As for Frey…I canna forgive him. I’m still as outraged as I was the day I found out he’d manufactured his rehab woes. If he was any kind of PERSON WITH INTEGRITY, he would give some of those purloined profits to Hazleden or to any addicts by the names of Lily or James. I read his book before its exposure; I loved it, especially because I thought it was true and because I thought the hero was a PERSON OF PRINCIPLES AND CHARACTER (despite my disagreement with many of his views). His mere appearance on the King and Oprah shows alongside his mama ironically gave truth to his big lie–what a wimp. I would never believe that turkey capable of undergoing root canal without major drugs.

I have published memoirs before. As acquiring editor at a university press, I was obligated to verify the author’s veracity by sending the ms to readers familiar with the events and principals. A reading of the manuscript costs very little (especially compared with lawsuits and public embarassment), and I would encourage trade publishers to take up the practice.

The buck stops here. Although I can see wimpy James Frey being persuaded to take liberties, we all are subject to pressures in our lives to do this and do that. Such a defense wouldn’t work in court–hell, it wouldn’t even work with my mother. As she would say, “if your friend told you to jump off a building, would you do it?”

As for the genre, why not safeguard it? Why not encourage truthfulness in advertising? Why let the genre devolve into worthlessness? I don’t believe Frey changed his story to protect the innocent. I don’t believe Frey is the James in the memoir–the wimp I saw on tv in no way resembles the hero of a million pieces. In fact, I don’t believe Frey ever had a serious addiction of the extent described in that book.

If it had been me accused of this con, accused wrongly that is, I would have released all documents and privacy pledges to clear my name and retain my reputation. All Frey did was scurry into the mouse hole he crawled out of.

Uh, no. I’m not related to Oprah.

Dwelling on Frey’s thus far revealed dishonesty or what he and Doubleday might do with their profits may be focusing on the wrong pieces. And by the way, is it really too hard to concede through the fog of criticism that Frey’s e. e. cummings and goings that transmit to print how he physically felt while in the throws of withdrawal is worthy prose?
Needling an “addict” who found a way out of substance abuse serves no valid purpose. Indeed, it may say more about his critics than Frey. However, enabling addictive behavior such as manipulation and lying is not the way to go either. Having said that, I really think we are entitled to know if in his recovery he “chose a road less traveled” or has misled us down a path not taken.
If you have any familiarity with the dictates of intensive in-patient programs, you began to get a little uncomfortable with the story line shortly after the root canal. Hazeldon and Frey’s therapists are legally constrained to remain silent, leaving the reader with Frey’s version of his recovery. We are asked to accept that his treatment plan was flexible enough to tolerate his transgressions, including the fact of and extent of his relationship with Lilly. That he and the Hazeldon posse set off to rescue her and did is even more ludicrous.
If Frey disclosed his treatment records, we might get to the bottom of this. There is more to be gained from this than viewing his now calloused hand getting crushed in the cookie jar yet again and again. Idle curiosity? Not in the least. His treatment team should be allowed to speak about his path to recovery; Frey should stop using his treatment as a shield for his pen. Those seeking help or thinking about getting some may benefit from a full appreciation of why treatment decisions that are made in the Minnesota Model are important and necessary. It could prove a deadly misconception if there is an expectation that recovery programs are a cafeteria experience. Certainly, a Frey fed fund to open the doors of these programs to those who do not have the means to pay the price of treatment is a better white-out for this ink fink than his serial apologia. The possibility that emulation of his putative path to recovery could cause people to squander their best chance at controlling substance abuse is something to be avoided. So out with it, Jim. We have other fish to Frey.

Note from the Wicked Witch of Publishing: Ivar Goldart, Esq. Civil trial attorney. Member Governor’s Forensic Evidence Commission. ”Represents women abused by correction officers.” Erudite comment and clever wording! Thanks, Ivar! Geez, you never know who’s looking at your blog these days!