If the accusations are true and Frey has embellished some of the events in his book, then it should have never been published as nonfictional. Frey has even said himself that his book is a memoir, a personal recollection of historical events. It was his life as he remembered it. Frey was an addict and an alcoholic; the majority of that period of his life was spent high. We have to take that into consideration. What he remembers may not be what actually happened.

It's difficult to define truth in a person's life. People see their own experiences much differently than others perceive them. The book obviously made an impact and helped many addicts and alcoholics. However, I do not think that it was right to claim it as a memoir. If information in the book was knowingly not true, then the book should not be considered non-fiction. This case should really be taken into perspective though. If it was helping people then there really is no difference if a few of his stories were embellished.

I don't really understand what all the fuss is all about. Whether the book is fictional or non-fictional, does it make the contents of the book less moving? Just by changing the category under which the book appears does it make the book less appealing? As far as i can see the longer this issue is stretched the more publicity the book is going to receive, what's more the sequel to this book is also getting a lot of free publicity. The author should just own up to what exactly his book is. The author claiming the book to be true is a big issue as proof has been found to prove him and his stories wrong and yet he still insists on claiming that every sequence in the book is true. It's another matter that when writing a memoir it is almost next to impossible to remember every small thing that happened in your life, but in this book as far as i understood all the events are quite big and tend to have a huge impact on your life. When something has a big impact on your life you do tend to remember it quite well but as it is in human nature, we tend to manipulate what we see or experience so it is entirely possible that what he said happened, didn't happen exactly how he said that it did.

I believe that this whole thing is being blown way out of proportion. The only real winner here is Frey. Although the public is trying to make him look bad, he is getting more publicity than he deserves. The only thing that this argument is going to do is sell more books for Frey. Even if the events in his book are fictional, there is no proof. He was under the influence when these events occurred so there is no liability anywhere.

First off whats in a genre? I think that Frey's main goal here was to inspire and to motivate. He wrote for his specific audience to help instill the hardships which his addictions inflicted. He showed the world that there is hope. He showed that you can recover when you think you've sunk to the bottom. In any case, this book served a purpose whether fiction or nonfiction. After all literature is an art, and art can be shown or expressed in any way the artist or author, in this case, wants. Some things might have been fabricated to get his message accross, but I think this may have been necesary in order to sell his books. I think that if a lot of people are buying this book then it's a good thing because the message is getting out there to so many people, and thats more important than anything!

Everyone has a favorite story to tell about their life. And that should not be limited to everyone but James Frey. A good story from someones life will be modified and get better every time that it is told. It will pick up new bits of information, it will seem to become much more of what you wanted to happen as your memories and wishes become harder to distinguish. When looking back on a lot of stories that I have had with friends, I can see major differences in my account and their version of the same story. Whats the difference if this man made up a portions of his book. It was published as being one of those great stories from an earlier time in your life. You must expect some things to be imbellished, polished, or just a just plain lie. Peoples memories are not perfect, and the longer you hold on to a memory the more often it changes, and the further from the truth it becomes.

I really don't see the big deal with the whole thing. When people read novels, they want a story that moves them. In my opinion that is exactly what James Frey gave his audience. I think it was silly for him not to just tell the truth that some of it was made up. I honestly don't think it would have been that big of a deal. He could have published it as a fiction book, and saved himself the embarassment of having to explain why his story is false.

I don't think the book at all is wrong for not being completely true, but it shouldn't be nonfictional. What is really wrong is the fact that the author states over and over that the book is all true. I think the publisher has much to blame for this, it's his job to display a disclaimer if ones needed. On the plus side, if this book help people with problems with alcohol or drugs I would say it is a good book.

I understand why some people are upset that James Frey exaggerated when he wrote his book, "A Million Little Pieces", about addition. Like Oprah, who selected the book for her book club, I feel that it has some relevant value. Oprah chose the book in hopes that it might help some people. Therefore if the book gives hope and support for recovering chemical abusers, then I thinks we should overlook a writer’s embellishment of the facts and let him have his literary license.


I think that had he not said the book was an autobiography it would not be a big deal. If he made this book with the intent of helping others and just let it be a book of inspiration and not about his like I would then say it would work. Him saying that the events were true when some of them are not just makes the book unappealing in my mind. I also think it loses its impact when you find out that the some of the things he wrote about are not true.

I think it is a big deal that his memoir is not true. Not only because it had a lot of attention drawn to it, but because it is a lie and if he wants to talk about his own life he should make it true. What message is he sending the world when he lies about his own life to make money. I think they should take it out of print and fine him some money. If he wanted to write a good book, maybe he should have written a fiction book and tried to make and honest dollar.

This just goes to show that lies in this country could stump even the most credible people. What for? Money. I think this is a very clever way to make money. Which points out that you have to be smart; not an alcoholic, criminal, or addict in the business. I am most impressed that he actualll came out and admitted it, caught or not. I would feel a little cheated though, but if you had a chance to lie, to the public, about your less than average life, and make it horrible to make money. You wouldn't do it?

James Frey wanted to write a book to save people. That’s exactly what he did, even though some parts of his book were fabricated. As long as the book is helping drug addicts and alcoholics, I believe the book still has a value. Of course, I do think that he should of told the truth in the first place. But, I don’t think that Frey’s book being partially fictional makes a big difference. It’s impossible for anyone to right an accurate account of his/her life, because a person’s memory is a very unreliable thing. Fictional or not, the book is being helpful to many people, and that's what matters.

I believe that if at least most of the information someone publishes is true it qualifies as nonfiction. The added publicity to Frey’s current situation has only brought more attention to what he’s done and possibly could uncover more accurate details as to what occurred in his life. He has acknowledged that some of what he wrote is not 100% true, but that shouldn’t mean we can discredit everything in it.

If the book is about James Frey's memories its hard to define what some one remembers or how they remember things as being true. I think all of the topics listed in the book should have been checked for creadibility of historical references. I dont think it would have been that big of deal if he set the book as a historical fiction because fiction is fiction. I dont really know how possible it is to say a memoir is 100% truthful but you cant condem someone on something they remember and how they remember it.

It looks like Oprah has finally turned on Frey as well:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/11030647/

It's interesting that now that opinion has started to turn against Frey, Oprah has joined in attacking him.

- J. Tirrell
jtirrell@purdue.edu