The private diary of Myrtle Gamble Knister, wife of modernist Canadian writer Raymond Knister, was used as evidence to prove her husband’s drowning in 1932 was an accident instead of a suicide. However, her diary wasn’t considered significant enough to be placed in archives (Carter 46). Therefore, though there was a lot of useful, relevant information, her diary’s “contribution to Canadian literature is virtually nill” (Carter 47). Myrtle Knister’s diary portrays the unfortunate drowning of a joyful, successful writer (Carter 43); while Dorothy Livesay’s archive (her autobiographical stories), which dominates Canadian literature (Carter 47), present a “sexually frustrated, financially troubled, unhappy” (Carter 44) man who committed suicide. Despite ‘truth’ not having a fixed entity (Carter 46) and, in this case, being largely based on one’s perspective, for years Livesay’s theory was “unchallenged” (Carter 46), while Knister’s diary wasn’t viewed as significant enough to be recorded in an archive (Carter 46). This issue forced me to question the relevance of diaries in archival research – is the fluidity and flexibility of ‘truth’ suddenly irrelevant when it comes to accounts made in a diary? Do diaries not hold any significance when it comes to archival research?

Though most readers and some scholars believe private diaries shouldn’t be considered as archives, the reality is that diaries are very similar to what people expect in archives (48). For instance, Knister’s diary acted as a “wild card” (48) as it went against the widely held belief that Raymond Knister committed suicide; like archives, her diary brought about “new truths” (48) reminding readers that truth is not fixed. “The genre of the diary (especially those unpublished and unarchived)…performs a crucial cultural function in that it speaks to a deeply felt desire to have some kind of writing retain a close connection to unmediated truth” (48). In other words, Knister’s diary provides the ‘truth’ from her point of view that is not influenced by public opinion or expectation, therefore actually increasing the validity of her account.

Additionally, Knister’s diary is retrospective (51), making it very similar to an autobiography. Thus, further fuelling my confusion as to why it wasn’t recoded in an archive while Livesay’s autobiographical stories were. “With its retrospective, anticipation, and direct address to another, Knister’s diary exemplifies an instance of diary writing as archivization; it is a particular kind of publicly oriented diary, recalling the past for the benefit of the future” (53); her diary couldn’t be more fitting as an archive! Furthermore, “Pamela Banting identifies Derrida’s archive fever/drive with a death drive at work in archives” (54); as well as mentions how it is “intensified by the currency of the diary” (54). In other words, Knister’s diary has all the aspects of an archive.

In conclusion, due to all the similarities diaries have with autobiographies and the way diaries are ideal archives, I believe the reason Knister’s diary wasn’t recorded as an archive was not because diaries aren’t significant in archival research; but because what is considered ‘truth’ is greatly linked to power, “truth-telling and power correlate” (46). In this case, Livesay had higher “social currency” (46) and a greater foothold in the archives sector compared to Knister (46) and, therefore, had an account that was viewed as more credible to the public. Additionally, the “myth about the early demise of gifted artists” (45) further strengthened Livesay’s suicide theory and weakened Knister’s accident theory.

Since ‘truth’ is highly flexible and dependent on one’s perspective, Livesay and Knister’s accounts “cannot offer clarity, but rather a textual whirpool of written claims and counter claims…personal accounts and diaries that will not give up the body of Raymond Knister any more easily than the lake did” (55). So, the fact that the Knister’s diary wasn’t recorded as an archive had nothing to do with a lack of ‘truth’ compared to Livesay’s autobiographical stories, but more to do with power dynamics and public expectations/beliefs.

Works cited:

Carter, Kathryn. “Death and the Diary, or Tragedies in the Archive.” Journal of Canadian Studies, vol. 40, no. 2, 2006, pp. 42-59, https://doi.org/10.1353/jcs.2007.0012