What This Theme Explores
Hidden Histories and Erased Narratives asks who gets remembered, who is recorded, and who is strategically omitted from the American story. In Horse, Brooks argues that archives, institutions, and even well-meaning cultural memory are partial by design, privileging the visible achievements of the powerful while burying the labor and genius of the marginalized. The novel insists that history is not a neutral ledger but an ongoing act of selection, mislabeling, and forgetting—and that recovery demands rigorous, sustained attention. By excavating the life of Jarret Lewis and his bond with Lexington, the book explores how truth is fragmented and how restorative storytelling can return names, context, and meaning to what has been stripped away.
How It Develops
The theme begins as a mystery framed by discarded artifacts. In the present, Theo rescues an unsigned equine painting from a trash pile, while Jess is asked to locate a forgotten skeleton labeled only “Horse” in a Smithsonian attic. These mute objects—misnamed, misfiled, misvalued—signal a past that exists but cannot speak for itself. As readers, we are then given the 19th-century narrative that official records never preserved: Jarret’s intimate, expert stewardship of the foal Darley (later Lexington), a story of skill and love never entered into ledgers.
In the middle stretch, the present-day investigation builds momentum. Theo and Jess combine art history with osteology to identify the horse as Lexington, but the human story remains in shadow. Their research trails—museum labels, archival paintings, breeding records—reveal how Black horsemen are everywhere in the evidence and nowhere in the credits. Meanwhile, Jarret’s chapters counter this erasure in real time, showing the daily labor, intuition, and knowledge that make Lexington’s greatness possible even as institutions ensure those contributions won’t be acknowledged.
By the end, the fragments are finally articulated. Jess and Catherine Morgan reconstruct Lexington’s blindness from the bones, and Theo traces the unnamed grooms in paintings toward Jarret’s name, restoring the human core of the legend. Yet the novel refuses a tidy resolution: Theo’s killing by police births a fresh erasure as an official report recasts a rescuer as an assailant. The story thus lands its hardest point—every recovered narrative is fragile, because the mechanisms that erase are not historical relics; they operate in the present.
Key Examples
The novel threads its argument through concrete scenes where institutions label, frame, and authorize what counts as truth, then reopens those frames to let the silenced speak.
-
The Skeleton Labeled “Horse” The greatest racehorse in American history sits nameless in a museum attic, a celebrated life collapsed into a generic specimen. Catherine Morgan’s outrage exposes institutional amnesia as an active form of erasure: without names, context, and care, even a legend dissolves into “just” a body. Jess’s decision to re-articulate the skeleton literalizes the work of restoring a true story to its bones.
-
Unnamed Figures in Art In the study center, Theo encounters equestrian paintings where Black grooms and trainers are central to the image but absent from the labels. Works like Star Maris with His Groom, Kentucky, 1857 give full identity to horses while flattening the Black figure into function, and Richard Singleton with Viley’s Harry, Charles and Lew names the men but reinscribes possession in the title. Theo recognizes how art both preserves presence and enacts erasure, pushing him to seek the people behind the images.
-
The Erasure of Jarret’s Ownership Jarret’s de facto stewardship grows from his father Harry Lewis’s wages, yet his bond and labor carry no legal standing. When Viley and Richard Ten Broeck deploy the Kentucky Association’s rules to void Black claims, the novel shows how law serves as a technology of forgetting—stripping ownership, authorship, and agency from those who created value. The economic theft is inseparable from the historical one.
-
Theo’s Death and the Police Report After Theo is shot while trying to help, the official narrative instantly overwrites reality, describing a “suspected assailant” who “appeared to raise a weapon.” This bureaucratic language reproduces the historical logic of erasure in the present, revealing how institutional storytelling protects power by manufacturing doubt. The episode explicitly ties the novel’s concerns to Race, Slavery, and Systemic Racism, showing the past’s mechanisms updated for modern use.
Character Connections
Jarret Lewis embodies the history that records refused: a horseman whose knowledge, patience, and devotion are the engine of Lexington’s triumphs. His chapters supply the texture that the archive lacks—how he reads the horse’s moods, innovates training, and navigates threats—so the reader experiences the magnitude of what is lost when his name is omitted. Jarret’s story insists that recovery is not a sentimental add-on to history; it is the heart of it.
Theo is the contemporary catalyst of restoration, trained to read images for what they obscure as well as what they display. He recognizes the humanity in unnamed figures and pursues the paper trail that could return their identities. Ironically and tragically, the same system that trained him to recover truth then erases his own—making him both the finder and the disappeared, the scholar and the subject of erasure.
Jess approaches the past through science rather than iconography, treating bones as archives that can be made to “speak.” Her evolving commitment—from procedural professionalism to moral urgency—models how meticulous, material work can redress historical silence. The act of re-articulation becomes an ethic: to connect what is scattered and to name what has been denied.
Thomas J. Scott, the painter, represents a partial witness. His work records gestures, expressions, and relationships that institutional histories ignore, but his perspective is bounded by his era’s racial hierarchy. He captures truth in image while often colluding in erasure in text and title, illustrating how even preservation can participate in forgetting.
Symbolic Elements
The Skeleton Lexington’s bones, stripped of name and context, manifest the cost of erasure: greatness without attribution, body without story. When the skeleton is finally articulated, its restored connections model how historical fragments can be made to speak coherently.
The Attic The museum attic is a spatial metaphor for cultural amnesia—out of sight, out of narrative. Dust and darkness stand in for institutional neglect, where misfiled artifacts languish without advocates.
The Discarded Painting Rescued from the trash, the painting dramatizes how value is socially conferred—and revoked. Its authentication is less about market worth than about returning voice and provenance to the silenced human figures it implies.
The Police Report A contemporary instrument of power, the report reduces lived reality to sanctioned language. Its sterile phrasing exposes how official narratives can fabricate authority while annihilating truth.
Contemporary Relevance
Horse speaks directly to current debates about monuments, archives, and whose stories populate public memory. The novel’s dual timelines show that the practices that minimized Black expertise on the racetrack are cousins to today’s institutional narratives that criminalize Black presence. Efforts to credit enslaved labor at universities, to recontextualize museum collections, and to center Black experiences in curricula echo Jess’s and Theo’s work: name what has been anonymized, restore context to what has been severed, and challenge the gatekeepers of “official” truth. The book argues that a more accurate past is a precondition for a more just present.
Essential Quote
“And here it is, what we wrote at that time, and what has been held to ever since: ‘No negro or mulatto, to make nomination in any stake, to be run over this course.’”
This rulebook excerpt lays bare how erasure is engineered: not by accident, but by policy. By excluding Black people from the very acts that confer recognition—nominating, recording, owning—the law ensures that their labor builds value while their names vanish from the record. The quote condenses the novel’s thesis into a single mechanism: power writes the rules that decide who gets remembered.