aesthetics vs. truth: the problem of the fake memoir

Post Reply New Topic

The "fake" memoir is troubling to me. More and more of them are being exposed. Some are but embellished a little, like the infamous A Million Little Pieces. Others are completely made up, like Bruno "Binjamin Wilkomirski" Doessekker's memoir of Holocaust experiences he never had, Fragments.

Does labeling an lightly embellished story a "memoir" make the author a liar? Instinct says yes, but the intellectual issues behind it are more complicated. Are we allowed to make concessions like that in the name of art? If we aren't, how can "realist" novels like Germinal be allowed?

An even more knotty question: Is a reader allowed to enjoy a "fake memoir" as a novel, given its dishonest origins?

I must admit the second question is somewhat personal to me. Elie Wiesel's Night Trilogy*-excuse the cliche-changed my life when I was fourteen. It taught me gratitude, the finality of death, the importance of loyalty, and even empathy, a skill some aspies never gain. After I read it I discovered that Night is packed with a million little historical inaccuracies that can only be explained by the creative liscense of Elie Wiesel. Yet the book has a power over me just the same. I could never forget it. I reread it as a novel; It's still amazing.

A fake memoir. A contradiction of terms, yes. The price we pay for aesthetics, maybe.

*I know it's now the hip thing in intellectual circles to despise Elie Wiesel as a sentimental preener who has too much money, only speaks Humanitarianese, and is a slave to the evil Oprah empire, but please don't make fun of me. People have had their lives changed by worse books than his.

http://www.salon.com/books/feature/2008/03/07/memoirs/

Someone please post.

I get so lonely.

Depends on the embellishments. I mean, I assume you use embellish in a sense where things are dishonest and the 1 foot long fish was perhaps 1foot and 1 inch, and so long as it does not impact the story it is alright.

Aesthetics is subjective, you as a reader may freely enjoy anything. I don't think that this is a moral choice, and there is no disputing over tastes.

Yeah, people have their lives changed by worse books. I am sorry that you started feeling lonely, I thought about posting, but aesthetics isn't my thing.

That's creative license for you. As far as fake goes, I'm considering writing a book on theology and using a pen name that makes me appear to be a man. Some religious men are sexist, even down to their book authors - they won't read women-authored theology books. Then you have your men who have female pen names, because women won't buy a romance novel written by a man.

Then there is that possibility that it really is their memoirs -- from a previous life or a parallel universe.

A memoir is more of a collection of memories, so fictional characters can have their own memoirs. I can't wait for the memoirs of Harry Potter.

Perusing a simple (for literary criticism) book of literary criticism just now, I found this:

"It is not the genuineness of a document or memory that spoils or makes the book, but the way it is used."----Humphry House

Even if the author is completely honest as far as their memory is concerned, others knew the writer and experienced the same events might feel that the work is not true or accurate because everyone has different perceptions and memories of events. Some authors purposely fictionalize and get caught, but I think many write memoirs as they remember, and probably don't double check dates and facts. That is the problem of memory, it isn't perfect.

Z

I learned disloyalty when some moron decided to not give back the Night book I let borrow.


Though I can't wait for the memoirs of The Arbiter in the Halo Universe.



Or at least whatever they do to Master Chief pretty soon.

Is it worse to enjoy a fake memoir as a novel or as basis for religious belief? Do we have to think of the alleged authors/writers of the alleged memoirs of Christ as liars because they declared what they wrote to be the truth?

Apparently at the epoch of their writing it was completely normal to enclose/vehicule a psychological/spiritual truth in a pretended "real life" format. Teaching in parables was widespread religious/spiritual practice. People living at the time would probably be amazed to see how the story has been taken for concrete personal history.

i think the problem is in people's only believing that something is "true" when it is "fact". As if subjective truth were far less important/powerful than objective truth. As if, not being objective, it would be worth nothing.

Good one.

BTW, you can easily get another copy. Since Night was anointed by Oprah's book club, they've been selling it supah cheap.