless they made the choice themselves. Kafka wanted his burned and they still released them.
I agree it’s a complex topic tbh. I’ve heard that kafkas diaries are amazing. I’m itching to see if the foreword to Didion’s diaries tells us if she wanted them published or not, hoping for another Patricia Highsmith situation.
My issue is less about their publishing and more about where the money goes (like you talk about with Hughes).
Honestly I don't think it's entirely ethical but I would still advocate for reading their journals anyway as how else can you get into their mind?
I keep a diary and i am mortified when i think of the fact that it might be read by others in the future. Especially those I have been unkind to. There's some hypocrisy in my words because I have the complete diaries of Kafka at home.
There's a reason authors published their other works and NOT their diary. Its so sad that their diaries are everywhere for the world to intrude into
Two responses. First, I’ve never read Millay. My, what a magnificent writer. I will be reading her now. Any particular novel you suggest I start with? Second, I couldn’t help thinking about The Diary of Ann Frank. I believe it would have been unethical to get that diary from being published for a host of reasons, the most glaring being the circumstances of her life and death. That said, I recommend the edition published after her father’s death that includes more of her sexual explorations. Finally, thank you for your fine, thoughtful essays.
Milay never wrote a novel, but wrote a plethora of poems and plays I reccomend you check out!! I agree with Anne Frank I read her diary when I was 13! But not the unedited version I definitely will check that one out.
Poems
Going to the library today will check out her pens. Thanks
You can also download her poems and save them in the Books app on your phone.
http://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/59167
I can’t thank you enough. I never made it to the library. I clicked onto the link and had a transcendent experience. First thing I did was look up Renascence. Then I read a poem that took my breath away and returned my soul to me. Thank you once more. I can’t believe I never knew Millay’s work. Thank you Marissa and Paolo for introducing her to me. I will buy the book and read the poems fast, slow, daily.
I’m so happy to hear that. She was an intense person, very gripped by the issues of her day, and her writing is distinctive and moving. I especially like her sonnets.
hey Marissa this was an interesting article. I admit i haven’t thought about this before…
For me it’s not that complicated. If they didn’t consent to it and gave no indication while they were alive, that it was a work they intended to publish, then yes, it’s unethical. You can make the argument that many achingly beautiful works would be lost to the sands of time if everyone honoured the wishes of artists. That’s true. But the quality of the prose isn’t an ethical pass.
Neither does this mean that I’m likely to turn my gaze away from writing that has been published against the authors wishes. I’m as nosey as the next person and itch to know their inner lives. But I think we all have to get comfortable with the fact there’s a tension between the two competing ideals that a) the world needs these works of art (or to put it another way - the work, itself is owed exposure due to it’s brilliance) and b) that the person who created the work intended for it to never see the light of day.
Also, as a final point, I think there’s a relative recency bias to these conversations where we talk about writers from the 20th century onwards. It would be interesting to explore this further. Like Marcus Aurelius’ Meditations were personal diaries and now we pore over them as works of philosophy. Jane Austen fans frequently vent their frustrations that her sister destroyed the writer’s letters after her death, but perhaps we need to view it as a supreme act of empathy by a loving sibling.
Plath left instructions to publish the bell jar I think if she wanted her journals published she would of said so
The Bell Jar was published before Plaths death under the pseudonym Victoria Lucas.
Also, this is also what I felt reading Kafka’s letters to Milena. They were otherworldly and beautiful, but I felt like I was intruding. It didn’t help that we don’t know Milena’s answers, so he is the only one to stand judgement on what is said between them.
I agree that it does feel intrusive. At least with fiction and poetry, there is a “fictional” aspect of it that serves as a blanket, protecting the author somewhat. The diaries are unfiltered. I have at least four diaries and I would dread any of my family members reading them, let alone the rest of the world. Still, Plath had to know somewhat that her diaries were part of her legacy.
This is such an interesting topic, and it made me think of when I read Henry and June, a curated collection from some of Anais Nin's journals that was published after her death. I loved the book, but it always struck me as bizarre that someone could take the absolutely most personal creations of a person (I've noticed as well it's usually a woman) and edit/publish them in any way they wish. In any case, I really enjoyed reading your essay, and I'm curious to know what you think about some of Didion's most intimate diaries being published soon.
(p.s. So cool to read something randomly by someone who is also from Venice!)
Reading about this reminded me of a conversation we often have as Arab readers when reading Ghassan Kanafani’s love letters to Ghada Al-Samman. Now those letters were published by Ghada herself after years of Ghassan’s assassination without his wife’s or children’s consent. Also she only published his letters to her, and we never get to see her side of the story.
She also did the same thing with another poet (publishing his love letters to her after his death) which made people hate her
I’ve been wondering on this very topic for a long time. Well insightful and wonderfully done article! 👌🏻
I was a beta reader for Carolyn Cassady's posthumous poetry collection, based on my connections to some of the people in that circle. I think her family treated the material with respect, there was nothing that would embarass her, and it showed another side of her that she had kept private until her daughters found the poems.
such an interesting topic, i’ve asked myself the same question! saved to read