Comments on: A Million Little Equivocations http://terrychay.com/blog/article/a-million-little-equivocations.shtml You tell that other boy, not to touch the woodwork... Wed, 07 Jan 2009 00:31:15 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8-bleeding-edge hourly 1 By: tychay http://terrychay.com/blog/article/a-million-little-equivocations.shtml/comment-page-1#comment-1092 tychay Wed, 25 Jan 2006 00:59:59 +0000 http://terrychay.com/blog/article/a-million-little-equivocations.shtml#comment-1092 @Tod: Since a memoir is sold as non-fiction, but something like a “based on a true story” movie is not, I will respectfully disagree with you. Nor do I feel one should judge a lie by the fact that it is contained in only 5% of the pages of a book. After all, those were the only 5% of the pages that could be easily <b>proved</b> to be false. <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/hope-edelman/freys-5-rule_b_13863.html" title="Frey's 5% Rule—Hope Edelmen" rel="nofollow">Others have put this far better than me</a>, though I can understand if you have a difference of opinion. In any case, I wasn't attacking him, I was attacking those who were defending him by saying that it was a memoir and based on his “perception” of the events when there was an “essential emotional truth.” That sort of equivocation is very dangerous. Richard Bradley, in my previous comment put it this way: “Are you sure you were raped? Maybe you just have <a href="http://www.aaets.org/arts/art13.htm" title="Perspectives on Acquaintance Rape—David G. Curtis, Ph.D., B.C.E.T.S." rel="nofollow">a different perspective</a> on a sexual encounter?” I realize that sometimes we can go all <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0042876/" title="Rashomon—IMDB" rel="nofollow">Rashomon</a> here but the truth is still the truth, no matter what version of events someone might choose to creatively interpret it. Indeed, as you alude to, this defense has <a href="http://www.observer.com/20060123/20060123_tom_scocca_pageone_coverstory1.asp" title="The Awful Untruth:You’ve Probably Had It on Phony Memoir— But Frey Fraud Was Worse Than You Know; Was Explosion Just Delayed W.M.D. Reaction?—New York Observer">an implication to today’s politics</a>, that I didn’t want to delve into. Others may want to drag it into that theatre, but I prefer to think simply about the social impact of this defense. As for Clinton, *shrug*. I was never a fan of him, nor was I a fan of his detractors when he was impeached. From my perspective, he lied and then muddied the waters with the Frey-like, “It depends on what your definition of is is.” But then again, there was no cause for impeachment, or if there was, given the re-election rates of most congressmen, there are an awfully lot of sitting hypocrites right now. I did try to imply that there might be a number of drug addicts who believe that there is an “essential emotional truth” to Frey’s work of fiction. In doing so, they might take it as a prescription to recovery. However, <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2006/01/24/books/24frey.html?ex=1295758800&en=06f60daafcb249b9&ei=5088&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss" title="Treatment Description in Memoir Is Disputed—New York Times" rel="nofollow">as the latest article in the Times shows</a>, doing so is a very bad idea. It also calls into question the validity of the “other 95%” of the book. I personally believe a lie presented as the truth is bad, no matter whose agenda they might serve. Defending them will come to bite you in the ass. A lot of evidence seems to back this up: Where Clinton stuck his penis and Oprah’s defense of Frey’s book are just two of them. @Tod: Since a memoir is sold as non-fiction, but something like a “based on a true story” movie is not, I will respectfully disagree with you. Nor do I feel one should judge a lie by the fact that it is contained in only 5% of the pages of a book. After all, those were the only 5% of the pages that could be easily proved to be false. Others have put this far better than me, though I can understand if you have a difference of opinion.

In any case, I wasn’t attacking him, I was attacking those who were defending him by saying that it was a memoir and based on his “perception” of the events when there was an “essential emotional truth.” That sort of equivocation is very dangerous. Richard Bradley, in my previous comment put it this way: “Are you sure you were raped? Maybe you just have a different perspective on a sexual encounter?” I realize that sometimes we can go all Rashomon here but the truth is still the truth, no matter what version of events someone might choose to creatively interpret it.

Indeed, as you alude to, this defense has an implication to today’s politics, that I didn’t want to delve into. Others may want to drag it into that theatre, but I prefer to think simply about the social impact of this defense.

As for Clinton, *shrug*. I was never a fan of him, nor was I a fan of his detractors when he was impeached. From my perspective, he lied and then muddied the waters with the Frey-like, “It depends on what your definition of is is.” But then again, there was no cause for impeachment, or if there was, given the re-election rates of most congressmen, there are an awfully lot of sitting hypocrites right now.

I did try to imply that there might be a number of drug addicts who believe that there is an “essential emotional truth” to Frey’s work of fiction. In doing so, they might take it as a prescription to recovery. However, as the latest article in the Times shows, doing so is a very bad idea. It also calls into question the validity of the “other 95%” of the book.

I personally believe a lie presented as the truth is bad, no matter whose agenda they might serve. Defending them will come to bite you in the ass. A lot of evidence seems to back this up: Where Clinton stuck his penis and Oprah’s defense of Frey’s book are just two of them.

]]> By: tychay http://terrychay.com/blog/article/a-million-little-equivocations.shtml/comment-page-1#comment-1024 tychay Tue, 17 Jan 2006 22:09:31 +0000 http://terrychay.com/blog/article/a-million-little-equivocations.shtml#comment-1024 Richard Bradley <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/richard-bradley/why-james-frey-matters_b_13977.html" title="Why James Frey Matters—Richard Bradley" rel="nofollow">expresses the unique socio-political implications of the debate around Frey</a> and references an interesting <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2006/01/17/books/17kaku.html" title="Bending the Truth in a Million Little Ways—New York Times" rel="nofollow">New York Times critic’s commentary</a>. Richard Bradley expresses the unique socio-political implications of the debate around Frey and references an interesting New York Times critic’s commentary.

]]> By: Tod http://terrychay.com/blog/article/a-million-little-equivocations.shtml/comment-page-1#comment-1022 Tod Tue, 17 Jan 2006 13:46:48 +0000 http://terrychay.com/blog/article/a-million-little-equivocations.shtml#comment-1022 It's common knowledge that in a lot of memoirs, names, places, and events have to be altered to protect the identity of certain people, time lines compressed, and things changed for artistic reasons. Only 5% of James Frey's book is even being disputed, and most of the disputed parts concern trivial things like whether he was arrested for driving drunk or arrested for driving high. This whole scandal reminds me of when the far right was attacking Clinton for not telling the truth about sex, and Hillary for going on TV and supporting him. Typical that the same types of people would be attacking a drug addict, just as Clinton was attacked for whether or not he did drugs too. It’s common knowledge that in a lot of memoirs, names, places, and events have to be altered to protect the identity of certain people, time lines compressed, and things changed for artistic reasons. Only 5% of James Frey’s book is even being disputed, and most of the disputed parts concern trivial things like whether he was arrested for driving drunk or arrested for driving high.

This whole scandal reminds me of when the far right was attacking Clinton for not telling the truth about sex, and Hillary for going on TV and supporting him. Typical that the same types of people would be attacking a drug addict, just as Clinton was attacked for whether or not he did drugs too.

]]> By: tychay http://terrychay.com/blog/article/a-million-little-equivocations.shtml/comment-page-1#comment-1021 tychay Tue, 17 Jan 2006 07:49:36 +0000 http://terrychay.com/blog/article/a-million-little-equivocations.shtml#comment-1021 Maureen Dowd has a <a href="http://guerillawomentn.blogspot.com/2006/01/dowd-oprah-how-could-ya.html" rel="nofollow">similar Op-Ed in the Times</a>. Choice quote: “Despite George Washington and the cherry tree, we no longer have a society especially consecrated to truth. The culture produces an infinity of TV shows and movies depicting the importance of honesty. But they're really talking only about the importance of being honest about your feelings. Sharing feelings is not the same thing as telling the truth.” Maureen Dowd has a similar Op-Ed in the Times.

Choice quote: “Despite George Washington and the cherry tree, we no longer have a society especially consecrated to truth. The culture produces an infinity of TV shows and movies depicting the importance of honesty. But they’re really talking only about the importance of being honest about your feelings. Sharing feelings is not the same thing as telling the truth.”

]]> By: tychay http://terrychay.com/blog/article/a-million-little-equivocations.shtml/comment-page-1#comment-1019 tychay Tue, 17 Jan 2006 06:40:36 +0000 http://terrychay.com/blog/article/a-million-little-equivocations.shtml#comment-1019 An Op Ed in the Washington Post <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/01/16/AR2006011600912.html?nav=rss_opinions/columnsandblogs" title="Oprah's Grand Delusion—Richard Cohen" rel="nofollow">says something similar about Oprah’s defense</a>. An Op Ed in the Washington Post says something similar about Oprah’s defense.

]]>