A lot of people were surprised when Oprah Winfrey called in during Larry King’s interview of James Frey to stand behind Frey in the mess about whether, or just how much, Frey fictionalized his experiences in A Million Little Pieces. Winfrey argued that while some of Frey’s details may not be the stuff of non-fiction, the overall reading experience resonated with her, and all the hubbub was a distraction from the book’s strengths. Now I wonder if perhaps she was thinking ahead to her next Oprah Book Club selection as well. It’s just been announced that she has chosen Elie Wiesel’s holocaust memoir Night, a book that over the years has been challenged by critics as being a fantastical rendering of Weisel’s experiences at Auschwitz. (Some of those critics, it should be said, are outright Holocaust deniers; but many are not.) If you think the ethics of criticizing a drug-rehab author (Frey) are sticky, how about the ethics of criticizing a Holocaust-survivor author?
Was Oprah's Defense of James Frey a Preemptive Strike?
TAGS:
and 
. You can also watch it on 
It’s fine that people criticize the work of others so long as they put forward evidence supporting their claim.
Why is there such a negative connotation associated with criticism? The entire POINT of the scientific community is communal criticism; without it, there would be no separation of the quacks from the experts.
Criticism is a vital check on anyone making a claim of significance. It wouldn’t be right for someone to claim that, say, the world would be thrown back into an ice age if carbon dioxide increases in the atmosphere without sufficient support to back it up. Yet people in politics and the media do this all the time; they make baseless comments to gain support. These people then cry “slander” or “traitor” whenever someone checks them on their facts. This rhetorical tactic is extremely dangerous, and it’s unfortunate that so many get away with it.
It’s fine that people criticize the work of others so long as they put forward evidence supporting their claim.
Why is there such a negative connotation associated with criticism? The entire POINT of the scientific community is communal criticism; without it, there would be no separation of the quacks from the experts.
Criticism is a vital check on anyone making a claim of significance. It wouldn’t be right for someone to claim that, say, the world would be thrown back into an ice age if carbon dioxide increases in the atmosphere without sufficient support to back it up. Yet people in politics and the media do this all the time; they make baseless comments to gain support. These people then cry “slander” or “traitor” whenever someone checks them on their facts. This rhetorical tactic is extremely dangerous, and it’s unfortunate that so many get away with it.
I must clarify: after extensive reading on global warming, I feel the scientists working in the field have a legitimate case that must be heeded. (Much of that research, interestingly, was funded by the government.) I’m just making the point that someone shouldn’t say “the sky is falling!” with absolute certainty without sufficient support. But because the field of global climate is so complex, it’s easily confused and many individuals simply say, “Oh, well, that’s just junk science” despite the 50+ years of study dedicated to the field.
I must clarify: after extensive reading on global warming, I feel the scientists working in the field have a legitimate case that must be heeded. (Much of that research, interestingly, was funded by the government.) I’m just making the point that someone shouldn’t say “the sky is falling!” with absolute certainty without sufficient support. But because the field of global climate is so complex, it’s easily confused and many individuals simply say, “Oh, well, that’s just junk science” despite the 50+ years of study dedicated to the field.
It’s obvious Oprah is publicly supporting Frey during this whole ordeal simply to maintain her own credibility as the dictator of the world’s most powerful book club. I’m sure she felt just as cheated as the rest of us when The Smoking Gun report was released.
It’s obvious Oprah is publicly supporting Frey during this whole ordeal simply to maintain her own credibility as the dictator of the world’s most powerful book club. I’m sure she felt just as cheated as the rest of us when The Smoking Gun report was released.
Next up on Oprah’s book club: “TESTIMONY: The Memoirs of Dmitri Shostakovich as Related to Solomon Volkov”? (Or so he says)
Next up on Oprah’s book club: “TESTIMONY: The Memoirs of Dmitri Shostakovich as Related to Solomon Volkov”? (Or so he says)