Electronic Writer

At first, I was a bit apathetic about the Oprah Winfrey/James Frey debate. But as time passes, and Frey becomes more and more demonized, I find myself with a bit more to say about the ordeal.

My apathy came as a byproduct of the simple fact that regardless of what happens to James Frey, he will be rich from this process. It is a bit callous, I admit. Nonetheless, it is true. It is reminiscent of a story about some publisher calling some author to report that some education district had banned his books from being taught in their schools. The author’s immediate response was celebration: the monetary rewards that such a honor will bring would be beyond his wildest expectations. Frey would undoubtedly suffer the same fate.

And then came the rest of the story . . . .

It actually sounded, at first, that Oprah was going to defend Frey–that they had somehow come to an agreement. That it was a book, and that a natural amount of embellishment happens in even the most factual retelling of a story–our famed newspapers included.

That embellishment is a problem of language itself. As soon as you choose to put an idea into words, you have to select a word to express it, and the subtle meaning of language is shifted depending upon the very word that you chose. (This is a much bigger discussion that doesn’t fit here, but you get the idea.)

Then came the second interview . . . .

Apparently, she was a bit less forgiving in this one. In fact, Oprah calls him a liar, and in essence, publicly flogs him on her show. Was Oprah doing this to salvage her reputation, or was this retribution for Frey’s lies, or is there something else? Regardless of her motivation, Oprah has gone above and beyond–the punishment does not fit his crimes.

There are others who agree. In the article, “Oprah’s revenge,” by Hillary Frey, she gives an in-depth account of the show.

The disheartening part is that the verbal flogging of James Frey was still not enough for Oprah. She apparently blamed the publishers of his book, and demanded accountability from the Editors involved with Frey’s project.

This is a dangerous position–and Oprah should tread lightly here. If the very authors and publishing houses who produce the texts that make her Oprah’s Book Club possible have to subject themselves to the public scrutiny each time they agree to be part of her “recommendations,” they may be a bit more hesitant to agree to her endorsement.

We are overlooking something basic, however.

The biggest problem that I have with this whole debacle, however is something a bit more basic and a bit more problematic. The genre of “memoirs” has been around for quite some time. The genre, itself, does not place requirements upon narrative style, length, and it certainly does not have requirements upon factuality.

We live in an age where de-bunking lies is almost a past time. Our politics are dominated by lies and debunking them. Our media is dominated by the very activity of unearthing liars and exposing them to the world. And, our President, is the greatest example of all. He maintains thousands of files of personal information about his political opponents. If they choose to do anything that he does not like, he uses the information in those files to attack the credibility of that character. (See http://www.capitolhillblue.com/artman/publish/article_7625.shtml)

What would have happened, however, if we had applied this quest for the truth to some of the great memoirs that have been written? Did anyone comb through Marcel Proust’s “Remembrance of Things Past” to debunk all of the factual inaccuracies of his life? Did the jailer’s come forward to testify about the Marquis de Sade’s actual behavior?

If Oprah’s starts implementing her new literary rules with only the authority that capitalism has invested in her, the entire genre of Memoirs may be have a doomed future.

While I was researching information for something else I was writing, I came upon this little photo and I couldn’t resist. This is the image of a favorite politician of just about everyone. He was so popular in Washington that they made him the Majority Leader. It is none other than, Tom Delay.

Unfortunately, this is most likely his worst photo-op. It is his mug shot taken while he was being arrested in Texas for conspiracy and money laundering charges.

See for yourself.

http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/1020051delay1.html

I am certainly not advocating lying, but I am, however, also not passing judgment on those who do. In actuality, I am advocating better health, reduced stress, and indirectly, a better world. So, start by drinking a glass of red wine every day. It is good for your heart. Try to exercise between 30 and 45 minutes at least 4 times a week. This will keep your heart healthy, your weight down, indubitable make you feel stronger and improve your self-esteem. It will also help almost every aspect of your body–the only machine that works better the more you use it.

The other way to reduce stress, and the subject of this entry, is to simply make a choice in your life. Choose whether you are going to lie, or or not–and, stick with it. If you decide to lie, trust no one with the truth, and lie to everyone. If you are going to tell the truth, tell the truth all the time and in every situation.

It is the place between these two extremes, however, that is the stressful situation. If you tell half-truths, or truths to some and lies to others, you will need to constantly manage the interaction between the two groups of people. You will need to keep the people who know the lies away from the people who know the truth. The people who know the truth might slip-up, and ultimately, your lie will only be as safe as the truth-knowing person’s lying ability.

In the long run, it makes for a stressful situation–for everyone involved.

ImpeachPAC | Electing a Congress to Impeach Bush and Cheney

Glad to know that the desire to Impeach George Bush and Dick Cheney wasn’t an original thought, and that I am not the only one thinking this. We’ll just have to watch and see.