Alex's first post in which he mentions:
Quote:
|
That said, James Frey wrote the book as fiction, couldn't sell it and then when a publisher said they'd take it as memoir didn't change a word before sending it to print
|
was the first I had heard of this switch. Nothing I had read so far had mentioned this wrinkle.
If that's the case, I think the publisher is at fault for not clarifying or putting a disclaimer on the book so the reader knows there is a fictional component.
Frey's story, as it is told in the book, is not unbelievable in the least. I've known several rehabilitated addicts whose stories are as bad or even worse. It's not uncommon in that world to have lots of "color" in your story at all.
Two other things have been bothering me about the book and the revelations of truth.
In the book, Frey spands a lot of time focusing on what "right true" to him. AA and the 12 Steps do not "ring true" but, upon reading the Tao Te Ching he finds that "these words are true". He spends a lot of time throughout the book talking about finding truth in people, in ideas, in writing. I just find it ironic that there is any level of falsification in his own writing when truth is so important to him.
Secondly, Oprah stands by Frey because of the Emotional Truth in the book and the fact that it has helped so many people. I question the second part of her reasoning. No doubt there have been people who have read it and decided to quite imbibing based on the sheer willpower of decision. To me, that's wonderful. The end product is what's important. But, I really wonder how many people this account has actually helped. That seems to be an empty claim to me and one used for sheer justification. Maybe I'm missing some facts here, but it strikes me as odd.
Lastly, the following quote from the LA Times seems very compelling to me and worth further thought.
Quote:
Frey rejects the conception that addiction is an illness and attributes it to an irrational weakness in character — sort of like a resistance to flossing. Similarly he objects to the 12-step AA-based methods of recovery, such as the one that sobered him up at Hazelden. In his book, he derisively describes a counselor's attempt to suggest that his problems may have begun with an inadvertent childhood trauma.
"I just won't let myself be a victim," he wrote. And then, "People in here, people everywhere, they all want to take their own problems, usually created by themselves, and try to pass them off on someone or something else…. I'm a victim of nothing but myself, just as I believe that most people with this so-called disease aren't victims of anything other than themselves…. "
Frey and his publishers have made a lot of money peddling these sentiments. If they were based on his actual analysis of his actual experience that would be one thing. But precisely what are they, if they are based — as we now know they are — on a lurid series of fictions. What sort of people appeal to a "higher" or "essential" literary truth in urging suffering individuals to disregard sound medical and psychological advice?
|
I really liked the book, the writing, the story - but I can relate on a personal level. I understand how people have issues with AA and the 12 Steps. I have no qualms if people choose other methods to get sober. THe end is what is important and, while AA workd for many, it may not work for all. Recovery has an EXTREMLY low success rate no matter what path is chosen to achieve sobriety. But, what bothered me about Frey's approach is his seemingly subtle jabs at the 12 Steps as a working method of sobriety. I hope he isn't suggesting that AA disappear to be replaced by his "white knuckle" method. To each his own - there are many paths to a singular place.