Alexandra Zapruder is the author most recently of the book Twenty-Six Seconds: A Personal History of the Zapruder Film. Her grandfather was Abraham Zapruder, who took the famous film of the Kennedy assassination. She also has written Salvaged Pages: Young Writers' Diaries of the Holocaust. She has worked for the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum and with the group Facing History and Ourselves. She lives in the Washington, D.C., area.
Q: You write, “As I worked, I struggled to reconcile the
personal and historical imperative I felt to write this book with the worry
that it would bring unintended and unwelcome consequences.” How did you balance
those demands, and how did you balance your roles as family member and author
as you were writing Twenty-Six Seconds?
A: The key word here is “worry.” I was worried about how my
family would feel and I was worried about whether I’d be able to be honest and
straightforward about all aspects of this history.
This is because it was such a departure from the culture of
our family, which emphasized discretion about the film above all else.
But when I really started working on the book and grappling
with the material, I found that I wasn’t blowing the lid off of anything. In
the end, this is a human story about people doing the best they could in
difficult circumstances and about conflicts that arise from genuine
disagreements about all sorts of important things.
As long as I focused on telling that story truthfully and
with respect for all parties, I found that the fear faded away and what was
left was the truly gratifying work of writing about these ideas.
Q: You note that your family really didn’t talk much about
the film as you were growing up. What made you decide to write about it, and do
you think writing the book changed any of your beliefs about the film?
A: I decided to write about the film because I realized in
the aftermath of my father’s death that our family’s relationship to the film
was a very significant one, and that this part of the film’s life had not been
told, and that without it, the whole story of the film and its impact on
American society and culture was incomplete.
Once I realized that, I felt it was important – and
meaningful for me as a writer and a person – to really look at the film’s
history in all its dimensions and try to understand its meaning, legacy, and
significance not only for us as a family but for American society as a whole.
I’m not sure I could say that writing about the film changed
my beliefs, because I really didn’t have many beliefs about it before I
started. But I do think it deepened my understanding of all kinds of important
questions that the film raised and that continue to reverberate for us today.
Q: What do you see as some of the most common perceptions
and misperceptions about the film?
A: One misperception is that the film only matters in the
context of the Kennedy assassination. It is, of course, the primary visual
evidence of the murder. But the dilemmas that the film posed for our family,
the media, the government, the assassination researchers, the courts, and
others touch on much bigger questions.
These include how to balance public interest and private
family values, who decides what the public sees and when and how, who owns the
historical record and what it is worth, and cultural questions like whether
there is such a thing as visual truth and how we reconcile our differing ways
of interpreting the same information.
There are smaller misperceptions – like the idea that the
film was the only one taken on Dealey Plaza (it wasn’t: there were 21 other
photographers present that day) or that our family sold the film to the Federal
government (we didn’t: it was taken by eminent domain and its value was determined
by an independent arbitration panel) that I was also able to address in the
book.
Q: What would you say is the film’s legacy, both for your
family and for the public?
A: This is a question I took up in the epilogue to the book.
I will just say that the film captured a moment that was a turning point in
American history and it will always stand for that point in time and all the
tumult and chaos that followed.
But I think it also has come to represent other things –
like the recognition that even the photographic record doesn’t always capture a
universally agreed upon truth or the fact that our faith in technology to
answer all our questions may be misplaced.
The film contains within it so many contradictions and it
doggedly refuses to give up a clear answer to the question of who murdered the
president and how. For me, its meaning and legacy lie in those inherent
contradictions.
On a still larger level, its legacy is that of the
existential pathos that its narrative reveals. It’s a beautiful sunny day and
there is a radiant couple driving down the street in an open car and then
suddenly, without warning, it is all shattered.
We know on some intellectual level that this can happen but
the film shows it and it reminds us of certain very deep human truths that are
painful to tolerate but important to confront.
Q: How have people reacted to the book?
A: Well, I’ve gotten lots of wonderful responses both in
reviews and though personal emails and conversations. It’s been especially
moving for me to travel and meet people who are interested in this story and to
share it with them.
I have found that the book has meant the most to those who
were alive at the time of Kennedy’s assassination and who were, as a result,
deeply affected by that event.
Many are still searching for answers or to make a certain
kind of peace with this. My book can’t do that but it does address very
directly the emotional and existential rupture that the film represents and
that the assassination itself caused.
Q: Are there any other books about the Kennedy assassination
that you would especially recommend?
A: My friend Max Holland is working on a magnum opus about
the assassination that I think will be fascinating. It’s called A Need to Know:
Inside the Warren Commission and deals much more directly than mine with
what actually happened on Dealey Plaza.
Max is brilliant and a great writer. He argues very
convincingly that Lee Harvey Oswald was the lone gunman. The book is
forthcoming from Knopf and I know it’s going to be an important contribution to
this topic.
Q: What are you working on now?
A: I’m not ready to start anything new yet. I’m still
recovering from this book – which took a lot out of me – and catching my breath
before I decide what’s next.
I hope I’ll find another story that has the richness,
complexity and unexpected depth that I found in this book and my first one, Salvaged
Pages, but I realize that might be asking a bit much for one lifetime.
--Interview with Deborah Kalb. Alexandra Zapruder will be speaking Feb. 24 at the Temple Sinai Authors' Roundtable in Washington, D.C. Here's a previous version of this Q&A.
No comments:
Post a Comment