Who’s your mommy…
An author once wrote a novel about his mother. It was a task undertaken in order to explore the life of his mother, a means to connect with someone whom he felt he neglected throughout his life. The author’s name is Samuel Freedman, and his book, titled Who She Was: My Search for My Mother’s Life, was dedicated to the memory and discovery of who his mother was as an individual. In his words, “I didn’t realize how little I knew about my mother until she passed away.” However, instead of wondering who she was, there is the question of who he is.
While reading Freedman’s novel, it seems as if he is reserved and tends to avoid stating opinions and making emotional connections. However, when spoken to in person, one would never be able to make the connection between the two. In explaining the variance in his behavior, Freedman employed an anecdote, stating that he once traveled to Beijing. During this trip, he recollects attending a dinner with Chinese representatives, and a minor detail that he would like to erase from his memories; there was a symbolic dish in which a cooked, whole duck would be presented, and the chef would cleave open the head, revealing the “pea sized” brain. The brain, in turn would be split into two, and both sides would choose a representative to ingest their respective portion of the brain; to Freedman’s luck, he was the chosen representative. In saying this, he related how crucial it was for him to “split his brain in two,” one part craft (his writer’s mentality) and the other, emotion (his personal opinions or anything that would cause bias). Freedman then asserted that this was vital because he was researching his mother, “the research stimulated the emotional process…the smallest item can set off an emotional explosion,” hence he had to refrain from getting emotionally involved in the research and creation of his book. Furthermore, during a question and answer session, he responded to questions about himself, his career, his novel, and his mother, but at one point, while speaking of his mother, Freedman seemed to become choked up and on the verge of weeping. So, in assuming that Samuel Freedman, the author is one in the same as the person, one could never be any more incorrect.
On another note, there was the issue that he was writing his work on his mother, whom he new little to nothing about. The problem arose in finding out as accurately as he could, the means in which to reconstruct the world that she lived in during her teenage and early adulthood years. In doing this, Freedman resorted to an unorthodox method of obtaining sources. He mentioned that his research process was developed in the form of an “archery target,” where the inner most circle (the bulls eye) would be those who were close to his mother and still alive (confidants, close friends, and kin/siblings) and records that would be immediately available, the next ring of “informants” were his mother’s ex-boyfriends and a plethora of other connections (children of the deceased, and articles in newspapers about the times that would show trends, hinting at things his mother might have done). In order to fully understand the times that his mother lived in, Freedman went to various libraries to read microfilms that contained newspaper articles from that time period, in order to have a vague idea of the trends and events that were occurring during that time. Interviews were another method that Freedman implemented in his search for his mother’s past. If those who he wanted to speak to were deceased, he would interview their children and spouses in hopes of obtaining insight into their lives. Additionally, Freedman utilized snapshots and photos of the time to further reveal patterns in everyday lives of the people, as well as reading letters that his mother’s friends wrote to other people, detailing events such as working in factories or participating in blood drives with her.
In the end, Freedman was able to effectively reconstruct his mother’s life as accurately as possible, given the limited information that he could obtain (his mother did not keep a journal). However, the details that he could not discern, he clearly showed a sense of non-bias by stating that his mother “may have,” or “might have” done certain things; being careful as to not assume anything. Whether he decided to set forth on this path as penance for neglecting his mother, or as a means to get to know her, he succeeded in the greatest aspect of all; he made the connection with his mother, and ultimately felt “more like her son.”