Comments on: Speak (Correctly), Memory! http://www.vqronline.org/blog/2008/12/31/memoir-truthiness/ A National Blog of Literature & Discussion Tue, 13 Dec 2011 00:47:38 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.1 By: Pete http://www.vqronline.org/blog/2008/12/31/memoir-truthiness/#comment-2571 Pete Thu, 01 Jan 2009 20:12:52 +0000 http://www.vqronline.org/blog/?p=808#comment-2571 It doesn't have to be 99.9% true, but all of the major components have to be true or at least have a basis in fact. Yes, Rosenblat was a Holocaust survivor - good for him, though it hardly makes him unique. Hundreds if not thousands of survivors have told their stories, with many going so far as to write a book about it. But from what I've read, the truth of Rosenblat's story mostly ends there, and the love story he wrote about was completely fabricated - most likely to make it unique, distinctive and of course marketable. And that makes the whole thing utterly wrong. It wasn't just some embellishment to the true story or a case of selective memory, but obviously a conscious effort to make the story better. And that's something I don't quite understand. Frey fabricating shocking elements of what was by all accounts a fairly mundane addiction is one thing - addiction-recovery memoirs are a dime a dozen, so it's not surprising (though inexcusable) that he'd try to spice up the story. But for Holocaust survivors to do the same doesn't make much sense. The Holocaust was such an epic event - one of the defining events of Western Civilization - and such a great story in itself that anyone directly associated with it would have a interesting tale to tell. Why Rosenblat would need to embellish is just beyond me. It doesn’t have to be 99.9% true, but all of the major components have to be true or at least have a basis in fact. Yes, Rosenblat was a Holocaust survivor – good for him, though it hardly makes him unique. Hundreds if not thousands of survivors have told their stories, with many going so far as to write a book about it. But from what I’ve read, the truth of Rosenblat’s story mostly ends there, and the love story he wrote about was completely fabricated – most likely to make it unique, distinctive and of course marketable. And that makes the whole thing utterly wrong. It wasn’t just some embellishment to the true story or a case of selective memory, but obviously a conscious effort to make the story better.

And that’s something I don’t quite understand. Frey fabricating shocking elements of what was by all accounts a fairly mundane addiction is one thing – addiction-recovery memoirs are a dime a dozen, so it’s not surprising (though inexcusable) that he’d try to spice up the story. But for Holocaust survivors to do the same doesn’t make much sense. The Holocaust was such an epic event – one of the defining events of Western Civilization – and such a great story in itself that anyone directly associated with it would have a interesting tale to tell. Why Rosenblat would need to embellish is just beyond me.

]]>