My Grandfather's Son

I was interested in Clarence Thomas' new book,My Grandfather's Son, if for no other reason because of the reviews I read. For example, Edward Lazuraus in the LA Times described this very personal memoir as a "polarizing memoir." Lazuraus goes on to describe Thomas' coverage of the Anita Hill affair in similar terms -"Spewing invective, Thomas depicts Hill as an abrasive, vindictive, politically motivated liar exploited by a "smooth-tongued" liberal "mob" (including a biased press) that was hell-bent on his personal destruction to prevent a more conservative court from overturning Roe vs. Wade." He then assaults Thomas' judicial philosophy thusly "This correlation between personal values, political beliefs and constitutional philosophy pose an ironic dilemma for the author. Of all the justices, Thomas has been among the most adamant in insisting that it is wrong for a judge's moral preferences and personal experiences to color his view of the law. Yet the memoir suggests on almost every page that Thomas has followed the opposite approach -- that his legal views appear to be the sum of his life experiences, that he is his grandfather's son both as a man and as a justice." The last characterization is utter nonsense. Thomas explains where his judicial philosophy comes from and although it has been formed in part because of his personal experience it is not the sum total of his experiences.

William Grimes in the NYT did a review which had the headline "The Justice Looks Back and Settles Old Scores." Dahlia Lithwick of Slate said the book "paints a stark picture of an America in which nothing but race matters. In his telling, virtually everyone who has ever wronged him has done so because of his race." Indeed, race is a part of this memoir but the message I got from it is quite different. Thomas had to live through segregation and then through the current period where political orthodoxy demands only one way to look at the issues of race. But the Justice has transcended that view. He seems to understand that there is not much difference between the segregation of the fifties and now. In either case, he believes that race should not be the determinant of one's character.

Jabari Asim of the Washington Post comments "This memoir will not sway those who oppose his fierce, unapologetic conservatism, but it does provide a fascinating glimpse into a tortured, complex and often perplexing personality." I guess Asim began with the assumption that it is wrong for Mr. Thomas to be "unapologetic" about his conservative beliefs. How dare he be conservative!

I am not sure which book these reviewers read but it was not the one that Thomas wrote. I happened to buy the audio version of the book, which is read by Thomas. What struck me about his reading is I think you can get a very good idea of the depth of this man who has been so mis-portrayed by the left. Thomas seems to be a precise person. His reading is measured. But his story is compelling none-the-less. I am not sure whether the reviewers understand the difference between resoluteness and anger. Thomas seems to be a precise man; his grandfather raised him in that way and as you hear his life unfold those lessons keep coming back. But the very point of this book is not that race should be considered but that one of the major ideas offered by this very stern man is that no one should be allowed to use race as a cover.

The future justice grew up under some extreme conditions both because of poverty and his race. But his memoir follows closely what I understand a book like this to do. Namely a memoir "especially as it is being used in publishing today, often tries to capture certain highlights or meaningful moments in one's past, often including a contemplation of the meaning of that event at the time of the writing of the memoir. The memoir may be more emotional and concerned with capturing particular scenes, or a series of events, rather than documenting every fact of a person's life."

The literary device that Mr. Thomas uses is his grandfather who raised him. His grandfather had a very strict set of standards and Justice Thomas and his brother were told at the start that his standards guided his life and would guide theirs so long as they lived in his house. In a very real sense Thomas, more than any other book I have read, explains with real clarity what it was like to grow up Black and poor in the south at the time that segregation was happening. Indeed there are passages in the book where Thomas relates experiences that I have never had - but they are not "tortured."

What I liked best about the book was the underlying theme. Thomas is a believer in the ability of individuals to make their own way (a reflection of the philosophy that his grandfather lived by) in the same way that Frederic Douglass told his story in his Autobiography. (By the way, in the same way that Thomas' book has been criticized in a manner similar to the one done by many who questioned Douglass' book at the time of its publication.) The message of Thomas' memoir might be summarized by the following quote "I have learned that success is to be measured not so much by the position that one has reached in life as by the obstacles which he has overcome while trying to succeed." That came from Booker T. Washington. Thomas' fundamental message is one of the absolute requirement for self reliance. Evidently, the reviewers either did not read the book or chose not to hear his points.

In my opinion many of the reviews of My Grandfather's Son, were written before the book was read. That is unfortunate because I believe that the Justice has written a compelling and inspiring book.