Okay, kids, it’s time again for the publishing industry to freak out about a fake memoir. And for the media to demand answers about how something like this could happen.Gang Memoir, Turning Page, Is Pure Fiction
I, like many of you, read about this woman in last week’s lengthy profile in the Times. Huh, former gang member now making a new life for herself and her daughter in Oregon. How nice.
Well, not so much.
So, all, how does something like this happen? Should publishing companies be fact-checking their memoirs and narrative nonfiction? If it were a newspaper or magazine, they’d have checked out all the details, we hear. If that’s the case, then how did the New York Times also miss the fact that she’s a big, fat liar? Generally, our MO is to trust authors in how they portray themselves. From all accounts, the agent and editor of this book had no idea during the years they worked with her that she was a sham. How can you combat a con artist except by being skeptical of everyone, all the time?
8 comments:
I'm admittedly not a big fan of memoirs. I prefer allegory as a method for placing personal experiences in a context that can most effectively speak to those who may not have shared that exact experience, but can relate to it, learn from it, be inspired by it all the same.
Besides, what's the old argument? That once something's written down it's fiction?
Although, in this particular case, I'm not sure why this woman didn't just write a feature story.
The New York Times is not exactly known for being concerned about the truth of what they print.
I think this chick was just really, really good at fooling everyone. Her editor said the details of her story never changed in three years of working with her, and she had photos and letters to back it all up. What a pain that must have been to pull off.
It's kind of curious that, once we've finished shaming the author, our first instinct is to question the editor and publisher. When the Verve lifted an orchestral arrangement of the Rolling Stones' "The Last Time," no one accused their label of wrongdoing, nor did anyone claim the producer was culpable.
One the one hand, the work is ultimately the author's. On the other, the public assumes, right or wrong, that publishing houses have the resources to fact check their books. In a case like this, however, fact checking is problematic because you have to find documented inconsistencies in the author's story. Moreover, what author is going to sign a book deal knowing his publisher is going to investigate his personal life?
I was interning at Teen People magazine a few months before it folded, and witnessed Time Inc.'s first big company-wide ax job. No one's job was entirely safe, but it seemed to me that the first place the CEO went to cut was each magazine's fact-checking team. I was working with the fact-checkers, and I saw our sub-department shrink from five full-timers down to two, plus a freelancer a couple days a week (and, of course, their college intern).
People are so shocked when something like this comes out, but really, they have no idea that publishers just don't have the resources to verify authors' stories. It's sad, but--unlike this woman's book--all too true these days.
I love your "Where I'd like to be" photo. It is beautiful.
Thanks! I think that photo is from National Geographic. I'm trying to find it again so I can credit it properly. Blogger messed up my template last week so I'm trying to put stuff back together again.
It's always Blogger's fault. Everything.
Post a Comment