AGORAPHOBIA – Fear of open spaces or of being in crowded, public places like markets. Fear of leaving a safe place. . .
. . .Fear of being alone or of oneself – AUTOPHOBIA
HELLO again. I had the opportunity this week to look at a number of different archives from a selection of artists including Jim Wong-Chu, Ethel Wilson, Blanche Howard, Douglas Coupland, and Joy Kogawa. I spent the majority of my time trickling through the Kogawa fonds which were both confusing and intriguing. I would first like to say that I admire Joy’s writing. She has been a source I look to when trying to express myself through my writing and inspires me to embrace a creatively emotional component within my work.
Quote found in Joy Kogawa Found, Box 19, 19 – 5. Itsuka: Draft, Oct. – Dec. 1986. Chapter 6. Cover Image from Itsuka.
I really enjoyed how dispersed sporadically throughout the drafts for her books were little notes with ideas on them – thoughts she wanted to include and not forget so she jotted them down on the nearest piece of paper whether that was a post-it note, movie stub, grocery receipt or scrap paper. The majority of what she decided to write on contained files, lists, and information on the reverse sides such as an SDI Associates Limites Statement of Operations from May 1971. But more importantly, these pages she wrote on ended up preserving lists of names, or letters from random people that for some reason at the time had been involved in her life, either in large ways or almost minuscule manners. That we will never be sure of unless speaking with Joy personally, which I may add would be a delight. This brings me to question the notion of the Public versus the Private. When looking at Joy’s fonds, I feel they, like many collections, are a combination of both. I also feel this is overall quite complicated, especially now that archives are sold to museums and special collections whilst the author is still alive. I noticed this also when peering into the Douglas Coupland archives and specifically a box that contained fan mail. I kept thinking to myself how many of the people who wrote to him wouldn’t have guessed their letters would be preserved in his personal archives.In Coupland’s archives, there is a compilation of works intended for the public and items clearly meant for personal use. Below are examples of this:
Generation-X Manifesto, Box 10, File 07
Caption of a page from a Personal Journal, Box 10, File 07
There is a financial, literary and cultural value to archives which may influence or even determine why something gets archived. I feel this is an important consideration when examining archives, and doubting their neutral arbitrary reputation. Similarly, in Joy’s fonds you see personal letters on the backs of her drafts that may not have been written with the intention that we, as archivists, would have one day read them. But again, she chose to first use them to write on, and secondly, sell them to be archived. Like I said, it’s all very complex and I cannot determine how it makes me feel in terms of archive-authenticity.
Her fonds also allowed me to find cultural connections to Canada. For example, In Box 19, file 5 there is a publishing offer presented to her from Louise Dennys dated October 30, 1986. I loved this letter for two reasons. The letter was so sincere and praised Joy for her emotional captivation but also, because it was a clue into the history of Canadian publishing houses. After researching further into Louise Dennys, I discovered she was a major contributor to the publishing industry in Canada. In her mid-twenties, she began Lester & Orpen Dennys (which this offer to Kogawa was from). This firm eventually became an internationally renowned Canadian publishing house and lead to Dennys transition to Executive Vice-President of Random House of Canada. It’s from these publishing houses that we owe credits to for some of our best-selling authors including Kogawa, Ondaatje, Atwood and many more. More captivating than this even is the idea Jim-Wong Chu discusses in a podcast he participated in at the University of British Columbia (video below). The topic of publishing came forward with a distinction to the importance of Vancouver and Toronto’s publishing houses for the development of Chinese-Canadian cultural status. When something is rejected for publication, as it often is, there is a high chance we may never get to see that work. This is detrimental to the voices that are not being granted a position on the canonical podium. This also connects back to the questions I raised in my last blog post pertaining to the silenced voices of our communities and what impact that silencing has on our wealth of knowledge. Additionally, it draws attention to the power behind the public. To answer, or at least entertain, my question from the last posting, who determines what is in our canon, in a way, can be answered by looking at the publication houses. I intend to explore this concept in the upcoming weeks and hope to uncover some ideas of the impact that publication houses have on the cultural status of many Canadian collectives.
