Hoaglund’s Shell

The critic and editor Phillip Lopate has many insights on the personal essay – how it functions, what makes it tick, how it is attractive to readers, and its various unique aspects. In his second aspect of the personal essay (the first is “The Conversational Element”), he defines “Honesty, Confession, and Privacy” as essentially the motor of the personal essay – the plot, as it were, that causes the reader to turn the page. “In opening up to the reader, in revealing my weaknesses, I become vulnerable, and this vulnerability becomes a magnet that draws the reader closer to me.” But does every personal essay require the overt expression of privacy to drive it? Or can these feelings leak out from a personal essay in indirect ways?

Edward Hoaglund, one of Lopate’s selected authors, in his “Courage of Turtles” expresses how his many turtle experiences represent as a learning experience in his inner life.

In his essay, Hoaglund does less with sharing emotions, but is incredibly adept in sharing his mind: his mind as it studies, absorbs, receives impressions, as it seeks to classify and define, and all this with turtles. We learn about the different types of turtles he has encountered, and without him stating it overtly, we see the connection to himself, and the turtles themselves turn Hoaglund’s insides out. It is almost by omission that we learn about Hoaglund: for he rarely lets us into his personal life, except through his kaleidoscopic treatment of this wonderful animal – he is so focused on the turtles themselves. But what is the overall impact of the essay? If we look at the last few lines, where he drops a turtle into the Hudson River, he gives up on his turtle: “I recognized that I must have done the wrong thing… there was nothing I could do, I walked away.”

He does show some emotion when he talks about frogs – “Frogs are depressingly defenseless: that moist, extensive back, with the bones almost sticking through. Hold a frog and you are holding its skeleton” (658) – could this be interpreted as expressing the fragility of the writer, seeing that he is subject to frogs’ naked exposure? Or is it that he vastly prefers turtles for their armor, and that perhaps his love of these animals has to do with his own need for protection? At any rate, the frog is basically the inverse of turtle, and so at the essay’s conclusion, we are intrigued to learn more about Hoaglund himself.

June Qin responds:

It’s interesting that you explored Hoagland’s essay through the lens of “Honesty, Confession, and Privacy” because, as you mention in your response and as I saw when I read Hoagland’s essay, Hoagland talks more about turtles than he does about himself, so how does he confess and show vulnerability to his readers? Your guiding questions of “Does every personal essay require the overt expression of privacy to drive it? Or can these feelings leak out from a personal essay in indirect ways?” nicely set up the rest of your response and provide food for thought as we begin to write our own personal essays.

Throughout Hoagland’s discussion of his love for turtles, he reveals more of himself; as you point out, “the turtles themselves turn Hoagland’s insides out.” The essay’s ending illustrates this: we see Hoagland’s mind working as he drops the diamond terrapin into the Hudson River, sees its fear, and proceeds to walk away. To me, this scene harkens back to the essay’s title, “The Courage of Turtles,” as we can imagine that the turtle persevered through the unfavorable conditions and likely made it to safety. Compared to the turtle, Hoagland doesn’t seem nearly as courageous. Is he embarrassed or ashamed of what he did? I would like to hear more of your opinion on this scene.

I liked your analysis of his distaste for frogs and how his preference for turtles over frogs possibly parallels his desire for protection as a writer. While reading this section of your response, I snapped back to your title, “Hoagland’s Shell.” Your diction—“the fragility of the writer” and the “armor” of the turtle shell—also ties back to Lopate’s aspect of “Honesty, Confession, and Privacy.”

Overall, I enjoyed your insightful commentary on Hoagland’s essay.