Flibbertigibbet

Fraud, Lies, and Fiction

Fraud, lies, and fiction. Criminal, immoral, and paid.

I didn't blog about it, but maybe you followed the drama of J.T. Leroy on your own. Small world. I actually new a designer who worked with "J.T." but that's neither here nor there.

J.T. Leroy is a fictional person who wrote semi-fictional non-fiction. Did you follow that?

Basically, author Laura Albert made up this J.T. Leroy persona and then wrote semi-autobiographical novels and short-stories under the name. The stories generally revolve around transgenderism, drug use, and prostitution.

I've never read any of her work.

Well, Laura Albert is being sued for fraud. The New York Times reports on it, but I found out through Galley Cat:

Rumors have swirled the last few weeks that Laura Albert, the now-infamous writer responsible for the "J.T. Leroy" persona, was being sued by film producers on the basis that she misrepresented herself as someone else and so they shouldn't have to make the movie as a result.

Of course, Albert likely claims artistic license with regard to her fiction and lies and naturally claims that they shouldn't be conflated to the level of fraud.

Push the clutch.

In 1940, existentialist Argentinian writer, Jorge Luis Borges wrote a story called Tlon, Uqbar, and Orbis Tertius. The story is basically one in which a bunch of people undertake to propagate a fiction as if it were true and suddenly physical artifact from their fiction being springing into existence.

In the story, an encyclopedia article about a mysterious country called Uqbar is the first indication of Orbis Tertius, a massive conspiracy of intellectuals to imagine (and thereby create) a world: Tlön. Relatively long for Borges (approximately 5600 words), the story is a work of speculative fiction. One of the major themes of "Tlön, Uqbar, Orbis Tertius" is that ideas ultimately manifest themselves in the physical world and the story is generally viewed as a parabolic discussion of Berkeleian idealism — and to some degree as a protest against totalitarianism.

If that sounds crazy to you, just try reading it in Spanish if you aren't fluent in Spanish. I think it took me some three hours to read it and at the end I was like, "Whaaaat?" That's true of many of Borges' stories though.

The notion of fiction becoming non-fiction or getting mixed up with the real world has been a dream, aspiration, practice of authors for a very long time.

Michael Crichton's novels routinely mix historical and scientific fact with fiction. Edward Cline's Sparrowhawk series portrays fictional characters as being involved in actual historical events, namely the American Revolution. one could make a list miles long of similar examples.

A friend of mine recently described an idea for a novel he has in which he would like to invoke the name of actual scientists and historians as authorities on a fictional ancient city-state somewhere in south-western Europe or west Asia. He wants to get their permission, of course, and his intent isn't to propagate the fiction, but merely to mix some modern-day elements of reality into his fiction.

The idea behind mixing fact and fiction is to create a fiction that is more engrossing.

Downshift.

James Frey got Oprah Winfrey to dress him down on national television when he wrote a fiction and claimed that it was real.

Oprah's outrage stemmed from the fact that she believed the story in A Million Little Pieces to be true, but it wasn't. She was inspired by the story of this criminal and drug user cleaning himself up and finding happiness and success in life.

I've been told that the book stands well as fiction as well. I haven't read this one, either.

I think some people are more inspired when an inspiring story is true. I have not observed a similar response in myself, but it's not beyond the realm of possibility, I suppose.

While I can appreciate the value of infusing a fictional story with non-fictional elements, the need to propagate the fiction out into reality strikes me as not only superfluous and the sign of a very weak author, but as we can see in the case of J.T. Leroy criminal.

Some elements of reality are inherently a part of all good fiction. The elements may not be specific, proper nouns, but parallels are always drawn. If an author describes a large, bustling city, readers immediately imagine New York or some other metropolis within the context of their knowledge.

Only non-art and bad art attempts to avoid any parallels with reality. For examples, please review the work of non-representational painters and sculptors or the work of performance artists, interpretive dancers, and the like. I'm fairly confident Bertold Brecht attempted something like it in theater, but I'm not certain.

Good art shows its audience the world as it really could be. Powerful art shows us the world as it could and should be.

Could these liars be considered innocent? Might we think that they're merely trying to make powerful art even closer to reality and applaud their effort even if misguided? I don't think so, but I can see someone trying to make that excuse. The problem is that one can't fake reality. Either this is a world in which the underdog can succeed through hard work and determination or it isn't. You can't make the world something it isn't by lying and saying it is.

But we needn't lie about great fiction. We know that it's a projection and not a reflection. Lying about it doesn't help it; if anything it hurts it. So, I think we can't do anything but assume that the work isn't very good if the author is compelled to lie to us about whether or not it's true.

And I think we can all agree that bilking people out of their money is just plain wrong and does nothing whatsoever to help the work.

Fraud, lies, and fiction. Criminal, immoral, and paid. J.T. Leroy, James Frey, and Michael Crichton.

Put it in park. Let's go get some ice-cream.