An Age That Bends the Truth in a Million Little Ways

[JimMorrison]

I believe this is a must read for everyone. I believe a lot of books and articles are "blurring the lines between fact and fiction" nowadays. This isnt just another article about James Frey's admission, its an analyzation of embellishments of the truth in literature and in society.


http://www.nytimes.com/2006/01/17/b...b1f429ebd&ei=5090&partner=rssuserland&emc=rss

A very interesting read. What does everyone think? Do you guys agree with the media and the effects it is having? It sounds like a serious movement that has been gradually developing and getting worse.

 

[Billy]

I am not shocked or surprised by this. All memoirs are subjective and hold variations of the truth, since the truth itself is often subjective, depending on who's viewing it. Objectivity is a lovely idea, but it doesn't really exist. In everything that is written you are always reading the author's point of view and I've found that before reading anything that is supposedly objective, it always helps if I ask myself who's writing it and what do they want me to think?

 

[TheRedNewt]

What seems to come up every time a person is caught in a lie is a more and more common belief, or at least defense, that there is no such thing as truth. I know it is a bit of a leap here, but it really doesn't surprise me in the least to see something like this when such attitudes to truth are common. Haven't we dealt with this in regards to the whole Clinton scandal a few years back? I know the situations are very different, but the same type of articles surfaced during both times. On one hand you have articles saying that there really aren't any lies merely one's own perception, and on the other hand you have people bemoaning the downfall of all civilization based on an increased disregard for the truth. Frankly, both camps take it too far, and I think it's time for someone to set some new frameworks.

The whole idea of relativistic truth as I understood it was supposed to be regarding moral truths of right and wrong in incidents when something of great value is at stake (the classic example of lying about runaway slaves or other historical instances), so I feel we should have some different standard for facts about someone's life. It's one thing to have an honest slip in memory, especially during a trying time, but from my understanding Frey wasn't even close to what happened in the parts he did "embellish."

Facts still exist. Perhaps you don't remember exactly how jail was, but you would certainly know if you were ever there. If you "forgot" about it, it would not take long to check public records. It's one thing to give your viewpoint about an event, but it is a different issue when you are giving your viewpoint about an event that never happened. That is called fiction, and it can be very entertaining. Of course, I had no intention of reading Frey's book because I don't particularly like Oprah and I am not one fro memoirs. What does concern me a bit is that viewpoints are always acceptable even in history textbooks, but how long before history books make claims that are easily discredited? What's the harm, it's just their perception, right?

 

[Violanthe]

I've only heard about this controversy, not read or seen any interviews.

But it occurs to me that all he had to say was that opinions differ when it comes to literary nonfiction. Many nonfiction purists would label memoir as fiction, while looser definitions call admittedly-fictional memoirs "creative nonfiction"

 

[Peder]

I've only heard about this controversy, not read or seen any interviews.

But it occurs to me that all he had to say was that opinions differ when it comes to literary nonfiction. Many nonfiction purists would label memoir as fiction, while looser definitions call admittedly-fictional memoirs "creative nonfiction"

I'm not so sure it matters what one calls it. If a person is lying, and knows that they are lying then there is a word for that. It's called lying. And when it is called memory to the best of one's ability, and labelled 'memoir,' that's a futher lie. The best one can say, for Frey's book that I have actually read, is that parts of it are pure fabrication (namely lying to the best of his ability about events that never happened), passed off as memoir. No new terminology is needed to describe that situation. I personally thnk that his particular 'memoir' passes the test for being called fiction, shelved as fiction, and sold as fiction. Or, if you wish, fiction based on true experiences, but fiction nonetheless.
Peder

 

[JimMorrison]

What seems to come up every time a person is caught in a lie is a more and more common belief, or at least defense, that there is no such thing as truth. I know it is a bit of a leap here, but it really doesn't surprise me in the least to see something like this when such attitudes to truth are common. Haven't we dealt with this in regards to the whole Clinton scandal a few years back? I know the situations are very different, but the same type of articles surfaced during both times. On one hand you have articles saying that there really aren't any lies merely one's own perception, and on the other hand you have people bemoaning the downfall of all civilization based on an increased disregard for the truth. Frankly, both camps take it too far, and I think it's time for someone to set some new frameworks.

The whole idea of relativistic truth as I understood it was supposed to be regarding moral truths of right and wrong in incidents when something of great value is at stake (the classic example of lying about runaway slaves or other historical instances), so I feel we should have some different standard for facts about someone's life. It's one thing to have an honest slip in memory, especially during a trying time, but from my understanding Frey wasn't even close to what happened in the parts he did "embellish."

Facts still exist. Perhaps you don't remember exactly how jail was, but you would certainly know if you were ever there. If you "forgot" about it, it would not take long to check public records. It's one thing to give your viewpoint about an event, but it is a different issue when you are giving your viewpoint about an event that never happened. That is called fiction, and it can be very entertaining. Of course, I had no intention of reading Frey's book because I don't particularly like Oprah and I am not one fro memoirs. What does concern me a bit is that viewpoints are always acceptable even in history textbooks, but how long before history books make claims that are easily discredited? What's the harm, it's just their perception, right?

well said, i totally agree.