The 2016 tome's been subjected to a lot of criticism, much of it from liberals who, like Vance's family, moved away from Appalachia in search of a better life. They seem to recoil at the idea that with hard work and determination, anyone can break away from anchors such as poverty and substance abuse to succeed in life.
Vance never really promoted his book as anything more than his own experiences, but far too many have tried to paint it as what in their view is a flawed narrative about an entire region and culture.
I finally had a chance to read the book last year, and couldn't find anything in it with which to find fault. And I feel like I can bring a unique perspective to an analysis of his work.
Although Vance grew up in Middletown, Ohio, in an area populated with expatriate Kentuckians, his family hails from Breathitt County, and he notes in the book that he spent many summers and holidays back in the mountains. I grew up in, and still live in, a county adjacent to Breathitt. I've lived in Appalachia all my life (including six years in Winchester, as Clark County is considered to be Appalachian by the federal government). And I've worked in Breathitt County for more than two decades. I don't know any of Vance's Breathitt relatives -- at least I don't think I do -- but I certainly know the places of which he writes, and the way of life there.
In addition, my wife's background is a bit similar to Vance's. She was born in Ohio to parents who had relocated from Lee County. (They returned home when she was young.) Her family didn't suffer the dysfunctionality or substance abuse issues like Vance's, but she was one of the first from her family to attend and graduate from college. I've heard her stories, and combined with my own observations and experiences, I feel like this enables me to provide a valid viewpoint.
The same issues Vance faced as a youth in southwestern Ohio are similar to those endured by those who remain in southeastern Kentucky. The same economic conditions that caused folks to migrate northward years ago are now manifesting themselves in those communities with the closure of industrial facilities that popularized a different set of "Three R's" in the mountains -- reading, (w)riting, and Route 23 (or 25 or 27, as the case may be, as all three highways lead out of Kentucky and across the Ohio River). Addiction issues are well-known in the mountains and are also problematic in the Rust Belt. Families where children are raised by their grandparents are very common in this area. Many of Vance's critics have labeled him as an outsider writing about rural mountain culture. They forget that his roots are here, and the community from where he came in Ohio is full of transplanted hillbillies, to the point where the Breathitt County High School basketball team used to play two road games a year, on back-to-back nights, in northern Kentucky so transplanted Breathitt Countians could come see the Bobcats play and meet up with family from back home.
As noted, Vance never intended the book to be anything more than his story of someone who broke the cycle and found success, but his story should be inspirational. If he could overcome his environment, anyone with determination can. Perhaps that's why so many liberals are dismissive of his chronicle, if not outright hostile to his story.
No one could legitimately call the "War on Poverty," waged since at least the Johnson administration in the 1960s, a success. Poor areas of Appalachia remain poor despite millions of dollars being pumped into the area through welfare programs. This has, whether anyone likes it or not, eroded the work ethic that those of Vance's grandparents' vintage took with them to the midwest. But there are still plenty of people who want to work and support themselves and their families, and make something of their lives. But they're stuck with bad roads, slow or nonexistent Internet service, and other infrastructure hindrances. A region that was ravaged with population losses two generations ago continues to hemorrhage its best and brightest; many of whom would love to stay but simply cannot afford to.
I have yet to see a cogent explanation of why Hillbilly Elegy is "trash," as so many call it, beyond that declaration itself, as if it's definitive. Are they rejecting Vance's experience? Would they prefer that people be given money, rather than being given opportunities to earn their own money? Are those who left the hills for bigger cities so far removed from their own experiences that they fail to see what's going on back home? What, exactly, do they find in Vance's personal story that is so bad?
My own observation is that Vance's saga is spot-on. He could have chosen a life similar to that of his mother, many of his contemporaries, or the thousands of people left behind in the mountains from which his forebears migrated away. That would have been the easy way out. He didn't. He didn't settle for that existence. He went to college and then on to law school. He made his own opportunities and leveraged them into success.
Why anyone would disparage Vance's success and his accomplishments in the face of adversity makes little sense. Do they not believe he managed to make it the way he did, without being propped up by government giveaways? Does his story threaten the vision they have for the mountains, one where everyone is reliant on Uncle Sam? What is so objectionable about his life story?
I probably won't see the movie, even though parts of it were shot in Breathitt County. Early reviews indicate that it isn't terribly true to the book, as the movie begins with Vance being summoned home from law school to deal with his mother's drug problems. But the criticisms of the movie are generating renewed bashing of the book. When I first read it, I did so with the knowledge that many were critical of it. I may have to try to find a copy of it and re-read it with an even more keen eye to try to find just what so many -- wrongly, in my view -- find objectionable.
