This may be the longest You Tell Me in history, but here goes:
What should be done about all of these fake memoirs?
Let that question percolate a little, and then let's see if your opinion changes by the end of this post.
I've been trying to process the news about two more fake memoirs surfacing, one by Misha Difonseca, who admitted that her memoir about her alleged Holocaust escape was fiction, and now Margaret Seltzer (writing as Margaret B. Jones), who concocted a story about growing up in South Central Los Angeles as a half-white/half-Native American gang member (she is white and grew up in Sherman Oaks). These fabrications, of course, follow closely on the heels of the J.T. Leroy and James Frey scandals (NYTBR blog roundup of these four here), and amid investigations by The Australian questioning elements of Ishmael Beah's memoir A LONG WAY GONE.
My first reaction is, of course, outrage that people could actually go through with these shenanigans, and resignation to the fact that the publishing industry will go through another round of beatdowns in the press and in public opinion. But after these initial reactions wore off, I'm left in a bit of a muddle. What really, should be done about this?
First off, as Michael Cader pointed out in Publishers Lunch today, I don't think people are giving enough credit to Riverhead and editor Sarah McGrath for heading this matter off before the book was published. According to today's NY Times article by Motoko Rich, knowing full well what happened in the Frey case, McGrath asked for (and received) several different pieces of corroborating evidence that backed up Seltzer's story. Seltzer's agent met with someone who claimed to be Seltzer's foster sister. McGrath and her agent did not turn a blind eye to Seltzer's fabrications and she did a more than cursory check, it just turned out that Seltzer had a whole lot more time to fake the truth than McGrath did to investigate it. Once the truth came to light, McGrath and Riverhead acted responsibly. I can't fault them on this. The book was never published and no one bought it.
But fine, so you might say, the editor did what she could do without becoming a full-on investigative reporter. So why don't publishers employ fact-checkers?
It's complicated. As Ross Douthat points out, the Atlantic fact-checks their articles, as does the New Yorker. But for the Atlantic this amounts to checking about 600,000 words per year. That's a holiday weekend in the publishing industry. It would take an army of fact-checkers even to do cursory checks of the millions of words published every year, it would be a tremendous expense, and that expense would inevitably drive up the price of books, reduce already slim margins.... I mean, are you willing to pay a lot more for a book just to root out a few bad apples?
One of the lesser-known (at least to outsiders) portions of a publishing contract is the warranty and indemnity clause. In nearly every publishing contract, the author has to warrant (i.e. promise) that they are the real author, that they have the ability to enter into the agreement, and usually when it's a work of nonfiction, they have to pledge that what they have written is true and based on sound research. If a court rules that the author has broken this warranty they're on the hook. Completely. It can seem onerous to the author to be on the hook like this and we agents negotiate the clause so that it's as fair as possible, but ultimately it's on them to tell the truth. And really, isn't this how it should be?
Another lesser-known component of memoir writing is that, from a legal standpoint, sometimes the truth HAS to be fudged to avoid defaming people, such as removing identifying details and changing names, so that the person in question can't point to the memoir and definitively identify themselves. Far from being a genre that is (or should be) held to journalistic standards, memoir is, and always has been, inherently a very squishy medium.
If anything, isn't this is all a byproduct of the drive by publishers, and in our culture in general, to want an author to be the "perfect package?" Someone whose life story is just as compelling as their work, who isn't just someone with a skill for words but someone who embodies their own work, this whole brand thing. We as a culture have become obsessed with authenticity -- it's not enough to just be talented, you also have to BE compelling. You can't just write a good book, you need to be able to sit down on a talk show host's couch and talk about your own human interest story, even if you're a novelist. The fabulists are just filling a cultural niche that we've created and which is nearly impossible to fill. It's so ironic that the more we as a culture want a great true story the more pressure there is to fake one.
Sure -- it's fun to pile on the publishers, but what really should be done about this? Should publishers bite the bullet, raise the prices on their books, employ fact-checkers and just hope that people will pay more for books when there is already incredible downward pressure on prices? Should we just treat these people as the outliers that they are, a few mistakes in an industry where thousands of books are published every year and live with a few embarrassments? Whatever the answer may be, it's not an easy one.
So now you tell me: what should be done about the fake memoirs?
new posts in all blogs
Nathan Bransford is the author of JACOB WONDERBAR AND THE COSMIC SPACE KAPOW, a middle grade novel about three kids who blast off into space, break the universe, and have to find their way back home, which will be published by Dial Books for Young Readers in May 2011. He was formerly a literary agent with Curtis Brown Ltd., but is now a publishing civilian working in the tech industry. He lives in San Francisco.
By: Nathan Bransford,
on 3/5/2008
Blog: Nathan Bransford (Login to Add to MyJacketFlap)
JacketFlap tags: publishing industry, You Tell Me, publishing industry, You Tell Me, Add a tag
Viewing Post from: Nathan Bransford
Nathan Bransford is the author of JACOB WONDERBAR AND THE COSMIC SPACE KAPOW, a middle grade novel about three kids who blast off into space, break the universe, and have to find their way back home, which will be published by Dial Books for Young Readers in May 2011. He was formerly a literary agent with Curtis Brown Ltd., but is now a publishing civilian working in the tech industry. He lives in San Francisco.
By: Nathan Bransford,
on 3/5/2008
Blog: Nathan Bransford (Login to Add to MyJacketFlap)
JacketFlap tags: publishing industry, You Tell Me, publishing industry, You Tell Me, Add a tag
26 Comments on You Tell Me: What Should Be Done About All These Fake Memoirs?, last added: 3/14/2008
Display Comments
Add a Comment
For me it is simple. Don't remove yourself so far from a situation in over thinking it. A persons first reaction to anything seems to be the path to a truth.Intuition is a valuable tool and can simplify so much. Start as that being "square one" and follow that path unignored.
I just began reading Mary Shelley's "Frankenstein" this afternoon. (Stay with me, this is going someplace.) From her Preface, written in 1817: "The event on which this fiction is founded has been supposed...as not of impossible occurrence....I have thus endeavoured to preserve the truth of the elementary principles of human nature, while I have not scrupled to innovate upon their combinations."
The reason we're drawn to memoirs of survival is because we want to believe it is possible to survive. So when we find out the person is lying--not just forgetting the facts of her history--we feel betrayed for investing not our money, but our faith and hope.
I don't read memoirs because I don't trust them--not since taking a class my senior year of college on "the autobiographical novel." By the end of the semester, I realized there is no such thing as pure truth when it comes to memories. One of the students presented her senior paper and had the whole class crying over her battle with cancer when she was younger. The next day she confessed she never had cancer, and the teacher knew this when she took on the assignment. The professor's point was to show us that the truth doesn't matter as much as our reaction to the story. It just served to piss most of us off, though.
I'm sure there are plenty of good memoirs out there that are as close to the truth as the author could honestly recall the facts, but I would much rather invest my time in a novel that, like "Frankenstein," preserves human nature through any combination of its principles.
As for what can be done? You know what can be done. Publishers know and agents know. There have been 85 posts already and everyone who's written in knows. Whether anything will be done about the false memoirs is a completely different issue. As long as people buy them, wanting to be suckered in, there will be a market.
a truth is an individual belief and is interpreted by each person differently (everyone percieves their own truth by seeing things differently). My policy is to ponder a truth and then move on, life is to learn and enjoy. Every person is entitled to their own truth, whether other people agree or not.
If she had submitted her "false memoir" as simple fiction, would any agent or editor have taken it up?
Isn't the really sad part about this that she had to lie to get published?
After reading through Nathan's post and the 88 thoughtful comments, I have to weigh in with my opinion(s). Sad to admit, we have created or allowed, perhaps even encouraged, a culture of lies, half-truths, deceits, frauds, etc. Yes, a "fake" memoir is despicable, but how can we make such a fuss over this while accepting the lies and deceit we live with daily from politicians and business? We desperately need to create a new society based on truth, honesty and integrity, and this requires a positive change in human consciousness--a change few are ready or willing to make. With money and power more important than basic human integrity, how can we expect anything different than what we have?
Peer pressure is possibly our strongest tool for creating a culture of truth and fairness, but than can work only when we live to such high standards ourselves. Then we can demand it of others.
Tweaking the conversation a bit:
"If anything, isn't this is all a byproduct of the drive by publishers, and in our culture in general, to want an author to be the "perfect package?" Someone whose life story is just as compelling as their work, who isn't just someone with a skill for words but someone who embodies their own work, this whole brand thing...."
Too right, too too right. Novelist as beauty contestant.
Z
I disagree with using Peer Pressure as a tool. Our happiness is based on our own perceptions and decisions that we have made or will make. The first lesson to be learned about people is UNDERSTANDING people. That is the first key in motivating a person. From there you can decide if that persons personality compliments what you desire. If there personality does not compliment yours it is as simple as "the glass is half full or half empty"...they are entitled to their view (with no animosity from oneself, but respect)
Sebastian Horsley, author of memoir Dandy in the Underworld, admits this privately: Jimmy Boyle and Boyle's ex-wife both deny that Boyle and Horsley ever had an affair.
Wouldn't he had to have gotten permission from Boyle to say that the affair happened? Do publishers require releases for such statements? Now, as the current generation of readers has probably never heard of Jimmy Boyle, it's not impossible that he would grant his permission.
But in the book, Horsley makes much of how afraid he still is of Boyle and how they're not in touch for years.
Sebastian Horsley is published by major publishers in the UK and the U.S. Incidentally, he's also reportedly a racist. the point being, he'll say anything to get famous. He'll now use those shock tactics to sell his so-called memoirs. So who knows what's true in THAT memoir?
But the whole problem is not fake memoirs. It's the dummy who decided to label memoirs nonfiction. They're not. They're not history textbooks-they're personal stories, based on a person's recollections and interpretations. And you have a range-from the fairly accurate to the you can't be serious-and you always will.
Isn't the issue more recategorizing them, and then letting the buyer beware? Letting the market determine the response? If more accurate memoirs sell better, well, that's part of the marketing isn't it? Let the publisher verify their hearts out so they can stamp on the cover "less lies, more filling" to get more sales. Or not.
Seriously, were it not for the nonfiction label, we wouldn't be having this discussion.
publishing companies make money off of books, and they function as marketers and distributors and are ultimately responsible for scamming readers.
indemnification deals with the relationship between the publisher and writer. it does not address the responsibilities a publishing house has to the buyers of fake memoirs.
if you buy a pair of 100% cotton jeans made by Guess (just a hypothetical!), and later discover that they are actually polyester, it's Guess' responsibility to own up to the deception.
sure, Guess probably bought the jeans from a manufacturer somewhere else, and may not have known they weren't 100% cotton, but it doesn't matter, because they stuck their name on them, just as a publisher sticks their name on a book. they are warranting to the world that the jeans are 100% cotton, just as a publisher is warranting to the world that a memoir is, indeed, non-fiction.
now, Guess will have an indemnification clause, too, and they can go after the manufacturer, but if you bought the jeans, you look to Guess for redress. why are publishers any different?
as someone who started her writing career as a magazine fact checker (after a first career as a lawyer) i agree that it's just untenable to fact check everything in a memoir.
but it's not that hard or expensive to ask for school records, family photos, birth certificate, etc. to at least prove that subject of the memoir actually existed.
is that so hard?
To Therese Walsh: unlike books, magazines sell advertising. That's probably why they can afford to fact-check each issue.
My feeling is that the loose system has been working. People are starting to get wise and investigate suspicious-sounding memoirs.
And by the way, it's worth remembering that if James Frey and JT Leroy couldnt write compelling stories no one would care either way.
Publishers should just slap a disclaimer on memoirs, the way supplement manufacturers do, i.e. "we say it makes you thin but there's no proof."
"We say it's true but there's no proof."
judi has an important point - that memoirs are not the same as other nonfiction.
I'm contemplating my own memoir - and I'll probably write it for my kids no matter what. But it's my own memory, and memories are faulty.
One day I happened upon the aftermath of a particularly bloody assassination in the Medellin/Cali cartel war. It weighs on my outlook on life to this day, and I still have a bit of a fear of police disco lights. While I remember every detail of the scene, what about the rest of it?
I think it was in January 1983, but I'm not sure. I remember it as being near 124th St and 77 Ave, but that doesn't jibe with what I remember doing before. If I get Lexus/Nexus access soon, I can research it, but that will certainly push my "memories" in a direction I didn't precisely remember.
When you make a compelling narrative out of your own life, you start from bad memories and you push them into a direction where they appear to make sense. Life itself doesn't make sense at all. I can remember bits and pieces, but I can't sew together the context under which they happened.
Wanna fact check any of this?
The problem, for me, comes in how you define "truth". Even fictional stories need to be "true", in the sense that they are representing people and cultures in a way that depicts their outlook on life. I learned as a kid in Miami that "reality" is very different from "truth", however, and that's what a good hunk of my memoir is about.
All writers must speak from "truth". I don't care if it's a memoir or fable, they have to be "true". Ms. Seltzer's story was not only not "real", it wasn't "true", and that's the problem. It wasn't her story to write far beyond not being an actual memoir. To compose a memoir is to adhere to an even higher standard of "truth" even if some of the bits that weave it together into a compelling narrative aren't precisely "real".
Does that make sense? Hopefully, it doesn't, otherwise I haven't done my job.
The point remains, however, that it's not exactly "non-fiction" in the purest sense no matter how you look at it.
erik, maybe seltzer thought she was telling the "truth" even though she had to lie to tell it. only a few people read the book, so who knows, right? maybe it was the "truthiest" fake ever.
that's not the problem.
the problem is she said she was writing a memoir and she was writing fiction.
i can't define truth, nor can i fact check whether your heart was pounding in 1983.
i can check some basics tho.
www.youtube.com/watch?v=aPo9sCqza98
To Anonymous:
Yes, magazines sell advertising and that advertising helps to pay for all staff, including the researchers. However, Rodale Press also has a huge book division and all of their books are also fact-checked. Umbrella situation? Maybe. Responsible publishing? Yes. Or is it just a nonfic thing to understand the importance of reputation and investing a little brainpower at the start?
I agree with Wanda: not everything can be fact-checked and some details might only seem false based on gut feel. But there certainly are facts which can be verified. Don't you think the knowledge of a pre-publication check might make the authors of these memoirs try just a little harder to be honest?
Why can't the author submit the book as fiction and be done with it?
Another small point is this: I wrote a memoir I'm trying to sell, and if someone asks Mayor Bloomberg if the stuff I said about what REALLY goes on in NYC homeless shelters is true, he will deny it. He has already denied it to me, even though I was there. But I guess the editors could find other people who were there and ask them. My point is that on some things, the VILLAIN will deny what the author says to save his/her skin. I'm sure my mother, if she's still alive if my memoir gets published will deny everything I said and most people who were witness are dead or there whereabouts are not known. And my brothers won't say anything, afraid to not get the inheritance.
just a few things to think about.
nanette
Unfortunately, my dial-up is balking at loading the just-shy of 100 comments that are ahead of me so I apologize if I'm repeating something someone else has already commented. That said...
The film industry has long used a phrase that I think the publishing industry could adopt as a new genre: "Based on a true story". In the "Based on" genre, fiction and nonfiction (memoir/history) can blend and interweave. Some few real life individuals can move through real events alongside fictional characters (think: Forest Gump).
Could give reviewers and book clubs new fodder for discussion: which parts/characters were real/which were fabricated.
Just a thought...
suzanne nam said:
> erik, maybe seltzer thought she was telling the "truth" even though she had to lie to tell it.
Yes, you are correct that she thought this - or I'll at least give her the benefit of the doubt. But it wasn't her story to tell.
Stealing someone else's story is the same as stealing their soul. If you want to honor those that really have no voice, possibly because they are dead, you have to really work at it. Anyone who's had to give a eulogy will tell you how hard it is.
I've had a moment from my childhood ripped off and used sensationally in a "Miami Vice" episode. I haven't forgiven television for that shameful act since. To be "true" is to really be a part of the moment and to depict it just as those who were there either reacted or would have reacted. It's hard stuff, but it's what makes works compelling IMHO.
You're probably right that she thought she was somehow being "true" - but I can assure you that after listening to her fake accent and reading a few bits of her work it wasn't. That wasn't her story to write, and I don't care how compelling it sounded. Besides, after three years and all that professional coaching/editing it better damned well at least sound compelling.
I am arguing that "true" is in the heart, while "real" is something out there in the mist. The village of Macondo is very true, even if it isn't real. Reality, I find, is grossly over-rated by this analysis.
erik, what is this "not her story to tell" stuff? as far as i knew, the universe and beyond was fair game for fiction writers (tho seltzer claimed not to be one).
the true/real dichotomy is silly and so is the idea of "stealing someone's story." was wally lamb stealing someone's story?! was ishiguro?! (list goes on and on and on)
Because memoir falls under non-fiction, presumably it can be pitched prior to completion of the writing. The NF proposal process is somewhat different from the fiction process which dictates a completed manuscript. If somebody has a good NF idea & proposal, that might be enough to hook an agent and publisher. Which could mean that the barrier to entry, as it were, would be lower than with fiction. Once an author's been given a contract, the pressure to continue the story is greater. Who knows. I'm not condoning the practice, I'm just wondering aloud.
I'm also amused at the people who've said that obviously memoirs are faked, hanging their hats on the idea that dialogue can't be re-created with any fidelity. But isn't there a HUGE difference between reconstructing a conversation vs. claiming a completely fabricated existence, constructing supporting documents and individuals (as Seltzer did)? In many memoirs you often read the disclaimer that dialogue is reconstructed "to the best of the author's ability." That's poetic license. Claiming different parentage seems to fall far outside that particular shade of gray.
Ultimately, I don't think this is a huge crisis in publishing. I think these fakes are and will be easier to spot going forward simply because of the abundance of information out there. But I doubt there are more fakes now then ever before.
suzanne nam:
Obviously, we disagree to the point that you aren't willing to consider what I'm saying. That's fine.
Wally Lamb is a person who values "truth" in fiction very highly, and I would think that this is obvious. He is a good example of what I'm saying.
Why was this story not Ms. Seltzer's to tell? Because it is clear that she didn't know enough about her subject to be able to, as Lamb would say, let the characters do what comes naturally to them.
You may think you're a great writer, and for all I know you are. Let's just assume that. But you are not omnipotent. There are certainly subjects that would be essentially impossible for you to react to in a way other than the conventional wisdom that you were raised in. That means that by attempting to tell that story you will be recounting background noise and your own prejudice.
I could not write a story about a rich white person who went to an Ivy League school and have it come off as "true". That's not my world. If I tried, the result would be laughable. I know this.
To assume that a writer can write absolutely anything, regardless of the culture it comes from, is the root of the echo chamber that reinforces prejudice. I will accept that a writer who understands that they know nothing could, in time, be capable of becoming very wise and writing about anything. But you first have to ditch the idea that anything is open to you - then, and only then, it might wind up being accurate.
Many of you will realize that I am hinting at something without using a very loaded word. I am trying to open a mind or two, not level charges. I find it's better to change the world rather than complain about it.
Writers are invited into someone's head for a while. What do you say when you get in there? Do you offer candy or nutrition? Do you dribble poison? The relationship between the writer and the reader determines a lot of what is retained. But I happen to believe that the author has a steep responsibility to behave themselves and offer something to their host - something that is at least "true".
Erik, I must respectfully disagree with you. Did Shakespeare write truthfully about kings and peasants? About the love of a black man for a white woman?
In this age of identity politics, it seems to me we're all too willing to surrender what can most help us understand one another: the gift of imaginative empathy.
I hope that all writers possess and cherish this, and don't let anyone intimidate them into thinking they can't write about whatsoever they wish.
Not a memoir, of course! :)
In my opinion, writing a fake memoir should fall under the "breach of contract" clause in a legal agreement with the author.
Literary agecies should consult an experienced IP (Intellectual Property) attorney for help in drawing up an air-tight contract with the would-be author. An ounce of prevention here beats a pound of cure.
The burden of proof (regarding authenticity) should rest on the author, not on the agent or publisher.
Hey, all - I just thought of another reason why (lazy) writers may try to pass off fiction as a memoir. Which of the following might make a better back cover:
"After twenty-six year old Miley Richards fell from a cliff on a remote island in the Pacific while on a hiking trip with her fiance, she was declared missing, swept away at sea. But when Miley wakes from a coma six days after the fall, she finds that, in order to survive, she must allow herself to be raised by a pack of separatist, vegetarian beavers."
- OR -
"This moving memoir, written by a young woman with inimitable storytelling prowess, tells the astonishing survival tale of twenty-six year old Miley Richards. After Miley fell from a cliff on a remote island in the Pacific while on a hiking trip with her family in 2004, she was declared missing, assumed swept away at sea. But when Miley wakes from a coma six days after the fall, she finds that in order to survive she must allow herself to be raised by a pack of separatist, vegetarian beavers. Consumed by amnesia, Miley uses sheer determination and will -- and the love of six adoring beavers -- to overcome her injuries, and to allow her to tell her story to all."
Fact of the matter is, readers may not be as sharp as we wish they were. Look at the number of people who still watch sensational daytime TV talk shows! Is truth (even false truth) better than fiction?
I'm going to go ask my beaver family about it.
Cam
Nathan,
I am glad you brought up this subject.
I have numerous thoughts on various aspects of this Scandal That Never Ends, and it is lengthy to include as a blog reply. Instead, if you are interested, please check out my blog where I expanded on my thoughts previously posted on Jonathon Lyon's blog.
http://tinyurl.com/yppsx8
Take care, have a good weekend, may all your clients be trustworthy and make you proud to represent them.
Linda
How about this: move memoir in between fiction and nonfiction (kind of like poetry, which can be either or both within a single volume), and apply a "truthiness" scale (with a nod to Stephen Colbert). More journalistic gets higher rating, more, ahem, impressionistic gets a lower rating. That way you can tell whether you're dealing with a story that is "true" like your Uncle Ed's fishing stories, or true like most of the reportage on the front page of the New York Times.
Seems we writers have strong opinions about fauxmoir...
Unfortunately, I fear if you're not in the business - writer, agent, publisher - you're blissfully unaware of all this brou-haha. My literate friends had no clue of the Frey and more recent debacles involving memoir gone bad. No idea. And they still buy the books. The mainstream press just doesn't make a big deal of it.
So if you're waiting for the economics of demand and supply to kick in, keep waiting. Peace...