The first question one encounters in this book is simply, how best to read it? The Lifespan of a Fact is two things in one - both an essay about the suicide of a young man who leaped from a Las Vegas hotel, and the notes of a fact-checker trying to verify the information in the essay. The essay is clearly literary in tone, but contains a lot of definitive information that a reader would assume to be an impartial observation of the facts of the case. The fact-checker finds that many of the "facts" are fabricated, which the author always rebuts by saying he is changing words here and there for artistic purposes, but not altering the intention, or the Capital T Truth. So how to read this hodgepodge? The original essay appears in blocks at the center of each page, with the fact-checker's notes surrounding them. I attempted to read both in conjunction, but I think perhaps I would have been better served by reading the entire essay first, and then going back and reading the notes. As it was, I didn't care for the original essay very much, but perhaps that is because I was biased by learning that many statements were false, even as I was reading them? This format also allows for the personalities of both the author and the fact-checker to come through clearly, and I found myself sympathizing with Fingal more so than D'Agata. Fingal had a job to do, after all, while D'Agata often resorted to name calling unnecessarily. Of course, it's unclear if that's what really happened, or if the authors were just seeking to inject a little humor into the text. So even though the two parts of the text seem to represent the literary version and factual reality of the event, perhaps there are even fabrications in the factual version! The relationship between the two men also progresses through the book, although only Fingal has a real arc. By the end of the book, he has uncovered so many inaccuracies in the various coroner's reports and news stories about the event that it's hard to say if D'Agata's essay is really so inaccurate after all. The Lifespan of a Fact is a quick read, but it left me wanting more in a certain way. The central question of the book is whether writing that is billed as nonfiction, such as an essay, has a moral obligation to be as factual accurate as possible. John D'Agata says no, but in my opinion that depends on the context. Was the article to be presented in a news magazine, where certain journalistic standards might be expected, or in a literary magazine? I wish the book contained a forward or afterward explaining whether the essay was ever published at all (prior to this book), or if the editor decided that the rearranging of facts was too deceptive to publish the essay as it stood. (Disclaimer: The back cover does say that the essay eventually became a book, which I have not read. I'll add it to my list...)All in all, it was worth the read. It raised more questions than it answered, but also firmly reminds the readers that sometimes, it's impossible to really know it all. “In 2003, an essay by John D’Agata was rejected by the magazine that commissioned it due to factual inaccuracies. That essay (. . .) was accepted by another magazine, but not before they handed it to their own fact-checker, Jim Fingal. (. . .) What emerges [from the correspondence between the two men] is a brilliant and eye-opening meditation on the relationship between ‘truth’ and ‘accuracy’(.)” The book is presented in the form of emails between D’Agata and Fingal. Both men ‘push the envelope’ to make points that contribute to the overall premise of the book: just how negotiable is a fact in non-fiction?When I read excerpts to my daughter, who has worked in non-fiction publishing, she was of the opinion that she would have ‘thrown the book across the room’, but I found it fascinating.I won this from Katie at Doing Dewy in May’s Non-Fiction Blog Hop Giveaway.Read this if: you enjoy reading essays; or you’ve wondered just how much fiction is in non-fiction. 4 stars
Do You like book The Lifespan Of A Fact (2012)?
Great duel between unpaid intern and big name author over the truthiness of nonfiction
—yang
