Week 7 Prompt

I did not realize that fake memoirs were a thing, but I can't say that I am surprised. So many movies have the description "Based on a true story." It is a selling point. People like the idea that what they are reading or seeing is true. From the marketing stand point, I get it.

I do not understand how someone can morally make the decision to sell works of fiction as nonfiction, though. That is simply lying to every person who reads your book. It is making up stories about people you have come into contact with for your gain only. It is disrespectful to people who have actually been in those situations, especially the title listed on the Wikipedia website where someone fabricated Holocaust experiences. That's just despicable. No one should wish themselves into those situations.

Last semester I took S672 Seminar in Literature for Youth. The focus of this particular seminar was nonfiction. We talked a lot about authenticity. There are things to look for in nonfiction to further support their claims. There should be citations. Direct quotes are good to include. Primary documents help to support the text. These are all things, both as librarians and as readers, we should look for in a nonfiction book. While a memoir isn't quite the same, I do think that they could include specific dates, photographs, quotes from other people, and, in some cases, supporting documentation for the events that they claim have occurred. When it comes to emotions and thoughts, of course, we will have to take the author at his or her word.

That got me thinking: Who should be in charge of ensuring that a memoir is truthful? Obviously, I would hope that the author would only include facts, but we see that this isn't always the case. Does that job fall to the publishers? The readers? The booksellers and librarians? Who should be held responsible?

For myself, I think that the publishers should at least be our first line of defense. They should provide enough fact checking in order to be reasonably sure that the majority of the memoir isn't false. Publishers, though, are in the business to make money. Do they fact check and ignore the findings if they think that a book will sell well? Do they simply not fact check and take the author at his or her word? Simply from reading The Smoking Gun's article about A Million Little Lies, we see that one of these scenarios has to fit as least some publishing companies.

The job of fact checking seems to fall to the reader. Not everyone is going to have the skills or tools necessary to do this. We typically rely upon authority figures, such as libraries and reviews. With libraries, that can be tricky. It is our job to provide books that patrons want to read as much as it is to provide accurate information. If a book is listed on best sellers lists, praised by experts, and requested often, do we order it despite the lack of supporting evidence that it is true?

I am peeved that Oprah Winfrey endorsed this book without someone having fact checked it. Her book club has a huge following. Her choices are influential. It should have been her administration's responsibility to ensure that a nonfiction is actually true before endorsing it. Just from reading The Smoking Gun's article, there are several portions of this book that seem outlandish. Did no one stop to think that it might be better to fact check this book before promoting it? Or was it a matter of money at play again? People with this much influence should take their responsibility more seriously.

This whole topic upset me. I suppose that the best thing for us to do is try our best to provide our patrons with accurate materials and opportunities to show our patrons how to examine materials themselves.