After Daniel - Villian

After reading the memoir by Moira Farr and analiyzing the idea of villians within the memoir I have come to the conclusion that Daniel was the villian. Daniel was his own villian, he feared and hated himself. This, is a huge thing for anyone who has battled depression and thoughts of suicide, as they are the person who they are battling against. The things that are deep inside them. A raging storm that is never at rest, constantly tormenting them. Daniel then became a villian to the people around him. After his death those that knew him became tormented by him; they couldn't let rest what they could have done for them. It wasn't that they hated Daniel for what he did, they hated Daniel for leaving them. When people die, we are consumed with selfishness, 'How can WE survive without them?.' For Daniel, it was how could HE live with himself, the villians that tormented him everyday.

Daniel's Villains

The villains described in Moira Farr’s memoir, “After Daniel”, were those destructive forces of addiction, mental illnesses and finally the triggering events that led Daniel Jones, the main character, to commit suicide as a means of ending his sufferings.

Daniel, who had suffered a prolonged depression and phobia as a teenager and young adult eventually became an alcoholic. His alcoholic addiction only acted as a mere mask for his mental illnesses. However, it was until he struggled to remain sober along with his recent marital split, financial difficulties, his strained and estranged relationship from some family members and friends, a recent suicidal attempt and a string of disappointment of his work that forced him to commit suicide.

Moira Farr, on the other hand, although she expressed a sense of guilt, was in no way responsible for Daniel’s self-destructive action of suicide.

Is there a villain in the Memoir “After Daniel”?

When we talk about villains, the most immediate image we have in our minds is a cruel and an evil person who possesses a scary image. If someone tends to refer someone as a villain we all try to relate that person to a stereotypical image of a villain that we all have in our minds.

It Moira Farr’s memoir ‘After Daniel’ there is no villain throughout the memoir, no reference at all has been made to an actual person being a villain. Villain is something that is always referred to being destructive and cruel. In this memoir there are some things that could be called a villain by looking at what they did to Daniel and how everything contributed to his suicide. The first most vicious villain in his life was his alcoholism; it killed him at the end. Another villain according to my analysis was his depression that he was going through and his depression had a major play in his suicide.

In conclusion I would like say that villain does not always have to be a human being or a person it could be anything depending on the situation. In this memoir the main villains were alcoholism and depression.

After Daniel:A Memoir Without Villains

I think that this memoir does have villains although it may not seem so at first, but when you take a closer look at it and consider all of the circumstances in his life and the things that he has been through it's hard not to see the struggles of his life as villains. You can consider his suicide attempts villains who wasn't succesful. All the struggles that he has overcome in his lifetime are villains, they are just not as obvious as other but nevertheless they are still villains.

A memoir without villains?

I don't think you could consider this a memoir without villains. Although a villain is usually considered something evil, there are a lot of antagonists that oppose the supposed protagonist, Daniel. One such villain could be his addiction to alcohol. Alcoholism is a demon that for some people, deal with on a daily basis. They use it as a way that they think is beneficial to them, when really, it's only breaking them down, and allowing the bad to triumph over the good. Another such villain could be his estrangement from friends and family which no doubt, fed his loneliness and his desire to end his life. Not to mention his previous suicide attempts, perhaps another villain, which by the grace of God, he was able to overcome, until he finally succeeded. One could even go as far as to say that Daniel was the villain against himself, although he didn't mean to destroy himself, he did so anyway.

After Daniel

Although a villain is usually defined as a wicked or evil person in a story, I would use the word villain to describe certain things in the memoir After Daniel. Certain factors that caused Daniel to commit suicide could be identified as villains because they are the cause of a particular trouble against Daniel, which is suicide. These villainous factors include depression, alcoholism, and the influences that triggered Daniel to committing suicide. I would classify these fators as the villains in the stroy because they worked against Daniel and contributed to the suicide death of Daniel. I would also classify these factors as the villains because in the memoir these fators were at oods with Daniel.

Realities and consequences of her partner's suicide

The realities of Daniel's suicide are embedded in his suicide note which is the focal document on which Moira Farr expanded in her book, After Daniel: A suicide Survivor's Tale.

Moira wrote "....suicide notes, written when people are at their pschological worst, are anything but the voice of clarity. Instead they are bizarre, rambling, angry and, above all, sad documents of disturbed minds."

Thus the suicide note gave us a good account of the nature and possibly some causes of one's distressed mind. They are but the realities as described by oneself before the suicide act is committed.

The consequences are felt by the loved ones and near ones. The parents of Daniel were to live with a never ending pain. Moira who is the the most dissastrously affected up to the point where she could not keep those tormented feelings but to expel them in, After Daniel: A suicide Survivor's Tale.

After Daniel: A Memoir With Villians

In After Daniel, I would say that the circumstances surronding Daniel's death could be considered the villians. Daniel had certain things working against him in the memoir that caused him to commit suicide. For example, the author discussed how Daniel was alienated from his family for a long period of time. This is a factor that contributed to Daniel feeling depressed and encouraging him to commit suicide. Another factor discussed by Moira Farr is that Daniel fought an alcohol addiction. Based on the research I did for my journal, alcoholism and suicide are correlated. Therefore, alcohol can also be considered a villian in the memoir because it caused Daniel to commit suicide. These factors could both be considered the villians in the memoir because they faught against Daniel and caused him to commit suicide.

A memoir without villains?

There are no masked killers, or robbers who break into Moira Farr’s house in her memoir, but villains are surely exposed. A villain does not need to be a physical being with a dirty plan. A villain can be a thing or a situation that brings about terror or harm, and in Life After Daniel this is the case.

The most obvious villain in the story is Depression. Although Daniel’s mental illness never takes a physical form it still reaps just as much havoc as a man with a gun in the local bank. Depression constantly stalked, teased, and tortured Daniel, and eventually lead him to death. Depression was not a man who pulled the trigger but it was the force behind the bullet.

Another villain in the memoir is alcohol. Many times I have heard alcohol, or drugs referred to as demons in the lives of those who fall captive to such substances. Daniel was one of those people who were drawn into the initial illusion of the fun, sexy side of alcohol, and was then held a prisoner.

I believe the final villain in Moira Farr’s memoir is in fact her obliviousness. In no way do I think it was Moira’s fault that Daniel’s life ended the way it did, and I don’t think she saw the warning signs and consciously decided to ignore them. I do however feel that after sensing Daniel’s depression, and witnessing his substance abuse she should have taken the time to look into how to help a depressed loved one, and what the warning signs for suicide are. Instead, like most people Moira chose to deny that things with Daniel could ever get that bad. No one believes that THEIR loved one could ever kill themselves, and that denial and obliviousness can end up being the worst villain in their loved one’s story.

James Frey rather than Grey Owl is the bigger liar.

Frey’s criminal career, jail terms and status as an outlaw as written in his memoir “A Million Little Pieces” were all proven to be either fabricated or exaggerated. Even so, the author continually denied publicly that the details of his book are factual. That proved what a conniving and bold liar he is.

On the other hand Grey Owl, was labeled as a "full blooded" l; m Indian by the press and because of how he felt about his existence and his chosen life style , he never bother to correct them .Even so, that did no overshadow his works on the plight of vanishing species of the beavers and his writings on nature are still viewed as classics.

Whos the Bigger Liar?

I believe James Frey is the bigger liar from “A Million Little Pieces” compared to Grey Owl, because Frey wrote a memoir about his life, the events that took place that make a person who they are. That turned out to be lies through out the entire memoir, and the lies were only to make his memoir more exciting. Grey Owl lied about his character, and where he came from, which does not make it “okay” to lie. I believe Frey wanted attention and thought that creating a personality, life, and events would make others interested in him. In this case it did but for the wrong reasons, he portrayed himself in the memoir as a liar that made millions of people fascinated with his memoir. Frey’s interview with Oprah he mentions that if he wrote a the memoir honestly about his own life there would only be very negative descriptions about his life, even though Frey mentioned that his own life experiences where negative, his false, fabricated memoir still created a negative image for himself

Who's the biggest Liar?????

I believe that James Frey was the biggest liar in the sense that while both of them lied, James Frey lied to further himself and his career. James Frey embellished on his criminal past to make his memoir more interesting, while Grey Owl lied to send a message. Grey Owl wasn’t trying to further himself, he was trying to send a message to people and he did it the best way he knew how ands that was by saying it in a way that the people known to be closest to nature would. James Frey on the other hand Lied to make himself seem could and so that his memoir would sell more.

Blog 2. Who Is The Bigger Liar?

When reading both of these pieces, I felt that they both; Grey Owl and James Frey were liars. With James Frey in his writing "One million little pieces" he told us the readers numerous times lies. With the memoir he wrote about his criminal background which we found out two years later to be false information. So once it was all said and done everything he told us about his life was really just a lie and he never really lived like he had said.
Once I read the "Man of the last frontier" written by Grey Owl, I found out that he too had lied to us readers. He told us that he was a full blooded Native Indian when really he was an Englishman. To lie about your identiy and your background I feel is someone who wasn't really proud of who they were. Sadly though we didn't find out about his lies in a couple of years, but after he passed away. The lies he told affected the way people felt and looked at his work he had done. As well his lies affected the amount of donations people gave to conservationists.
When I read memoirs i expect to read about the writers life experiences how they dealt with them, their emotions and feelings. Not to read lies and to be falsely lead on. My final thought on these two writers was that they were both liars but in the end I think that James Frey lied more because he told lies pretty much about everything he wrote not just a couple things like Grey Owl did. In the end a liar is always a liar though, not matter how many times you tell a lie or what you tell the lie about.

Who is who?

After I had read the story I had would say that Grey Owl is the bigger liar. For one: Grey Owl's lies had lasted longer most of what he had said or half of it was based on lies which had been kept by himself 'till death. Not only that, Grey Owl had created a false identity which he had used in public. Even though it's tough everyperson tells about their lies and comes clean, for Grey Owl he kept his lies and built on the lies he had created it was only until he passed away his lies came forward.
For James Frey, he had also lied but his lies had came forward in a short period of time and wasn't hidden for many years without more lies built on them. Also, James Frey at times confessed to his lies and agreed with it.
For these reasons I believe that Grey Owl is the bigger liar.

Somewhere Between Fact & Fiction...

I don't feel that either Grey Owl or James Frey are liars. I believe that in the case of Grey Owl he felt that he was this person that he became. He wasn't a white englishman, he was a native american; he lived it, loved it, and felt it within himself. It was because of his beliefs and love of the preservation of the land that he hoped to "evoke sympathy and caring for the land that sustains us all."

James Frey's memoir, A Million Little Pieces was a major success until it/he was banned from 'Oprah's Kingdom'. It was noted that although the events that took place did happen, that the details were exaggerated and fabricated for mass appeal. The book in my opinion however, is beyond entertaining ; it is informative. I thought that even knowing that all the details may not have taken place exactly as Frey describes, the important issue is the underlying theme: Overcoming addiction and the process by which this is done. The dark side of addiction. The dark side of drug use.

In both of these cases, the issue is not about the lie. Lies are a part of the world that we are in, everyone lies for some reason, whether to protect themselves or protect others. Lies are details. Details bring attention to the larger issue. They both used illustration and imagery to bring attention. People are naturally drawn to details and exaggerations, they keep us connected to what we are doing. It was important for both men to use their details to their advantage. Sometimes it is important to blur the lines between fact and fiction. Blurring these lines helps to better understand the larger issues.

Who is the bigger Liar?

Who is the bigger liar? They are both liars. However, each individual lied about different things. James Frey on one hand lied about situations that he encountered. He added facts and used a lot of exaggeration to make his stories sound more exciting and appealing. This is not right because he wrote a memoir about his life, but half of it was not true. So why did he even write a memoir?
On the other hand, Grey Owl lied about his identity. He said that he was a full-blooded native Indian, when in fact he was an Englishman. He also stated that he did not enter the wilderness until he was 18. Although both of these men used lies in their stories, I would say that Grey Owl was the bigger liar because he lied about his identity rather than facts.

Who's the bigger liar

Between Grey Owl and James Frey, I think James Frey is the bigger liar. The reason I chose Frey wasn't based on how big the lie was or how long the lie was told or how many lies were told. I chose him because of the impact his lies had on the people who read his words.

Grey Owl's lies consisted of him not being a full blooded indian and being an englishman and not seeing the wilderness till he was 18. Although he either lied about himself or never bothered correcting the stories about him, he never lied to benefit himself. His story and his life works concentrated on vanishing species and they're survival. In a case like this, you could say that the end justified the means. The lies that were discovered about him weren't used as any inspiration to tell his story. Yes, it makes him look like a liar, but it doesn't outweigh what we discovered about him to be true, which is an advocate for vanishing species.

James Frey on the other hand wrote false memoirs about his life. He exaggerated about a key arrest in his memoir, hitting a cop with a car, while being high on crack, which led to a 87 day jail sentence, when in fact, he was held at a police station for no more than 5 hours, posted bond and was cooperative with the police officers. What makes it even worse for Frey is that his book was featured on Oprah Winfrey, a very influential woman, who helped promote the book as a memoir.

James Frey, even after being caught in his lie, continued to defend the authenticity of his memoirs, even though accounts had already proven his stories to be partially fabricated. His book can be seen as an inspirational read for readers, which was at one point considered to be true. But after integrity has been questioned and proven, it is hard to see what Frey was trying to accomplish, other than to make some money.

Grey Owl wins the lie battle...

When Grey Owl and James Frey are compared on the basis of their lies and falseness, Grey Owl is the one that wins the battle. According to me and the reading that I have done it seems that Grey Owl is a bigger liar of the both.

My reason to pick Grey Owl is- his lie lasted for a very long time, almost until his death. People started to learn about his lie after his death and the truth came forward. Grey Owl also kept the secret to himself throughout his life and kept on living with the false identity he had in public. It would have been better if Grey Owl himself disclosed the secret to the public, by doing that he wouldn’t have been called a liar.

In the case of James Frey, he is a liar too, but at some points he did agree that he lied and fabricated his writing to make it more appealing and entertaining for the readers; and his lies did not stay under the closet for that long in fact people came to know what the truth was and what was false.

In conclusion, I would say that Grey Owl is definitely a bigger liar compared to James Frey based on the lies. I think there are many writers out there who do make up things and fabricate their writing to make it interesting but very few get expose or caught.

Grey Owl

I feel as though between Grey Owl and James Frey, Grey Owl is the bigger liar.
He lied about his entire childhood. He would not see the true wilderness until he was 18 years old! The press had labeled him a "full-blooded" Indian despite his blue eyes, Grey Owl never corrected this. He was not even a full-blooded Indian, let alone a half-breed. Grey Owl was born in Hastings England. His real name was Archie Stansfeld Belaney.
James Frey created a few of the situations in his book, and did lie about being wanted in three states. But atleast he lived "most" of what he wrote!

Blog 2: Grey Owl vs. James Frey

Based on my research, I would say that Grey Owl is the bigger liar when it comes to telling lies in their life writings. I would say Grey Owl is a bigger liar than James Frey because of the duration his lies lasted. Although James Frey told lies in his book 'A Million Little Pieces', he was exposed a couple of years later. On the other hand, Grey Owl was exposed after his death. He lived his whole life with the lie that he was a full blooded Native Indian, when in fact he was an Englishman.

I also believe that Grey Owl is the bigger liar because when he was exposed, his books were withdrawn from publication. This had an effect on the conservation causes with which Grey OWl had been associated. This in turn affected donations to conservationist causes badly. Not only did Grey Owl's life-long lie affect his identity after he died, but it also affected organizations which needed the funding provided by the sale of his books. Although everyone may tell a little lie sometimes, the lies become very problematic when they start to have a negative effect on other people.

Blog 2: Who is the Bigger Liar?

In my opinion, James Frey is the bigger liar. I believe this because James Frey did lie about being a full-blooded Indian although he was actually an Englishman. However, this lie did not overshadow the truth of the message he spoke about: the plight of vanishing species, symbolized for him to in the beaver and his mission to preserve the Canadian wilderness. Although Grey Owl did lie, he still lived the life of a Native Indian later in his life.
James Frey, on the other hand, frabicated many large parts about his life, including details about his criminal record. The Smoking Gun alledged that Frey had never been incarcerated and that he exaggerated the circumstances of key details of his memoir. James Frey never actually lived the life he claimed to have any time in his life. Telling lies in memoirs is never right no matter what the situation. Memoirs are supposed to be actual life writings of someone's life. However, I do believe that in this situation James Frey is the bigger liar.

Tell the Truth.... And Nothing But the Truth?

Nobody wants to be lied to, we all want to hear the truth. We assume that when we read memoirs or a journal that it is automatically true.

This may not always be the case; what we remember and what actually happened doesn't always match up. Does that mean it is a lie? I don't think it does. Although blantently lying about events in ones life seems useless, even when trying to make a memoir or journal appealing to the reader.

John's memoir about going to a party he was not invited to and ending up being a lie seemed genius to me. It is brilliant to me that he could tell his lie so well that it seemed like truth.

So when do lies become the truth?

Truth

The crazy bride was a very frustrating lie, I was convinced it had taken place until the last little caption on the bottom of the screen! I had never heard of it before, nor do I use youtube. I guess I made an assumption because I couldn't, and still can't understand how someone could take time to do that? Possibly in need of attention, or money involved?
As for James Frey, whether he lied or exaggerated the truth, he sold 3.5 million copies. His novel was obviously enjoyed by many. I don't think that it was his wisest decision to lie to Oprah Winfrey on television though. If he was honest to her people would of hated him for being honest about his previous deception, rather then being a liar about the entire situation.
Grey Owl lived a lie his whole life. The press had labeled him a "full-blooded" Indian, while he wasn't even a half -breed. I don't understand the concept of pretending to be someone you are not your whole life. Although I found his story to be interesting, it was spoiled from the beginning when I found out about his lies.
I am the worst liar ever! Even if I don't know the person, I still cannot keep a straight face. So I just avoid lies in general. But I know that just like everyone else I have told a couple white lies before.

Life Writing: Tell The Truth

I think that writers should tell the truth when writing about personal experience and about their lives. Falsifying anything about yourself reflects negatively on your character and insults the intelligence of the reader. There are certain media, such as movies, where it is "loosely based" on the life of the person. It is meant to add intrigue and excitement to the story, but still does very well in explaining the life of the person. But outright lying about your life and experiences and claiming it as your own is much like identity theft. Who's to say that the facts you are claiming about you are actually the life events of someone else in your life? If this part of the story is a lie, who's to say that the rest of the story is true? Instead of sharing your life with others your destroying your credibility as a writer by falsifying your life. So I believe that all writers should tell the truth when writing about themselves.

Life Writing is based on facts

Writers in their attempt to convey a non-fictional story should try as much to stick to the facts. Although details of an event may change from time to time and to whom a story is relay to, those writers nevertheless has a responsibility to uphold the contract with their readers by providing authentic details that in no way change the meaning of what really happened. Besides, for writers to base a story on false merit is too bold and the story be dismissed as being meaningless and the writer incredible.

When it comes to writing about ones life, I believe that the author should in fact write the truth. When most people tell stories, they use a lot or just a bit of exaggeration. Exaggeration is what makes stories more interesting and keeps the reader’s attention. I do not mind at all if authors want to add better details about a situation to make it more appealing. That also makes more enjoyable reading. I have a problem when an author adds situations or encounters that never actually happened in their memoirs. If the author wants to make up stories or events in their life, then they should write a fictional book, not a memoir/biography.

Truth or Lie....depends on the writer and the form of writing...

Everyone says truthfulness is very important and most of the time writers should tell the truth, I definitely agree to this- it is always good to tell the truth in memoirs, novels, stories etc. The writer has the choice to make whether to tell the truth or to lie. I have come across writings that I have read seemed complete truth and the reader gets convinced that the incident took place, but later we learn that what we read was a made up incident and fictitious. After knowing that it was a lie readers do get a bit upset but the made up story definitely entertained the readers as intended by the writer.

Jhon Glassco’s Memoirs of Montparnasse is an interesting one; it is about his experience at a party that he was not invited to, but ends up going to the party. The memoir is well written and the reader definitely gets to believe that the incident took place, but it is said that most of his work is fictional; he made up the story that had not taken place. Even though it was not the truth I enjoyed reading it, but I think it is important to tell the truth in a memoir because it is something personal and you are writing about yourself.

In the case of memoirs sometimes when a writer is writing of an incident that took place long time back, it is not possible to recall each and every moment of the past, which leads to fictions and exaggerations that the writer uses to make the writing interesting and effective for the reader. I personally think that it is very important to be truthful but in some cases like the one mentioned above, a little bit exaggeration should be fine.

Truth

Truth, what is truth, I think that we all have own perception on what we feel is true to us. It is only human to exaggerate the truth to suite our own need. However lying is something that is wrong and affects not only you but also everyone around you. Even if the lie is intended to protect another persons feeling. It is even worse to lie to yourself in order to find some form of importance. In spite of this there is thin line between truth and lie and how can one distinguish this line if we have our own perception on what we feel is true to us. When we as readers read a piece of writing it is up to us to make our own judgment as to how truthful the material is and how are we going to interrupt this material on the bases of what we feel is true to us.

BLOG 2: Owl vs. Frey

For me, Mr. Owl is the bigger liar. It’s one thing to lie about a date you went on, or a train wreck you were apart of, but to lie about who you are, and where you came from is a big deal for me.

I have worked very hard to realize who I am, personally, and I’ve taken pride in letting everyone else know who I am. Therefore it is hard for me to accept Grey Owl telling the world that he was always a gruff, adventurous Indian when really he was raised by his two aunts in England, and never even experienced the wilderness until he was an adult.

James Frey lied but stayed true to himself. He was indeed a substance abuser, and got in trouble with the law. I think that people only ridiculed his lies because he had told them right to Oprah’s face. Being on Oprah’s show made his lies more public, which made people even more upset with him. Oprah said, and many agreed that A Million Little Pieces was the most remarkable writing, and made them cry, and kept them awake at night, and I think that the novel would still have that effect on people if they weren’t already too pissed off to go out and buy it now.

Because Grey Owl had the reader believe that he was someone he was not, and James Frey just embellished the facts of his messed up life, I think Grey Owl would be the one I’d convict for the crime.

A little lie never hurts anyone

Even though lying never gets you anywhere. people still lie all the time to each other to hide something or to just sound more exciting by exaggerating an example of lie in our daily lives is that parents sometimes lie to their young children in forms of promises of getting them pony at their birthdays, even though some parents know that they wont be able to fulfill their promises to their children, but they still do it all the time in one form or another, not all the lies are bad. Sometimes people lie to their dear once to protect them or shield them from a certain danger or awful truth, which will hurt them badly if they found out earlier then they should. I think writers should tell lies and use lie as a tools in forms of stories and memoirs i.e. first lying and then getting caught at the end and then by showing a lesson on not to lie or something like that. All this can be done to warn and teach their readers of the dangers and mishaps they might face in their lives and how to go about in facing them. Even though lying is a very bad thing and people shouldn't lie, they still do and sometimes people even know that someone is lying but they just let them go on with their lies, maybe because its just easy to accept a lie then a truth sometimes like believing in fairy tales as most of us know that they are not real and are just made up stories. Its still just fun to have something to compare our lives with even though its all fake and lie, so in the end a lie can be a tool and can also be a weapon, its up to us on how we go about using it, but then again a little lie never hurts anyone!!!

We all lie a little bit!

In my opinion a writer shouldn't have to confine their imagination within the concepts of the truth. If they can't relate a story in the way that they want to, I don't see the problem with them exaggerating a bit. There are plenty of stories that capture our attention only because something has been exaggerated or added so that the story has the desired effect that the author wants it to have. Take for example when true life stories are converted into movies. The person who writes the script almost always adds something so that the movie has a greater impact on its audience. I feel that as long as the author knows where to draw the line and can admit that there are some content that may not be truthful, there is no harm in a little exaggeration.

The truth!

Being in this course, the topic of truthfulness is a very important one. My opinion on the matter of truth varies, depending on the literature we are talking about.

There is a technique titled exaggeration, and when writing things myself, I think that is a useful technique. When telling a true story that is very personal and interesting to you, it may not be as exciting to read, and that is where exaggeration comes in handy. By using big expressive words, or by describing something as being ‘fat’ when really it is only slightly plump it can help make writing more interesting for the reader.

There is a line between exaggerating and flat out lying however. Especially when we are focusing on memoirs, which are by nature supposed to be very truthful, lying is just, to me, rude.

When I think of literature and lying, I automatically think of James Fry, and his novel A Million Little Pieces. I watched Oprah praise this book to a great extent, so I ran off to get it, and I was fascinated. Part of the fascination for me came directly from the fact that, at the time I thought all of what I was reading had actually happened to a real, normal person! When word got out that a lot of his writing was in fact fictional, I felt a little taken advantage of.

If an author wants to write about their life, and throw in fun, exciting, FAKE chapters, then they should have to claim their book is based on true happenings, instead of saying it is a true memoir.

Stick With The Truth!

Most of the books I have read throughout the years deal with real stories that have taken place someplace in our world, and they have been filled with real people. At least we all think so. When we go out to look for books, I know from my personal preferance I like books that are based on true experiences people have gone through or dealt with.
I feel that author's if they are writing a book based on a true story then they should at least stick to that and not have half of it true and the other half fake. I feel this doesn't make them as the writer look very inspiring to us readers if we were to really like a particular writer because of their true and inspiring novels, only to later find out that half of their story was made up. So in my opinion, if your writing a novel based on a real life experience; don't add in any "fake" things, just the real ones.

Procrastination

I had to laugh at the procrastination video. First of all, that guy looks like he's on crack. Second of all, I think we're all guilty of procrastination. Instead of doing the task at hand, we constantly find ways around to actually getting the job done. Like, right now for instance. Instead of finally writing this blog, which I'm doing now, I must have watched the Frank Ze video 3 or 4 times before I finally started to write this. Inspite of this being a bonus exercise, it's still considered work. And at all cost for some reason, I find ways to avoid doing actual work. But it always gets done!

Take the oath...Tell the truth!

When a person begins to read, or develops a passion for reading, there is always a specific style that they tend to lean towards. They might like reading memoirs, fictional stories, or have an interest in horror books. Whatever their choice, the reason why they like it must have something to do with the writing or the way that the story is told.

For most people, including myself, when you choose to read a book of memoirs or journal writing, it is mainly because it is assumed that the events that will transpire throughout the book are based on actual events that have taken place. I believe that if a writer is writing something that readers will believe to be true, they have an obligation to writing only the truth. If they are writing fictional stories then naturally readers will already be wise to the fact that the story is false and will not be left to feel like they were mislead.

This is important to notice when reading John Glassco’s memoirs. The main controversy around the memoir was not his style of writing, or the time period, but mainly the fact that most readers believed the events to be true. When the events were questioned the readers left feeling betrayed. It is because of this that I am a firm believer in writers taking an oath to be truthful when writing.