Part of the suspense in a memoir is the factual representation of someone’s experience. However in this reading Glassco seemed to take away from the realistic approach of a memoir and incorporated his story with many untruthful details. These details did discourage me from getting into the novel as I found his integration between autobiography and fiction seemed to lean a bit too far to one side. This was due to Glassco long tales that seemed to become too far from the truth. In my opinion if an author is going to write a memoir it should be the whole truth. I found myself thoroughly indulged in Michael Ondaatje’s memoir and it’s because he used great detail in explaining true to life stories. So should writers be writing the whole truth or nothing but the truth? In my opinion the truth prevails. Memoirs are an account of the author's personal experiences. If it is filled with false stories than the memoir no longer brings a connection between the author and the reader.
Stephen Kaufmann
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
Stephen's blog was well written, I agreed with everything he wrote. He made references to other readings that we’ve read and compared the Michael and John’s memoirs. I didn’t enjoy Glassco’s memoir either; I’m not sure why Glassco chose not to tell the truth but even with his embellishments his memoir was bland in my opinion.
Post a Comment