Paul John Eakin Breaking Rules

In the article “Breaking Rules: The Consequences of Self-Narration” the autobiographical scholar Paul John Eakin explores the significance of autobiography on human perspectives of identity. Eakin argues three main rules (113-114) which prove an explicable relation between one narrative and oneself, maintained in the face of societal consequences and condemnation (114). This summary will be organized based on these three main rules (Eakin 113-114) establishing and exploring them through Eakin’s given primary and secondary examples.

The first rule presented is the “misrepresentation of biographical and historical truth” (113-114). Autobiography has been classically presented as literary genre, governed by conventions (Eakin 114). Eakin asserts, however, that autobiography can answers larger questions of personhood (114). The two primary examples of ‘autobiographies’, David Stoll’s “I, Rigoberta Menchú: An Indian Woman in Gautemala” (Eakin 115) and Wilkomirski’s “Fragments” (116) are compared. In the case of Menchú, she defies the rules of
Eakin believes the consequences to breaking this rule are the most severe (119), although is also one of the most intertwined to the idea of identity (119). Eakin references the scientific studies of Oliver Sacks and Daniel L. Schacter (120) in order to look at case studies of people are considered to “fail to display normalcy” (120) due to chronic memory loss. Utilizing this scientific research Eakin poses a larger question on personhood, on how, from early ages, human memories form who we are (120). He interprets the research to convey the need for memories and narrative in order to have human connection (Eakin 121). Eakin finally arrives at the idea that “autobiography is… a discourse of identity” (124), affirming to the readers that the article proves that they must imagine the idea of literature more complexly