What do you guys think about this sh*t?
drewnice
5,465 Posts
'Star Tribune' Raised Questions About Frey's Disputed Memoir in 2003[/b] By E&P Staff Published: January 11, 2006 4:05 PM ET NEW YORK[/b] A national controversy has erupted over James Frey's 2003 bestselling memoir, "A Million Little Pieces," after The Smoking Gun this week reported numerous whoppers in his true-life tale of crime and addiction. Frey will appear on Larry King Live Wednesday night, presumably to answer charges.But the Star Tribune in Minneapolis today observed that this was no big surprise to them or to many locals. The paper recalled, "Similar discrepancies were pointed out in a 2003 Star Tribune story." Frey responded then by saying, " I've never denied I've altered small details."From today's Star Tribune account:"Twin Cities public relations executive Jon Austin said he was hardly surprised when he read about the Smoking Gun findings this week in USA Today. 'I remembered that there were problems about the veracity of his story when the book came out,' said Austin, a former spokesman for Northwest Airlines.'"In July 2003, shortly after the book was published, Austin told the Star Tribune that 'no way, no how, nowhere' would Frey have been allowed to board a commercial jet covered in blood and vomit, with a hole in his cheek and four front teeth missing, as the author claimed in the first paragraph of 'Pieces.'"Joining Austin in his skepticism at the time were other Twin Cities professionals. A Minneapolis police captain said Frey's description of the Minneapolis bus station and of a search through nearby crack houses to locate his girlfriend didn't ring true. The president of the Minnesota Dental Association called Frey's account of visiting a dentist near the Minnesota clinic, which he acknowledged was Hazelden, to have two root canals and four teeth capped without anesthesia 'absolutely false.'"At the time, Frey brushed aside questions about his book's accuracy. 'I wrote what was true to me,' he told the Star Tribune. 'If people want to pick apart the facts, they can.'"
Comments
Oprah just called in live...
No shit? I was kidding, but damn. If that's not an admission of guilt I don't know what is.
EXTREME!
The Smoking Gun was the media outlet that broke the story by conducting an initial investigating into the dude's arrest record, etc. They are owned by Time Warner.
And guess who already has the rights to making a movie of the book???
Do I even have to say it?
Wait, do you really think this kind of negative publicity will benefit not only the book, but a movie as well?
The book is engrossing from the get go and I'm only 50 pages deep so far, but for real, I plan on throwing it in the trash.
So far my mindset has been under the pretense that this is a biographical account of this guy's life, so for me to try and get back into the book thinking "hey, I wonder if he made this up or if he did'nt" is too much time to waste. Especially considering how many other great books are out there.
I was actually reading the TSG story right before Drew posted this and subsequently went on to read other side stories about it. Shit is the definition of
The worst part is thinking about people in treatment who have proabably been looking at that book like "well if he can go through that, I can definitely beat this".
Damn.
Didn't have time to start a new thread, though...
wait, you talkin bout the bible?
Herm
Hahaha, nah, shit is just weak to try and pawn off some made up shit as your story.
I don't belive it. That is most outrageous thing I have ever heard. Why would a drug addict lie?? To get money??? No way!!! This must be a first.
Until now I have taken all self a grandising autobiographys as absolute truth, now when reading anything I will have to ask myself; what is the authors agenda?
I think I will just quit reading books.
Dan
Ok, ok, I get the point!
Of course I know everything said in there is not 100% fact, and I know embelishments are rampant etc.
BUT - to think that the majority of this book is bullshit makes me lose interest in reading it. The whole reason people are bugging off it to begin with is BECAUSE IT IS SUPPOSED TO BE (mostly) TRUE.
I'm not some naive fool who doesn't know people pad their stories. It just doesn't hold any interest for me.
Good for him though.
GET THAT MONEY, HOMIE!
I dunno day, does the "any publicity is good publicity" PR mantra apply here, or not? I just think, at the very least, that it's a serious coincidence. Is it possible that Time Warner could have talked to The Smoking Gun at some point as to influence their investigation and how they present it to the public? I certainly am wondering about that.
The dude kept saying that the material being scrutinized is ~18 pages of the ~400 page book. The author contended that it's "not that much", but I think that's a pretty substantial chunk of a "biography" to be incorrect.
Honestly, it made me want to check out the book, just to see how embellished parts of it are and then I'll be the judge myself.
I think the dude got in WAY over his head, word of mouth gets to Oprah, who has the influence to make Grafwritah Vice President if she wanted to, and then everything spiraled out of control. I was not at all convinced by his interview with Larry King last night.
If Frey lied, i agree that's not a good look. And he's in a whole lot of trouble.
This doesn't change the fact that its an awe-inspiring read.
my $0.02
WOAH. Oprah posts here now?
Haha, nah...but that was her point. At the end of the day, the message is what the book is all about.
Seriously: i dont really care if the exact level of promised authenticity is reached in a book i've read. As long as its no scientific research, i expect the authors to exxagerate (sp) and do anything they feel is neccesary to make for a compelling / good read.
The 18 pages are especially pertinent because the book hinges on the incidents described therein. The dude's problem isn't that he was some kind of two-fisted, anti-social crackhead. It's that he's a fucking liar.
God knows how many gullible Oprah disciples read that shit and thought it was inspirational, only to find out that Mr. Redemption is a fraud.
Oh, and f*ck Oprah too.
"my friend leaonard" (which is the follow up to his "autobiographical" account?) has a big disclaimer in the begining about certian elements being taken liberty with.
shouldnt that have maybe been a tip off?
Most autobiographies should be published as fiction??? I don't agree with that at all. If anything biographies written by someone about another person should be held to under the examination light as far as knowing the true goes.
I think the latter is the case especially with a biography, which should be more objective than the - in some cases too - subjective autobiography.
...the girl who sat next to me during jury duty all last week, haha!
HEY!
yeah and f*ck yo couch n***a!
my wife read both of those books, couldn't put 'em down. sucks that dude lied, but to have the publisher give refunds...man i cosign on that being an admission of guilt.
oh yeah, f*ck oprah too.
Almost everyone embellishes their own life to make themselves look better. If not by changing things then by omitting them. Its human nature and in most cases it is probably not intentionally done. I am sure there are some bios out there that are completely true and honest but I doubt that the majority of autobiographies don't take some liberties. At the same time unless there is some specific evidence of an exaggeration as in this case it would be rather hard to prove. That said who gives a crap. If people would stop blindly believing everything they read they wouldn't take this so hard. People are not nearly skeptical enough of the written word.