Cheater Punishment
A Million Little Pieces, James Frey's 2003 memoir about a drug battle, was discovered to be partially faked, and he was scolded on-air by Oprah. Wikipedia calls it a "semi-fictional memoir" which amuses me.
On the other hand, I would very much like to write one of these fake memoirs. (Check out Misha Defonseca's fake memoir – she threw in a sequence where she lived with a pack of wolves.) Take my life, doctor it so that it's a bit more interesting throw in a nemesis, maybe have an old mentor/oracle type character; ultimately produce what America wants: a tragedy with a happy ending.
But I would label it fiction. I might pull one of those "based on true events" things. Or I might let future biographers research my life and try to extract parallels to my work.
So here's the question: why not simply sell these as fiction? Fiction authors often weave real life circumstances into their works. A good story should sell, no matter what the label. Well, not necessarily. I did some half hearted research and discovered that 1) America's (useful) publishing statistics cost a lot of money to get your hands on, and 2) In 2005, the NYT published an opinions article asserting the growing dominance of nonfiction.
And it's true. There's something compelling about reading an amazing story that happens to be real. (Remember my post on In Cold Blood?) I bet the average public want their escape to be plausible; they know they probably won't discover that they are secretly royalty (or a wizard): but maybe they could survive an impossible drug battle, or even live with wolves.
Or maybe it's not about selling books. Maybe nobody ever told these authors that white lies aren't OK – especially widely published white lies.
I really liked Obama's comments in the introduction to Dreams from my Father. He acknowledges the inconsistency of memory, and says that he has done his best to accurately recreate what happened, but retold conversations will not be verbatim:
"Finally, there are the dangers inherent in any autobiographical work: the temptation to color events in ways favorable to the writer, the tendency to overestimate the interest one's experiences hold for others, selective lapses of memory. Such hazards are only magnified when the writer lacks the wisdom of age; the distance that can cure one of certain vanities. I can't say that I've avoided all, or any, of these hazards successfully. Although much of this book is based on contemporaneous journals or the oral histories of my family, the dialogue is necessarily an approximation of what was actually said or relayed to me. For the sake of compression, some of the characters that appear are composites of people I've known, and some events appear out of precise chronology. With the exception of my family and a handful of public figures, the names of most characters have been changed for the sake of their privacy."
Smashing Story: Angel at the Fence: the True Story of a Love that Survived, was the canceled ("true") story of a romance during the Holocaust. Salon did an interesting piece on this story.
**
I have never understood why, from a moral standpoint, single men and women get involved in affairs. If you know the man has a girlfriend/wife, have some respect for the woman and refuse the guy. Same goes for men.
What happened to doing things for the good of society, even at your own expense? Is it that radical to think of the committed partner, even if he/she is faceless to you? In When Harry Met Sally, all the sympathy is on the woman who is seeing a man who won't leave his wife. In He's Just Not that into You, Scarlett Johansson is advised by Drew Barrymore that the married man she is seeing might actually be "the one." Excuse me? It should be considered morally wrong to engage in an affair, even if you aren't the one attached.
Society's attitude needs to shift. Or the attitude the media portrays needs to shift.
Not only are you thinking of the other person in the equation, and refusing to enable the cheater; you are also respecting yourself. Who really wants to be the hidden relationship, the booty call? And even if he/she finally commits, who really wants to end up with a cheater?
I realize that affairs are often unintentional. I get it. Affairs are like a riptide; you're in the ocean, you step into the wrong area, and before you know it you're in over your head. Fine. Don't go to the ocean: don't casually flirt, don't hang out one-on-one, etc.
"Oh but men aren't biologically designed to be with one person!" Without commenting on the truth of that statement: a man who feels that way shouldn't get into long term relationships. Or he should get out of the first one before going on to the next.
I know this wasn't very empathetic. How empathetic are you going to feel when your wife of 10 years walks out on you for a guy with a Lamborghini? Nobody empathizes with the leaver/cheater. Why empathize with the enabler?
**
I miss my cat.
No comments:
Post a Comment