21st-century editors should keep their hands off of 20th-century books
I'm going to do a very poor attempt at explaining my feelings over this. For a long time I've idolized Teddy Roosevelt. Parts of his story just speak to me:* He was sickly but just worked very hard to compensate and overcome it to live an outdoors-centric life. I suffer from some undiagnosable(word?) arthritis, I work hard to still do my favorite activities (backpacking, hunting and fishing).* He was extremely well learned, thoughtful, and articulate. He kept a detailed journal. I admire those traits and try to emulate them. I pursued a PhD, I keep a journal, I frequently write to relatives and friends. I try to be thoughtful and articulate.* He was a legendary hunter (as I mentioned I love hunting), and conservationist. He is partly responsible for the National Parks, which I enjoy every free day (I live near Yellowstone and routinely pass under his arch).* He was empathetic and progressive for his time [0], despite his unshaking nationalism. He didn't seem to fall for toxic tropes of conservatism (although those political terms don't translate to today, Teddy is universally celebrated by the right). I believe strongly in what I consider to be core unshaking tenets of American national identity, but I also try hard to be empathetic and make sure no one is left behind. I don't believe the answer is exclusion of outgroups, which I think is a common conservative trope today. I have a lot of respect for Teddy (with some important caveats) [1].* He held himself, and those in government to a higher standard [2]. He believed he was a public servant, and fought tirelessly against corruption. There is nothing that makes me angrier than corruption and entitlement in political office today.I also learned, a couple years ago, he probably would have despised me, had our paths crossed. I'm mostly Italian-American, who he openly viewed as mostly criminals [3], and even went so far as to applaud a lynching of Italian Americans in New Orleans [4].I think it's important that I learned this. I'm glad it wasn't erased or ignored or left out of the record. I learned a few things from it. I learned (well, I already knew, but it was reinforced) that no one is perfect. No one. And that perfection is the enemy of self-improvement, it is the enemy of progress, and it is the enemy of good. There's no part of me that I'm aware of that's worse for having held TR in such high esteem and tried to emulate the great things I found about him. In fact, his example has improved my life in a variety of ways, particularly my mental health and fortitude, seeing him as an example. Sure, it made me sad to learn that fact about him, but in terms of material affect? It had no change. Words, thoughts, opinions, ideas, are necessarily flawed and incomplete as a direct result of the human condition. Pretending they are not creates two things:1) An impossible standard2) A false sense of security and satisfactionI'm better at some things than TR. I don't have Italian Americans (or any minority group for that matter, my understanding was that he had similar feelings about natives). That alone is a major victory. By not having to draw myself against perfect examples, I can foster some feeling of accomplishment, but I can also learn that my idols were flawed and that even if I am flawed in many ways, I can hopefully still do some good. That's an important motivator.A perfect example is one I will never live up to, and in that case, why even try?[0] https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/theodore-roosevelt-mississ...[1] https://americanaffairsjournal.org/2020/08/theodore-roosevel...[2] https://globalanticorruptionblog.com/2020/09/14/president-th...[3] https://theamericanmag.com/a-rather-good-thing/[4] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1891_New_Orleans_lynchings