Position one: a writer should be who a writer says they are.
When I choose a book and I see an author I want to assume that they are who the books says they are. If I am reading "Glass Houses" and it's supposed to be a memoir, then I expect the story to be largely true. I realize that we forget details of our lives over time, or that we reimagine them as we remember them - I know that really happens. But if we tell the story with different facts because we want to sell more books or just tell a better story, then I think that book belongs in the Fiction section and should be listed as a novel. Not a memoir. If I read fiction and the information is not correct then I am much more forgiving. If I read a historical fiction and some of the historical facts are wrong, I count that as bad writing, but it doesn't have the same negative feeling. I maybe feel the author was lazy, but not trying to mislead me.
Position two: writers have been using pseudonyms for ages and there's nothing wrong with that.
I have read books where I know the author's name is a pseudonym (sometimes they list that in the book jacket), and I have read some where I learned that after the fact. I don't mind the fact that George Eliot was a woman, and it feels fine to me that someone would use a pseudonym to get published in those days. But it feels wrong that a person now would use a different cultural identity to get published. But I have to ask myself - is it? It feels wrong to me, but I'd be interested in hearing the other side of that opinion. I think my position would be that if the author could not get published because of their identity and they need to create another one to get a publisher to look at them, then I can understand that. But to write from the perspective of that other identity seems wrong. I don't think George Eliot wrote with the idea of telling the story of white men. She just wanted to get published.
What about the idea Menand (2020) mentions where an author is made up of multiple authors? I remember when I first learned that Carolyn Keene wasn't really one person, and that was disappointing to me. In that case I felt sad that the real authors weren't getting any credit for their writing. I recently learned that Erin Hunter isn't one person, but a group of writers. I guess that's good because I can't figure out how one person could write all of those books. On the other hand, it feels duplicitous to me.
Summary
I think in the end that if an author makes up material in a book they need to list that book as fiction, rather like what Jeannette Walls did for "Half-Broke Horses" - which could not have ever been a memoir since it was about her grandmother. She called it a "true life novel." I like that. If I read what is called a memoir and later realize it was largely fabricated I will feel cheated, and I won't read that author again. I think if an author uses a pseudonym they need to be ready to identify their real identity once they are published (I'm still a little uncertain on this - I think there are good reasons why an author would want to hide their identity).I don't entirely know how I would address this topic with the patrons at my library, beyond just affirming their reading choices and maybe also affirming frustration they might feel. Of course, if a patron suggested getting rid of a book because of lies or perceived lies, I would explain our process of reviewing books and have them contact the proper person for that.
Hi Janna! I really liked reading this and thought your response was very thorough! I agree with your two-sided response here. It's potentially problematic to assert that it is duplicitous for an author to take on a false identity because in some cases, it certainly makes a lot of sense (as in the case of George Eliot). In our current cultural milieu, however, it seems that to take a on a different cultural identity is problematic because it undermines the efforts of culturally diverse authors and the readership that is legitimately seeking out those voices. When publishers stifle mainstream authors, however, due to their race and gender, you might understand their desire to use false identities to garner some attention. It's such a difficult question.
ReplyDeleteIn any case, I agree with what you say here: "If I read what is called a memoir and later realize it was largely fabricated I will feel cheated, and I won't read that author again." I agree. I don't like to be mislead as a reader, especially in the case of memoirs.
These scandals are certainly multi-faceted, and I can see both sides!
Melissa, I really agree - I think people who write good things but aren't part of a culture that is "in vogue" have a hard time. I heard a story about someone who submitted exactly the same story to a publisher but used a culturally different name and the story got accepted. It makes me think publishers should review things "blind". I think they do that for grant proposals in some places. But, your point that a publisher might want to go for certain groups does make sense, and I guess they should have that right as a company. Anyway - yes, it's complicated!
Delete