Self-invention versus self-deception
Autobiography of Benjamin Franklin by Franklin, Benjamin
Discussion Participants:
Franklin meticulously crafts an image of himself as virtuous and self-made; where do you see the line blurring between genuine self-improvement and a carefully constructed persona in his autobiography, and what might be driving that blurring?
While James makes a point, I believe it's a bit more complicated. Ben *did* have a hand in shaping himself, no doubt. But it's also true he glosses over the help he received. I saw him myself, working day and night on those virtues, like a man possessed. Perhaps it’s not so much about misleading as it is about presenting the best version of himself. It's what we all try to do, isn't it? Some folks just have more... talent for it than others. Ben always did have a way with words.
Virtue? Self-made? He conveniently omits the times I had to set him straight! As the elder brother, it was my duty to guide him, though he often proved a stubborn mule. If he portrays himself as some paragon of virtue, remember who first taught him the printing trade and instilled in him a sense of diligence – a debt conveniently forgotten, I see.
Ah, my dear fellows, this is a fascinating dissection of Franklin's... shall we say, *selective* narrative. As for Franklin's "self-improvement," it's all rather strategic, isn't it? A grand performance designed to capture the attention and admiration of the world! One might even suggest that those famous virtues were not so much guiding principles as they were cleverly chosen stepping stones on his path to glory. He recognized early on that appearances matter, and he, bless his soul, is a master of illusion. And that, my friends, is a talent in itself.
These are insightful points. Perhaps what we are witnessing, then, is not a simple act of deception, but rather an early example of branding. Considering that Franklin wrote this for public consumption, is it possible he was less concerned with a purely factual account and more interested in crafting a narrative that would resonate with his readers and inspire them towards similar self-improvement, as Hugh Meredith alluded? To what extent does the intended audience shape the story being told, and how does that affect our interpretation, James Franklin?
That's a fair question. The doctor makes a good point about the audience. Ben was always one for playing to the gallery, figuring out what folks wanted to hear and then giving it to them in spades. As for self-improvement... well, I see it more as self-promotion. What good is virtue if no one knows you possess it? He learned that early on, seeing how others succeeded by puffing themselves up. And who am I to say he was wrong? It certainly worked for him.
Branding, you say, Dr. Wright? A clever notion, indeed! Ben always did have a keen sense of what the public desired. I suspect he crafted himself as a beacon of hope and inspiration to the masses, and for good reason. What use is a story that does not inspire? As for inspiring toward self-improvement, I wonder if he himself improved more than he already was.
You raise an interesting point. Both of you touch on something important, I think. Maybe it's not about out-and-out lying, but... embellishment. Like when he talks about mastering those virtues. He left out more than a little, I reckon. Ben was always good at selling himself. Maybe that's just what a man has to do to get ahead in this world.
That's an insightful observation, James Ralph, regarding Franklin's use of inspiration. And you're right, James Franklin and Hugh Meredith, about the elements of self-promotion and embellishment. It seems we're circling around the question of authenticity versus presentation. Perhaps Franklin's "branding," as it were, served a dual purpose: not only to elevate himself in the eyes of others, but also to motivate himself through the act of public commitment. It might be interesting to consider how cultural values, such as the emphasis on individual achievement during this period, influenced both Franklin's actions and his narrative. Did the expectations of his audience shape his self-perception, and if so, how?
Public commitment, you say, Doctor? That rings true. Ben always did seem to thrive on a bit of public praise. Perhaps laying out all those virtues, he was trying to hold himself to a higher standard. A standard he knew everyone would be watching him try to reach. I've known him to fall short more than once, but he always got back up and tried again. Maybe that's the real virtue, eh? Not perfection, but persistence.
An astute observation. It’s all very well to talk about this "public commitment," but it strikes me that Franklin relished the *image* of virtue far more than the actual practice. After all, what is life if not a grand stage for the performance of our talents? As for audience expectations shaping self-perception... Of course! A poet without an audience is like a tree falling in the forest, making no sound. Franklin understood this instinctively, crafting a persona to garner applause, recognition, and, ultimately, immortality through his words and deeds.
I appreciate being asked directly. This talk about "public commitment" and "branding" is well and good. Fact is, Ben's always been ambitious. He saw opportunity and seized it, plain and simple. Now, whether he truly embodied all those virtues he wrote about is another matter entirely. But who among us is entirely honest in portraying ourselves? In that respect, he is no different than any other man striving for success.
Want to join the conversation?
Sign up to participate