A brilliant bit of advice, Paul. Everyone setting out to tell a “juicy” family story should pause first to read this post. You're doing a public service here.
I was actually thinking about this recently when someone said, “Oh, I always love a juicy story from family history.” It made me stop and think more deeply about the trigger for those rabbit-hole dives. Are we just out to get the “dirt”?
I hope not, but it is certainly true that, as younger generations, we are often pursuing an "itch" to understand what it was about our elders, ancestors, or generations past that led them to behave in ways that seem irrational today. In my own experience, decisions that seem relatively ordinary today (divorce, for example) can be at the root of odd behaviors in our ancestors. Contextualizing these decisions by the mores of the time can be very helpful in understanding those behaviors.
Really insightful, Paul. It’s so important to consider the societal norms of the time for context, whether that was views on children born outside marriage, divorce, sexuality, disability, or mental health. Many of these experiences are now recognised within protected characteristics, yet prejudice and judgement still exist. In many ways, people continue to keep secrets, just as our ancestors did.
Context matters so much when we look at the choices people made and the secrets they kept. Many things once considered shameful are now understood very differently, yet fear of judgement still hasn’t disappeared entirely.
I think that’s one reason family history can be so powerful it reminds us that our ancestors were navigating the same pressures, prejudices, and desire for acceptance that people still face today.
My own approach is that if the person is gone for at least 70 years and there are no living descendants or close relatives who would be distressed to have a family secret told, I will write about it.
I made a recent exception to this rule because I knew the family didn’t care one way or the other. I find it interesting that almost everyone has a departed family member so universally loathed that no one cares who says what about them.
I agree Lisa, time and the impact on living people really do matter when deciding what should remain private.
Your point about universally disliked relatives made me smile because it’s so true, almost every family seems to have one person nobody feels compelled to defend. In those cases, telling the truth can feel less like exposing a secret and more like acknowledging a reality everyone already understood.
I also think there’s a difference between gossip and honest history. Sometimes writing about difficult people helps explain family dynamics and gives later generations important context.
Thoughtful read. It’s a good reminder we don’t know what’s going on for the others in the web. We’ve dipped our toes in the genealogy pool. My mom was mostly estranged from her father and has 2 half brothers. Initial outreach was rebuffed. It seems like 80 years on, one might be receptive and maybe even curious but that’s not always the case. As you say, maybe it’s shame, fear, embarrassment but I think I’d be open to knowing.
Many of these same questions come up for memoirists whose stories include people besides themselves, often family members. Important issues to consider for family historians and genealogists.
A brilliant bit of advice, Paul. Everyone setting out to tell a “juicy” family story should pause first to read this post. You're doing a public service here.
I was actually thinking about this recently when someone said, “Oh, I always love a juicy story from family history.” It made me stop and think more deeply about the trigger for those rabbit-hole dives. Are we just out to get the “dirt”?
I hope not, but it is certainly true that, as younger generations, we are often pursuing an "itch" to understand what it was about our elders, ancestors, or generations past that led them to behave in ways that seem irrational today. In my own experience, decisions that seem relatively ordinary today (divorce, for example) can be at the root of odd behaviors in our ancestors. Contextualizing these decisions by the mores of the time can be very helpful in understanding those behaviors.
Really insightful, Paul. It’s so important to consider the societal norms of the time for context, whether that was views on children born outside marriage, divorce, sexuality, disability, or mental health. Many of these experiences are now recognised within protected characteristics, yet prejudice and judgement still exist. In many ways, people continue to keep secrets, just as our ancestors did.
Context matters so much when we look at the choices people made and the secrets they kept. Many things once considered shameful are now understood very differently, yet fear of judgement still hasn’t disappeared entirely.
I think that’s one reason family history can be so powerful it reminds us that our ancestors were navigating the same pressures, prejudices, and desire for acceptance that people still face today.
My own approach is that if the person is gone for at least 70 years and there are no living descendants or close relatives who would be distressed to have a family secret told, I will write about it.
I made a recent exception to this rule because I knew the family didn’t care one way or the other. I find it interesting that almost everyone has a departed family member so universally loathed that no one cares who says what about them.
I agree Lisa, time and the impact on living people really do matter when deciding what should remain private.
Your point about universally disliked relatives made me smile because it’s so true, almost every family seems to have one person nobody feels compelled to defend. In those cases, telling the truth can feel less like exposing a secret and more like acknowledging a reality everyone already understood.
I also think there’s a difference between gossip and honest history. Sometimes writing about difficult people helps explain family dynamics and gives later generations important context.
Thoughtful read. It’s a good reminder we don’t know what’s going on for the others in the web. We’ve dipped our toes in the genealogy pool. My mom was mostly estranged from her father and has 2 half brothers. Initial outreach was rebuffed. It seems like 80 years on, one might be receptive and maybe even curious but that’s not always the case. As you say, maybe it’s shame, fear, embarrassment but I think I’d be open to knowing.
That’s the thing sometimes we will never know the truth and have all the answers.
Many of these same questions come up for memoirists whose stories include people besides themselves, often family members. Important issues to consider for family historians and genealogists.
Very important Jill and something I think we all need to consider very carefully