Talk:My Memoir

Did you know nomination

The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by SL93 (talk) 20:56, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

(

• Comment or view
• Article history

)

• ... that My Memoir, by Edith Wilson, has been described as a "self-serving apologia"? Source: Clayton, Bruce, "Our first woman president 'Edith and Woodrow' details the first lady's pivotal role after her husband's stroke".
  • ALT1:... that one of the reasons My Memoir was written by Edith Wilson was "to defend the legacy" of her husband, Woodrow Wilson? Source: to defend the legacy of President Wilson

• Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Tri-Cornered Baseball Game

Created by Eddie891 (talk). Self-nominated at 22:59, 21 November 2020 (UTC).

• Comment Neither of these hooks look great to me. First, many memoirs are self-serving apologia[1] (just look at Wehrmacht generals for a darker example). Second, many of them are written to defend someone's legacy (essentially the same thing from the other POV). (t · c) buidhe 23:56, 21 November 2020 (UTC)

• While it may be common for Nazi generals, it isn't necessarily for First Ladies of the United States, particularly to have their memoirs openly called that. I skimmed Genzlinger's essay and, while interesting, I don't think it's relevant, given that he's bemoaning the "lost art of shutting up", when one becomes "lost in a sea of people you’ve never heard of" "writing uninterestingly about the unexceptional". I wouldn't consider the wife of a President of the United States uninteresting or unexeptional, and Woodrow Wilson is certainly someone that people have heard of last I checked. While it is true that many memoirs defend someone, I think it rare that they defend someone who isn't the author of the autobiography. Of course, I may be completely wrong here, as I am often. Cheers, Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 00:38, 23 November 2020 (UTC)

• ALT2 ... that in My Memoir, former First Lady of the United States Edith Wilson detailed how she became Woodrow Wilson's gatekeeper after his stroke, prioritizing his official duties? — Maile (talk) 16:58, 23 November 2020 (UTC)

Just an FYI on the subject matter. Edith did what she had to do for her husband and for the country. While it well might be that the doctors advised her to do so, mentioning in the hook, dilutes her somewhat heroic role in keeping the country running.— Maile (talk) 16:58, 23 November 2020 (UTC)

• Full review needed. BlueMoonset (talk) 04:08, 21 December 2020 (UTC)

• QPQ done. The entry is long enough, new enough, no Earwig pings, sources are presented neutrally although I find myself wondering whether there are more out there that might have a different idea about what constitutes “historical value”. Regardless what is in the entry seems probably sufficient at this point. I’m in agreement with Buidhe and Maile that it makes the most sense to make the hook something more distinguishing about the book so I’m ticking the most recent proposal. Innisfree987 (talk) 19:57, 24 December 2020 (UTC)

From WIR Talk

Edith Wilson memoir and historical value

Hi all, I’ve just run across First Lady Edith Wilson’s autobiography My Memoir at DYK and I’m a bit sorry to see how much the entry is focused on book’s lack of historical worth. It’s all sourced, just, it seems unlikely to be the view of women’s historians or cultural historians for that matter—most artifacts have some historical value, it’s just a matter of what they testify to. Of course as it stands this comment is OR on my part. Just thought I’d throw it out there in case someone immersed in the sources might have seen the book referenced. Long shot! Innisfree987 (talk) 20:44, 24 December 2020 (UTC)

We should be careful not to unduly glorify the past-- in this case, I found nothing to contradict the sources that I put into the article-- if I had, I would have put it in the article! However, if anyone finds other things to add, I would be most appreciative. Cheers, Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 21:36, 24 December 2020 (UTC)

Yup like I note, it’s all sourced and I don’t suggest glorifying anything. I did approve the DYK as is. But for further developing the entry, reading raised the question for me especially since Google scholar finds 85 references to the book, suggesting maybe some sources have found it useful for some purpose, which tracks with more recent historical methodologies that use texts very differently than would have been the case when the book was released 80 years ago. But unfortunately at the moment I don’t have access to most of the sources to see more of what it’s being referenced for, in addition to the more recent sources already in the entry. I’ll dig some more in what I do have. Innisfree987 (talk) 22:06, 24 December 2020 (UTC)

Probably best continued at the article’s talk page so I will copy this over there but would continue to be grateful for all input... Innisfree987 (talk) 03:12, 26 December 2020 (UTC)

My concern is what to make of, e.g., this piece in OAH Magazine (2001) that uses My Memoir as a historical source on First Ladies' policy influence. It does not specifically state that the memoir has historical value so we must carefully avoid SYNTH. At the same time it seems challenge the entry’s current emphasis on the book’s lack of historical value. Perhaps simply stating something like “Later historians have used the memoir to evaluate First Ladies' influence on policy [cite], etc. etc.” with other examples. My academic journal access is limited but this (Presidential Studies Quarterly, 1985) seems to be in same camp, using the memoir to study Edith W as a powerful political figure in her own right. Innisfree987 (talk) 03:50, 26 December 2020 (UTC)

Innisfree987 Hmmm... I've actually got quite a bit of academic journal access, so I'll take a look tomorrow and see if I can dig anything up Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 01:15, 29 December 2020 (UTC)

Eddie891, great, I’ll be interested to hear. Innisfree987 (talk) 21:00, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

To add a third example, this has a brief but interesting use of the book to comment on race in the Progressive Era. Innisfree987 (talk) 22:51, 2 January 2021 (UTC)

Ok, I went ahead and added what I had found. We can always change if you find more/different. I also tried my best to balance the lead accordingly but I don’t think I succeeded. I’ll take another stab at it tomorrow. Innisfree987 (talk) 05:32, 7 January 2021 (UTC)