Farm Boys: Lives of Gay Men from the Rural Midwest Read Free Page B

describe his relationship with them?
How would you describe your attitudes about intimate relationships with men?
How would you describe your involvement in the gay community?
How would you describe your political perspectives, especially with regard to issues of concern to gay people?
GENERAL REFLECTIONS
What are your best memories of growing up on a farm? What are your worst?
How would you describe the influence that your farm upbringing has had on the character and quality of your life?
How would you describe your current feelings about being a gay man?
How do you feel about the life choices you have made in light of being gay?
    The fact that all interviews were based on the same range of questions contributes to a similarity in the topical range of these narratives. However, interview subjects differed greatly in how they responded to the interview process. Some subjects seemed to be most comfortable with a very clearly delineated question-and-answer format, and tended not to go off on their own. Others were more self-directed in what they had to say; I would ask a question to get things going, ask questions for follow-up or refocusing as I was inclined, move things along occasionally with a new line of questioning, and the subject would take it from there. These were generally the best interviews, driven less by my questions than by the force of the subject’s narrative spontaneity.
    Earnestness abounds in these stories. While the reader will find moments of humor and light-heartedness throughout this collection, many of these stories are largely serious in tone. I believe this results from several conditions. First, it seems likely that the more serious-minded would choose to participate in an in-depth autobiographical interview as part of a cultural research project, especially when they know that portions of what they say may be published. In addition, many of those who chose to tell their stories had some distinctly serious things to talk about. There is also the editorial reality that humorous exchanges in conversation do not always translate effectively in print. More fundamentally, though, I believethat many of these men were less interested in entertaining me and my potential readers than in telling about their lives and being heard.
    It was fascinating to experience the various ways in which these men approached telling me—a stranger in most cases—about themselves. Some men seemed to be quite comfortable talking frankly about intimate matters; others seemed nervous or embarrassed. Some were inclined to take an orderly, linear, chronological approach in recounting the events of their lives. (One man in his early seventies reported the exact dates of several events of his personal development during the 1930s, including that of his pubescence.) Other men seemed to prefer a looser, more thematic approach to talking about their lives, which was more compatible with my style of questioning.
    Some men were quite inclined to reflect on and analyze their experiences, and to talk about the emotional and psychological aspects of things. Others were more disposed to talk about specific people, places, and events. Most gratifying to me were those occasions when rich surface details came accompanied by insightful analysis and reflection. The questions that seemed to be most challenging for many subjects were two that I asked in tandem toward the end of the interview: How would you describe your current feelings about being a gay man? How do you feel about the life choices you have made in light of being gay?
    Somewhat less than half of the men represented in this collection used pseudonyms, including Henry Bauer, Dennis Lindholm, James Heckman, Norm Reed, Ronald Schoen, David Foster, Doug Edwards, Bill Troxell, Martin Scherz, Heinz Koenig, Dale Hesterman, Everett Cooper, David Campbell, Richard Hopkins, Lon Mickelsen, Steven Preston, and Connie Sanders. All prospective interview subjects were informed that their names