Colleague of Augusten's dad speaks out

In my story on Augusten Burroughs, in describing how there has been a negative reaction to his new book A Wolf at the Table, in which he writes that his father was abusive, I wrote:

"The Times also spoke with university colleagues of Burroughs' father, who obligingly called Robison a good guy."

Fred Feldman, of the philosophy department at the University of Massachusetts-Amherst, emailed me and objected to my use of the word "obligingly" - and rightly so. He felt it implied that he and his colleagues told the NY Times whatever they wanted to know, when what they did was simply offer their opinions of working with Burroughs' father, John Robison. He's right; "obligingly" does imply that, and I should've chosen my words more carefully. I didn't mean to imply they were protecting Robison for any reason, merely that their impressions of him were quite different than his son's.

Here's what Mr. Feldman had to say:

"I knew John pretty well for about 35 years.  We worked
closely together on many administrative matters as well as on some philosophical
matters.  He always treated me very well.  He was generous and thoughtful.  He
seemed to be by nature a reflective, moderate, and sympathetic person.  He was a
peace-maker in our department at a time when it seemed that it would be
impossible for anyone to make peace.  Through all of this, he was constantly in
pain as a result of a severe case of psoriatic arthritis.  Yet he maintained a
cheerful and pleasant demeanor at work."

If this was a mask, it was one he wore all day every day for 30 years."

The plot, it just keeps thickening...I honestly don't know what to think. It's possible that a person can show one self to the world and another to his family; it happens all the time. Did it happen in this case? I don't think I have the insight to say one way or the other. But it's certainly interesting.

Comments

[Brett Bayne]

I'm not about to write a book about my father, but I can assure you that the world that extended beyond the confines of our home, he was a salesman who exuded charm and good-naturedness, full of wise humor. He delighted everybody he met. Behind closed doors, I knew a much different man. That's how it is sometimes. Fans and coworkers saw a radically different version of Joan Crawford over the course of four decades than Christina saw in one evening. People show a different version of themselves to family.

[Connie]

Absolutely they do, and can. One of the other things Burroughs has been taken to task for is saying he can remember images from when he was a year or so old. Now I sure don't remember that far back, but my editor told me she remembers certain things about being a baby, so it's obviously possible. I always wonder: How do you know if it's really a memory or if it's just one of those stories that your parents have told for years so you think you remember it???

[Brett Bayne]

Unfortunately, one of the pitfalls of being human is that our memories tend to change over time. We are terribly unreliable in reconstructing the past. Probably one of the reason all of the worst parts of history repeat themselves. I have many very vivid memories of the past, but I wouldn't necessarily trust any of them.

[Andy]

It's also possible that a person would completely invent or at least overdramatize events in his life to sell memoirs.

[Connie]

Yup. That's entirely possible too...we can go through the list of people who have done that in the past year pretty easily...I found the NY Times comments from his brother interesting because he did corroborate one incident that involved Augusten running and getting a BB gun and telling his brother to shoot his father...but his brother, who has Asperger's, saw the whole thing as something far less dramatic than Augusten did. And of course Augusten was young then.

Again, a matter of perspective.

I was also interested that Haven Kimmel, a writer who's a friend of Burroughs, said she'd seen his father's diary and that they do corroborate what happens in the book. He writes about them a little at the end of the book but not to a great extent, like, he's not trying to prove anything line by line...

[HoCo]

We all have examples of people who reveal a side of themselves to the public that is altogether different from what we see when the guard slips. We do it. So it's possible that this guy's dad was bad.
I still have a problem with someone making a cottage industry of whining about how crappy his childhood was, tho, and how rotten his father was. Frankly, I could care less about this individual and his sob stories. I want to say: Get over it and stop living in the past!
He's free to say what he wants. The father's dead and can't react. Anything is possible.
Some people might be able to recall events that happened to them before they were 4. But I think it's much more likely that this guy has convinced himself of things and in his mind's eye they've become the truth. If we tell ourselves a lie often enough, we start to believe it, and sometimes, if things are traumatic enough, the mind shuts down entirely and leaves holes in time. I can remember what song was playing on the radio on the car ride to my first high school swim meet in early 1978. (Eric Clapton's Lay Down Sally. No reason I should recall that. Song wasn't significant to that drive or the meet). But there are some details of my childhood that are totally lost to me, mundane things like: Did we go from classroom to classroom to change subjects in elementary school some 40 years ago or did the teachers travel to our homeroom? Or bigger events: When did my parents actually divorce? I was there. I don't remember. If those simple, seemingly innocent recollections are lost to me, what other detail is my brain masking from that period to protect me from?
Finally, I read Storms, a fun, well-written, delightfully dishy, tell-all written by Carol Harris, Lindsey Buckingham's ex girlfriend who split from him in 1984 after a tumultuous seven year relationship. In the book, she recounts, with exacting detail, whole conversations that happened more than 30 years ago. Both sides of the conversation. Who remembers such details about the last phone call we just placed 15 minutes ago? Made for a great read, but as with all these one-sided bios, a bit suspect. We're getting one person's picture of history.

[can't fight this feeling]

I totally get the frustration with everyone and his brother milking their tough childhoods for books. Burroughs is definitely an easy target for that, because he's what, 42, and has THREE memoirs? But you know...that still doesn't mean everything he wrote about didn't happen, and there aren't any parts of Dry that don't ring true.

[Phoebe]

I find this post somewhat obligatory.

[Phoebe]

But, for realsies. Accuracy is a lot less mandatory in a memoir that's actually entertaining and/or well-written. JAMES FREY. Or, you know, AUGUSTEN BURROUGHS IN EVERY BOOK (there have been like nine essay collections, too) WRITTEN SINCE "DRY."

I was going to say something else, but my memory fails me.

[Connie]

Good writing, realistic emotions, and a great sense of humor definitely make up for any little stretching of the truth, if you ask me. Does it really matter if someone was wearing blue pants instead of black?