A few nights ago I was reading an essay by the author Pam Houston, author of Cowboys Are My Weakness. In the essay, Houston comes clean about using real life as an inspiration for much of her fiction (about 82% of it is me, she says). That’s not surprising or unethical, after all, real life experiences shape a writer’s outlook, ideas, and what eventually spills forth from the pen.
What was surprising was Houston’s admission that in magazine articles she wrote, labeled as nonfiction, she didn’t merely compress characters or timelines, but rather, was urged by editors to fictionalize events. In essence: they made shit up.
Since writing is a creative exercise, Houston argues that an event is no less real if it is imagined. Call me old-fashioned, but I disagree. Journalists lose their jobs over fabrication. They lose lawsuits over fabricating quotes (does anyone remember Joe Esterhas’s journalism career that led to his firing?)
Especially now, in the era of the citizen journalist when one does not know how to trust the veracity of what they read, it is distressing to learn that editors and writers are playing loosey-goosey with the truth. Even more distressing having worked in places like West Africa and Afghanistan, where journalists put their lives on the line, often losing them (or their legs, in the case of photojournalists Joao Silva or Giles Duley to bring people the truth.
Outside of the realm of journalism, it is also hard to trust what we read. James Frey (one of Houston’s former students) caused an uproar when it was revealed that his memoir of substance abuse, A Million Little Pieces, was untrue. I wonder, why did Frey not consider writing a novel instead?
In Houston’s defense, she doesn’t bill herself as a journalist. She is known for her fiction. But if a writer can’t stick to a genre then they shouldn’t accept an assignment, even if the story in question is about a kayaking trip in France. And if an editor of a magazine can’t stick to journalistic standards, then where are we?
This slippery slope for truth reminds me of a man I met once in Alaska, a self-professed “adventure guide and National Geographic photographer.” When I asked what issues his work appeared in, he confessed, “Oh, I sent them photos. But they were never published.” One has to wonder what the extent of his guided adventures were—driving without snow tires in winter on the Arctic Highway? Who knows, but who really cares, now that his credibility has been blown.
Like with the Alaskan guy, when an untruth is discovered, it raises questions with the reader about how the character of the writer, and how she sees herself. In the end, it is the embellisher that is branded the chump, not the reader, while devaluing the writing's art itself.
A writer’s credibility is her calling card. We trust a writer to take us on the journey that they promise. It’s a contract of sorts, and when the contract is broken, the author’s voice is no longer one of trusted authority, and the reader will turn away from the writer.
If writers insist in believing the facts and the details of their lives are what they wish to invent, then perhaps they don’t really know who they are, or are turning away from them and their relationship with the reader.
Forty-six journalists died worldwide last year in pursuit of the truth according to the Committee to Protect Journalists. These journalists didn’t invent facts, adventure, storylines, or dialogue to look better or sell books or articles. They didn’t have to. They were practicing their craft according to the credo that every writer and editor of nonfiction should adhere to: Tell the truth or you go home.


Salon.com
Comments
Nice to see your writing and creative voice again. A well-thought out piece supporting the integrity and authenticity inherent in solid writing. It's important to stay in alignment, else we cloud the art with our very human untruths. Thanks for writing it.