Missing and All Too Present: The Limits of the Unpublished

Abstract

Abstract This essay examines two peculiar examples of the unpublished from two eccentric authors: Joe Gould’s fragmentary Oral History (probably commenced in the 1910s) and Arthur Inman’s Diary (the 17 million words of which run from the 1920s to Inman’s death in 1963). Neither of these works can be fully published in any conventional way, and the essay examines the reasons why, looking at the history and myths surrounding Gould’s supposedly multimillion-word narrative, the paucity of extant parts of it, and how its nature and nonappearance have been interpreted by Joseph Mitchell and Jill Lepore, amongst others. This contrasts with the all-too-abundant size of the Diary of Inman, a wealthy valetudinarian whose voluminous writings describe in minute detail his prejudices and absurdities, as well as the stories of the many people he paid to be part of his dysfunctional household and to entertain him. The difficulties raised by trying to publish this strange, vast document are discussed through the example of the substantial selection of it, edited by Daniel Aaron (1985). Concluding considerations include the wider questions raised by these sui generis works, particularly the ways in which they resist traditional critical and editorial categorization.Both texts are impossible to publish in full . . . and possess an odd, fragmentary, but delusive allure as a result: the larger idea of their unpublished works is more interesting than the reality of reading them.