![]() ![]() |
![]() |
| |
|
Yxta Maya Murray on ‘Love and Consequences’ HoaxPosted on Mar 4, 2008Margaret Seltzer is a liar; we know that now. That she has a novelist’s gift, that she claims to have written her book to better people’s lives, and that she is at heart an activist for social justice—none of that matters in the wake of her admission to The New York Times’ Mokoto Rich that she faked the book because “there was no other way that someone would listen to it.” The book, and my passionate work reviewing it for Truthdig, seems now shabby and somewhat disgusting. Beyond the emotions bubbling in my blood, however, one clear question arises in my mind: Why didn’t she just turn it into a novel? And why is Seltzer only the latest sinner, joining the other damned, namely James Frey, Nasdijj and Monique De Wael, who all allegedly exploited the stories of oppressed people for their own false ends? The answer? Because we don’t value the novel anymore. The coin of the realm is Reality: blogging, biography, Web confessions, “The Real Housewives of New York City.” We have learned to so diminish the importance of the imagination that we no longer pay sufficient attention to the “ecstatic truths” (Werner Herzog’s much-repeated maxim) that may be gleaned from fiction. Thus we have created a market that demands “true crime” and “authentic” tales of woe, which are easily exploited by frauds. To write a novel about the suffering of others is a very different project than writing a nonfiction account of war or racism. To write a novel is to admit that you don’t know everything, but that you want to. When the fiction writer depicts characters who endure poverty, violence and despair, she must work very hard to remember her own pain, or somehow identify with that suffering. In other words, she must place herself in harm’s way, and she must make herself vulnerable. This can be quite a different process than taking interviews with people who have suffered. The fiction writer “gets in character,” as it were. Moreover, she knows that readers may explain away her work as “not true,” as “frivolous.” Writing fiction about these themes is accordingly perilous, and, to many, worthless. But when the writer “makes it up,” she creates a world that isn’t designed to persuade people of a case. “The inner city needs more funding.” “Racism is evil.” “We need to re-evaluate the just war doctrine.” Rather, she conjures up a universe that is designed to transport the reader into deep, pure feeling for other people. All her craft is bent toward that one purpose. Consequently, the novel is one of the only art forms that may touch us deeper than advocacy, deeper than reason. It can be one of the most powerful engines for true social change. Seltzer had it in her to write a beautiful book about the underclass, but in lying to her editor and to her readers she has debased not only the people of South-Central Los Angeles but the value of “story.” So, this morning, many of my friends who have read the book (or about it) are doing double takes of the tale, and saying things like “Well, now that you think about it, it doesn’t seem that real after all!” “Obviously she was lying!” “A white girl in a black gang? Absurd!” “We should have known!” My response is this: I believed every single word that Seltzer wrote in “Love and Consequences.” And if I had to do it again, I would believe her a second time, a third time, a fourth. I would believe her because that’s how I want to approach books, and the world: with an open heart. The value of literature is that it gives us hope in the Word and in other human beings. Though Seltzer’s hoax tempts me to begin snooping under people’s words to see if they bear double meanings, or to sniff at them to see if they are rotten, I am going to maintain my faith in women’s witness. If this makes me run the risk of looking the fool, as I certainly do now after writing such a heartfelt review for Truthdig, then so be it. So, here, come close to me, tell me a story. I’m listening. I believe you. Make me feel something. Make a fool out of me. Yxta Maya Murray is a writer who lives in Los Angeles and is the author of several books, including “Locas: A Novel.” Previous item: Truth or Consequences Next item: Warren Cohen on the Rise (and Fall) of the Neocons Elsewhere: . CommentsAre you a Truthdig member yet? Login now, or register with Truthdig.
By trevoralan, March 10 at 8:15 pm # Keep hope but learn somethingI am a little worried by the apparent final attitude, seemingly inviting people to fool her again, and then making fools out of us. I am glad this does not make her a cynic, disbelieving everyone. But it should make her more SKEPTICAL. If the author, Ms. Murray, wants to be a journalist, which I would include a serious book critic as, she NEEDS to ask people who bring her incredible stories some hard questions to weed out the fraudsters. If her attitude really is that she is open to being fooled as a political statement in solidarity with some segment of society, first she tells me I can never trust her byline isn’t another fraud, second she is saying that segment of society are not worthy of the scutiny we expect all other adults to go through. I am really starting to have second thoughts about Ms. Murray’s journalism. It really does women and ethnic minorities no favors to do a simple background check and expect the truth the first time around. It really does no one any favors not to ask them the hard questions. Maybe her therapist can be accepting of all the would-be memoir author says, but to appear on this website, and for me to take this website seriously, I have to ask you to be ready to offend people who have written books, o matter how much you hope that story is true.
By Canadian, March 9 at 7:43 pm # Too little cynicism!Honestly, why anyone would believe such a clearly overblown, false story is beyond me. There’s a shocking lack of cynicism out there. There’s no reason why anyone should believe that kind of obviously trumped up nonsense. I mean, it IS insulting to Native Americans and anyone who lives in South Central LA that someone with no experience of their situation has the gall to concoct tales about what such a life might be like.
By e good, March 6 at 3:27 pm # What about asking a “real” Black from South Central to comment on this disception? I think his/her reply would differ vastly from those above.
By sns, March 6 at 10:55 am # hey Yxta!it would not have been published as a novel............maybe as a tween book after heavy edit but most likely not......so keep reading and believing in the by default limited edition of this book.
By Denise Minick, March 6 at 6:28 am # DebasementIt seems to me that Seltzer didn’t debase South Central Los Angeles as much as she debased Sherman Oaks. What a con! What an imagination!
By Jon Boorstin, March 5 at 5:49 pm # Is Fiction lying?Ms. Maya Murray makes an important point. “Uncle Tom’s Cabin” was an important social document, a crucial part of the anti-slavery debate. It’s hard to imagine a novel having that effect today. xx jon boorstin
By amh, March 5 at 11:27 am # Italo Calvino’s essay, titled something like “the right uses of politics in literature,” talks about the power of imagination and literature to portray the world, in ways beyond the intent of the author. I agree with Murray that good fiction requires more courage and risk than non-fiction at the moment. It seems to me that the public who buys into the “reality” of “memoir” that even in the best of the genre, many others admit to the fallibility of memory and the necessity of imagination to tell the “truth.”
By Tom Y., March 5 at 11:12 am # Seltzer may have been wrong (and it’s too bad), but Ms. Murray is to be commended for her stepping right up to say “Oops,” first, and second for her insights about the power of fiction. Whoever needs a lesson in this should read (or re-read) Tim O’Brien’s “The Things They Carried”. O’Brien repeatedly makes the case for storytelling as confession and catharsis, and repeatedly argues the difference between truth and fact in the setting of the Vietnam War. The facts, he says, don’t matter. The truth does. Even when he puts himself in the novel, and offers verifiable facts about himself, he still tells a “made-up” story which is absolutely true. I KNOW it is--I feel it in my gut. Ms. Murray understands this. “Make me feel something” is the heart of good fiction.
By smartastic, March 5 at 6:56 am # i think the real reason she didn’t write a novel is because it’s harder to get novels published than memoirs—novels are held to a higher standard of writing than memoirs.
By KGBrunette, March 5 at 6:11 am # After reading the synopsis of the book and then news articles that the book is lies...when I seen that she is trying to pass her as being also of Native American origins, she’s debased them as a people, too! I’m non native and I actually do live on a reservation in NW WI. She would be debased around here as a wannabe, and the probability of her getting her ass kicked on the res would become more reality than she imagined her book to be. She’s probably never been on a reservation! And why did she choose Native Americans? She must’ve been hanging out in the Yahoo! Native American chat rooms...that’s as close to the res as she ever was. Projecting negative stereotypes of a race only serves to set legitimate people back in their hard work to overcome the semantics. All I can close with, is she should make public apology to the groups that she chose to exploit in her phony book!
By pqbon, March 4 at 4:12 pm # I’m disappointed that the original interview is no longer easily available. I finished your interview a mere hour before the news hit my desk that the book and author were fakes. I thought the original interview put the issue into harsh light. The author didn’t just lie in the book. She lied to person after person after person in a very real and personal way. When I saw the news I was wondering if you were going to post a response given how open your seemed to be in your interview. I’m glad to see you did. I think the author was wrong for what she did… However, I agree with you that fiction has been damaged by in our modern culture. It used to be that fiction could change the world or at least the individual - Uncle Tom’s Cabin? Catcher in the Rye? - However, none of this excuses her actions. Add Your Comment |
COMMENT TOOLS:
Hide comments
Show comments
Comment on this article