Many a time, in the course of doing these memoirs, I have wished that I were writing fiction. The temptation to invent has been very strong, particularly where recollection is hazy and I remember the substance of an event but not the details … Then there are cases where I am not sure myself whether I am making something up. I think I remember but I am not positive.
–Mary McCarthy, Memories of a Catholic Girlhood
Given the perhaps inevitable comparisons between memoirist-turned-novelist (all in the same book!) James Frey and recently resigned NASA press office operative George Deutsch, I think it’s worth taking a quick look at the relevant differences:
- There is a reasonable expectation that scientific information flowing from a government agency like NASA is guided by good data, accurate calculations, and the like — in other words, that it is as close to true as scientific methodology can get us with the data on hand. Truth matters in scientific communiques, whether between scientists or from scientists to the general public.
- Memoirists, in telling the stories of their lives, often work in areas where objectivity is nigh impossible. The reader can reasonably hope for a memoir to convey the truth of what certain experiences felt like as they were being lived, or the truth of how a certain life feels as the person writing about it looks back on it. Not every memoirist will include a disclaimer like Mary McCarthy’s, but perhaps the reader should assume one.
- While Oprah may get annoyed at guests lying on her show, the data seem to indicate that people who go on talk shows sometimes lie. Even to Oprah! Regular consumers of talk shows expect this. (Also, Oprah may have enough money sitting around to hire a fact-checker or two.)
- The public has a reasonable expectation that NASA is doing the fact-checking before issuing press-releases or putting stuff up on its website. Given that most members of the general public do not have the resources or training to fact-check science themselves, they look to NASA and agencies like it to do this quality control.
- Quality control is best performed by those who understand the thing it is whose quality they are controlling. You don’t have the kid with no sense of taste (because of that unfortunate rollerblading accident — kids, wear your helmets!) do the taste-tests at the candy factory. Similarly, you don’t put a kid who doesn’t have a thorough knowledge of how scientific methodology works, of what data has been amassed, of how it has been analyzed, and about the extent to which it supports or undermines various theories in charge of “quality control” on scientific communiques.
- Quality control for a publisher of memoirs may come down to making sure the memoirs are engaging reading. If there’s a real issue about making sure “memoirs” are sufficiently truthy, editors can engage the services of those qualified to check out the anecdotes — say, private detectives. Alternatively, editors can go on record as saying that literary works may convey truths that transcend the facts of actual events.
- Education in journalism does not, in and of itself, transmit the skill set needed to do “quality control” on science. Perhaps it trains one to communicate scientific matters to lay people more clearly. But, it doesn’t confer the ability to make substantive changes in what the scientists say and call the result “good science”.
- Making stuff up on a resume may be indicative of the ability to tell a vivid story — perhaps acceptable in communications between a memoirist/novelist and an editor.
- Making stuff up on a resume when you are seeking employment doing quality control on science — that is, in a context where the facts matter — is a disqualification
Kids, don’t lie on your resume. Especially, don’t lie on your resume as a means to secure a job that you are not qualified to perform. And definitely don’t lie on your resume to secure a job from which being a liar disqualifies you.
If you must engage in creative writing about your life, write a memoir, for goodness sakes.
