I am not sure if any of you have been following the controversy over the last week concerning James Frey's book, A Million Little Pieces. If you click the title above it should take you to one of the news stories about the controversy. The gist of the controversy is this, James Frey wrote a book a few years back about his life as a former drug addict, alcoholic and and criminal. He told sensational stories about what happened during different drug episodes and during various arrests and imprisonments. The book has sold millions of copies especially after Oprah Winfrey made it a book club selection on her T.V. show last fall.
Only one problem, apparently much of what he wrote in his "Memoir" are flat out lies and fabrications! This last week the website, "The Smoking Gun" wrote an extensive article outlining all off the lies and deception. Frey's lawyer has been threatening the website with a lawsuit for months if they published their story. Of course the website had one thing in their favor, namely THE TRUTH! Frey had lied in his book. He had made up people, events and situations. He had exaggerated his alcohol and drug use. What he wrote was a lie.
Confronted with the truth of these allegations, Frey should had responded with shame and remorse. He should have publicly come out and retracted his statements and agreed to rewrite the fallacious sections in his book.
Ah, but not so in this postmodern world. Truth is irrelevant if the made up "TRUTH" has helped people. Frey appeared on Larry King Live to defend his book. He is not saying that everything he wrote was totally accurate, only that his lies are just like everyone else's who writes memoirs.
Read one quote from the show cited in an AP news article:
Frey has acknowledged to The Smoking Gun that he embellished parts of the book and he said so again Wednesday night on "Larry King Live," stating that alterations were common for memoirs and defending "the essential truth" of "A Million Little Pieces."
"The book is about drug addiction and alcoholism," he said. "The emotional truth is there."
Did you catch that last line, "The emotional truth is in there." What does that mean? How can there be emotional truth if there is not TRUE truth? Later on in the show Oprah called in to defend Frey. Interestingly, she never said what he said was actually true or that the book accurately reflected Frey's life. As long as it helped people then it was "true for you." Here's her comment again quoted in AP:
"If you're an addict whose life has been moved by this story and you feel that what James went through was able ... to help you hold on a little bit longer, and you connected to that, that is real. That is real," she said. "And it's ... irrelevant discussing, you know, what happened or did not happen to the police."
Notice some key phrases: "life has been moved" "you feel" "to help you" "you connected" and then the shocking comment, "that is real." Then she says it is irrelevant discussing if it actually happened!!! In other words, it doesn't matter if you believe a lie as long as it is meaningful to you. The fact that it is meaningful makes it "true for you." It's all about you, truth is inconsequential.
Even if you are not familiar with the events above, the issue should be clear. We live in a world that devalues truth and puts a premium on emotional experience. Truth is unnecessary as long as what you believe helps you. I think Frey and Oprah's motivation for defending the book are different. Frey embellished his life in order to sell more books. Who wants to read a run of the mill turn around story? Oprah is afraid that thousands of people who quit drugs or alcohol because of being inspired by this book might relapse and return to that lifestyle. The concern is commendable but not at the expense of truth.
Paul addressed the issue of truth almost 2,000 years ago in the Bible. The issue was the physical, bodily resurrection of Jesus. Some thought, even if Jesus didn't actually rise from the dead that's okay as long as it makes your life meaningful and it helps you. Even today some say that if Christianity makes you a better person or changes your life that is fine even if the events are a canard (deliberately misleading statement), it doesn't matter because of all the good it does. Hogwash!
To that the Apostle Paul replied, "if Christ has not been raised, then our preaching is vain, your faith also is vain." (1 Corinthians 15:14) Beyond that he says that he would be a "false witnesses of God." (v. 15) If Jesus did not actually rise again from the dead in real life then, "your faith is worthless; you are still in your sins." (v. 17) He concludes, "If we have hoped in Christ in this life only, we are of all men most to be pitied." If we based our lives on a lie we be pitied. Why?
Simply because it would be a waste of my life to base it on a lie. If Jesus didn't rise from the dead literally and physically then we are not forgiven of our sins, the whole basis of Christianity has been proven false and living for Christ is a fool's errand. If Jesus didn't rise from the dead we should live it up in this life because this is all there is. Forget restraint. Forget moral improvement. Forget trying to glorify God. Eat, drink and be merry for tomorrow we die!
But of course Jesus did rise again from the dead!
Here's my point, don't buy into the postmodern garbage that truth is unimportant or irrelevant. As Christians we sometimes try to accommodate to culture in order to reach people. I have had well-meaning Christians tell me that we shouldn't try to use apologetics to reach the lost. We should just compare out story to theirs and the winsomeness of our story will convert others. NO, a thousand times no. We are people of the truth. We stand on our faith because it is true in the real world. We should stand up and expose falsehood and help people see the importance of truth.
Yes, Christianity is helpful. Yes, it has changed my life. But the reason it has is because it is TRUE. Don't sacrifice truth at the altar of postmodernism.
7 comments:
i'm actually more intrigued to read the book now, knowing that it's less whining and more of an attempt to make a story, in a A Heartbreaking Work of Staggering Genius kind of a way.
My beef with this is with this idea of "faction" where he presents fabrication as fact. He can lie and embellish all he wants provided he tells us his stories are not accurate. When we blur the lines between fact and fiction we end up in some fuzzy feel-good nowhere land.
What really got to me was the initial vehement denials before the truth was exposed and his justification afterward.
yeah, his justification is crap, and given that the truth of it was one of his selling points, it's very 'cheap'. nonetheless, it is a memoir, not a documentary. despite dave eggers explaining, in the middle of stretching the truth, that he is stretching the truth, AHWOSG is still in most libraries' non-fiction section. frey is a scumbag, but (not having read the book) it sounds like that's meant to be the point.
i guess the reason all the hand wringing surrounding TSG's article bugs me is because "a million tiny pieces" IS so different from the bible (or a textbook, news article, or a biography).
believing the bible depends on the veracity of the events depicted in spite of the writer. the idea of divine inspiration is a big part of making the experience more direct, and less vicarious. believing the bible does not hinge on whether it's a good read or not.
by contrast, a memoir is interesting precisely because the author is NOT objective. the vicarious thrill depends on the story being good, and the author injecting his own feelings and his own perspective.
I think part of the stems controversy stems from the fact that the author not only adamantly insisted that there were no exaggerations he went so far as to say that this was the naked truth and even included many actual names of people. He wasn't concerned with hiding identities because it was true.
He threatened to sue the Smoking Gun for defamation of character and libel if they went ahead with their accusations. They actually tried to work with him behind the scenes but he was insistent that there were no exaggerations or misrepresentations of facts. His tune has only changed after the allegations have come out.
The spin about it being a memoir may hold some credence from a literary perspective but they are well after the fact. If he had not gone on Oprah and said that the book was absolute fact it probably would never have been an issue. It is because of this that he is taking a public drumming.
Of course Oprah did help him sell a few extra million books. This is as much about profit as it is about truth to those involved.
I'm more interested in the comments justifying the book than the contents of the book itself.
It seems to me Dave, that what you're most upset about is the reliance on existential philosophy in general regarding the "truthfullness" of his story. I agree with what you said in your post. I linked to it here. Also, I stole your title because I thought it was really catchy. But I didn't really "steal" it because as long as it does good to my blog traffic, it's OK. ;) In all seriousness, very good post. You're very clear with your thoughts.
well said dave...i couldn't agree more
Post a Comment