(2008)
Tony Horwitz is one of the best writers who are forging the trail for
a new genre, one that is in desperate need of a name. More on that in a
minute.
In books like Confederates in the Attic and Blue Latitudes (my two
favorites), as well as Bhagdad Without A Map, Horwitz has merged travel
writing, history writing and memoir writing.
Why, for example, write about the trip Captain Cook took when you can
ride it yourself and mix your experiences with a colorful summary of
Cook's trip, as Horwitz did with Blue Latitudes?
Put another way Horwitz retraces the steps of others, taking readers
along for the ride. These reports are unflinching at times – Howard Zinn
would be satifisfied – while also quite comic and entertaining.
I was excited at the chance to interview Mr. Horwitz about his new book.
The second half of this interview will follow in about two weeks, after I
finish the book, and will focus more on the book itself.
Scott:How would you describe your style of writing? In
encouraging others to read your books, especially my favorite,
Confederates In the Attic, I call it a cross between memoir writing and
history. Do you agree it has elements of both?
Tony: To be honest, I don't know what to call my books. They're a
blend of history, journalism and adventure travel, with my own story
woven in. There's a bit of memoir in Confederates but not much of it in
my other books. If you come up with a catchy shorthand name for this
style, please let me know!
When you started writing your books what was your goal? Did
you intend to inject yourself into your stories or did it just sort of
turn out that way? Have you encountered any historians giving you grief
over that?
My first two books, One For the Road and Baghdad Without A Map, were
basically traveler's tales that grew out of my adventures as a reporter
in Australia and the Middle East. I had no goal other than to write
books, which gave me the latitude to do things I couldn't in my
journalistic work and also a second career of sorts. But I did them
while still working at my day job as a journalist.
My last three books, Confederates in the Attic, Blue Latitudes, and A
Voyage Long and Strange, were full-time occupations and have gradually
moved me away from journalism and towards history. By and large, I find
historians welcome nonfiction that exposes a general audience to
historical topics, so long as the material is accurate. Also, since
they're often limited to libraries and classrooms, they're very
interested to find how ordinary people remember and experience history.
What was your goal and plan with this particular book? Have
you thought about what historical periods you will be writing about for
future books?
I don't really have clear goals when I begin a book, apart from
exploring (and getting lost in) a topic I feel passionate about. In the
case of A Voyage Long and Strange, I wanted to fill a gaping hole in my
knowledge and better understand why it is Americans in general have
chosen to forget or neglect an exciting chapter of our history, one that
explains a great deal about what this country became and who we are.
What kind of reaction have you received from those you have
written about? I'm particularly curious about reaction to Confederates
In the Attic since you wrote in there about Civil War reenactors
including those at Antietam and Gettysburg, both of which are in my
backyard.
You can never please all readers and I've occasionally gotten angry
responses from those I've written about. While most reenactors I've
spoken to enjoyed Confederates, and felt it accurately portrayed living
history, some hardcores felt I was making fun of them (I was, of course,
but of myself as well, and felt I was sympathetic while gently ribbing
reenactors). I also got heat from extreme Southern nationalists who
resent any suggestion that the Confederacy was misguided or that
remembrance of it may offend others.
I wrote a llist of things you should never say to a Civil
War reenactor. Would you like to suggest any other things you should
not say?
Your list hits the high points. To be safe, never call someone a
reenactor, say living history. Also just "hardcore" not hardcore
reenactor
What is it about history that so interests you as a writers
Like a lot of history buffs, I think it's just a bug I've had since
early childhood, the past has always fascinated me, even staring at old
pennies as a little boy. As a writer, I'm also drawn to the way the past
influences the present, despite Americans' generally forward-looking
and amnesiac tendencies. Perhaps, too, I find the present so
discouraging at times that I prefer to hide out in the past.
What other writers do you like to read?
For pleasure I mostly read modern fiction, a few of my favorite
novelists are Ian McEwan, Russell Banks, and my wife, Geraldine Brooks.
For nonfiction, I'm a big fan of Jonathan Raban and Annie Dillard.
No comments:
Post a Comment