THE TRUTH OR THE STORY?
A while back I wrote a post about a writer’s proximity to a character, perhaps an almost fictionalization of biography, but identifiable nevertheless. But now we examine what happens in reverse when a writer’s supposed exploration of their lives is not all that close to the truth. After all, it was Mark Twain who said: Never let the truth get in the way of a good story.
2003 saw the publication of “A Million little Lies” by James Frey. It was marketed as a memoir of drug addiction, crime, and the return to sobriety through twelve-step programs. There were mixed reviews until it was picked as an Oprah’s Book Club selection and then spent fifteen weeks atop the New York Times Bestseller List.
And then it all came apart. Reports that much of it was fabricated came in. By early 2006 the thread was unraveling and Frey made a return appearance on Oprah’s show to admit his duplicity. Yet there are numerous questions still. Was the book praised for its writing or simply to boost sales? Had it been promoted as, say, a non-fiction novel, like “In Cold Blood”, would there have been as much pushback? Might Frey have extricated himself simply by referring to it as a meta-fiction?
If you bought the book and read it and were fascinated or moved or saddened or disgusted, the book had an impact on you. In essence, it worked. The fact that agents and publishers and, of course, Oprah herself were bamboozled led to an author being pilloried. And perhaps rightly so. But can we expect any book to contain complete truth?
One of the greatest works of the Transcendentalist movement is “Walden” by Thoreau. “I went to the woods because I wished to live deliberately, to front only the essential facts of life, and see if I could not learn what it had to teach, and not, when I came to die, discover that I had not lived.” It’s a classic opening and sets the stage for an amazing journey.
There are many who point out that Thoreau often went into town to visit family and friends, had assistance from various visitors, and wasn’t living a solitary life. Defenders claim Thoreau’s intention was to live a simple life.
Are the detractors merely looking for a reason to undermine the work because they disagree with his principles or intent? Or was Thoreau a literary fraud?
Again, if you read the book and were enchanted by the notions presented, does it really matter if the author added in components that were not verifiably true? If Thoreau wrote a novel about such a man and presented it accordingly, would there even be such a discussion?
It’s necessary, at times, to take the work in vacuo, simply read it for its merits as a piece of writing, story-telling, character development, or whatever it is you, as a reader, are looking for by choosing the work.
Whether, as we discussed previously, the fiction is so firmly part of the writer, or the writer fabricates a tale, we have too often lost sight of the reader. Just give me something entertaining that may warm my soul. I’ll figure out the truth later.
