Hey readers,
Recently, my ASTU class went on a field trip to the Rare Books and Special Collections Library at UBC. We had the opportunity to explore Joy Kogawa’s personal archives which reveal her process of creating the novel, Obasan. It was very eye-opening to learn about Kogawa’s journey while creating her novel. I had not considered the years of planning, writing and editing that went into the production of Obasan.
Something that specifically broadened my understanding of the novel was the amount of rejection that Kogawa initially faced. Since I had already read Kogawa’s published work and learned of how this novel is such a significant piece of Canadian literature, I never considered that might not have been immediately successful. After going through the Kogawa Fonds and seeing rejection letters from various publishers, I realized that her ultimate success is even more admirable since it was a challenging process. It was also interesting to look at the editorials from publishers to discover how some changes were made in the book.
For me, this experience with Kogawa’s archives made me question how memory is conveyed. Obasan is widely acclaimed for being a prominent work of historical fiction since it acts as a voice for all of the Japanese Canadians who suffered through the internment period. Even though the novel is a work of fiction, it is reflective of Joy Kogawa’s personal life, thus demonstrating a personal history. The historical events referred to within the book, such as the attack on Pearl Harbour, are representative of a public history as well. What I am wondering is since Kogawa’s novel was reviewed and edited by other sources, do these modifications in her story redefine how her memory is conveyed? To expand on this, in part of an editorial it suggested to reduce the letters between Aunt Emily and Naomi’s mother in Japan. For me, the letters written by Aunt Emily is a strong representation of memory, especially seeing the memories be passed down to another generation. After learning that it was suggested to modify this part of the book, does it no longer become Kogawa’s expression of these memories and more to do with the publisher’s ideas? To counter this notion, it still is ultimately Kogawa’s work, and since it is a work of fiction, technically the memories have been fabricated even though they ring true to the author’s personal experiences.
Overall, the trip to the archives was very fruitful and it made me think more deeply about Kogawa’s creative process.
