Talk:A Million Little Pieces

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Novels
Literature Portal
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Novels, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to narrative novels, novellas, novelettes and short stories on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit one of the articles mentioned below, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and contribute to the general Project discussion to talk over new ideas and suggestions.
Start This article has been rated as Start-Class.
Low This article has been rated as low-importance on the importance scale.
Assessment comments

Contents

[edit] Additions needed

I have not read the book and never intend to, but could someone who has read the book please add a few sentences that give the meaning of the title? Thank you.

[edit] Plot holes

It seems to me that this story has some holes big enough to fly a small plane through. First, Frey is ushered onto a plane by a doctor, even though he is unconscious, has a broken nose, hole in cheek, and 4 damaged teeth. Shouldn't he be treated? What is the point of putting him on the plane in his condition? Wouldn't the doctor by liable for this sort of negligence? Second, the airline accepts Frey on the plane, even though he is unconscious, covered with vomit, blood, and urine. Again, why would they accept an unconscious passenger without escort, particularly in this condition? What about the poor passenger that has to sit next to him? Again, what about the liability issues?

My thoughts exactly. I read that description on the back of the book long before any of these allegations came out and I thought "What airline is going to allow a guy covered in blood, vomit, and urine with a hole in his cheek on the airplane."
Hmm. Well, you know what they say about truth and fiction. --Bookandcoffee 21:19, 1 January 2006 (UTC)
I agree. Lots of good skeptical reviews at Amazon. The crack house part seems unlikely. The dentist scene was riveting, but I haven't heard any support for the justification that addicts can't have local anesthesia. Rufus Sarsaparilla 20:11, 2 January 2006 (UTC)
Now that The Smoking Gun has raised serious concerns over the book's legitimacy, can we please work on changing this article? Dstopping 05:15, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] catagory hoax?

i mean come on. isn't this a little extreme?

-sparsefarce 30 jan 2005


This story must now be considered to be 100% fiction. Frey has less credibility than the Bush administration. Why would anyone believe any part of this book is not basically made up. For example, is there any positive evidence that Frey went to rehab? I would bet money that he did not. No aspect of his description rings true. I have worked at three different drug rehabs and not one of them resembles his description, while all three resemble each other closely. What is the evidence? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 141.150.155.167 (talk • contribs).

I'm wondering, how can we call this memoir a hoax, when the origin of the word "memoir" comes from the French word "memory"? I find it particularly difficult to dispute what someone remembers, saying that their account of what they remember is *wrong*. Frey never said that he had outright lied, only that he had taken some "creative license" in his writing. - S. Komae (talk) 15:10, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

I agree that parts of the novel are embelleshed, even made up, but let's look at the definition of "hoax."
An act intended to deceive or trick.
Now, he added things and, by his own admission, made himself look better then he was. But I think it's an overstatement to say that he, by writing his book, intended to deceive or trick the people reading it. "Hoax" implies he wrote the book with malicious intent, which I just don't believe is true. If we have a source showing, say, he never attended rehab, then we're closer to this, but I've read criticisms of him and they don't accuse him of not coming to rehab, at least to my knowledge. --Szabo 20:49, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

I reiterate: what is the positive evidence that Frey ever attended a drug rehab?

The fact he said he did and nobody has disputed it. Regardless, I don't think he wrote the book with intent to "deceive or trick." Fabricating portions of the book because of inner demons is not indicative of intent to decieve. I'm going to go ahead and remove the category for now.--Szabo 04:16, 30 June 2006 (UTC) 04:15, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

Unblock

A memoir is how a person remembers his or her own life, not how it actually was. It's not structured like an autobiography, and memoirs are seldom completely true because they are memories. Think of it this way: If Don Quijote were writing his memoir, and he came to the part where he was fighting windmills because he thought that they were giants, he would write in his memoir that he was fighting giants, because that's how he remembers it. This book helped people, and the fact that it has some parts in it that are untrue shouldn't come as a surprise.

I only just read this book and his subsequent book, "my friend leonard". How anyone thought this book could NOT be fiction is beyond me. I have never done drugs and never been to rehab, but nothing in this book rings true. Having said that, I liked both books, probably the latter more. They weren't great novels, but they were entertaining and in the end, isn't that the whole point of reading?

      Uh, not necessarily? 130.49.93.169 18:18, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Citations?

Did a little poking around, in part because I'm writing a paper that involves this memoir, or fictionalized memoir, or whatever we'd like to call it -- where the heck is there any mention in the cited sources that verify this?

On 26 January 2006, Frey once again appeared on The Oprah Winfrey Show and admitted that the same "demons" that had made him turn to alcohol and drugs had also driven him to fabricate crucial portions of his "memoir"; it first having been shopped as being a fiction novel but declined by many, including Random House itself. (from the Wikipedia page itself)

I don't see anything supporting this claim... Where did that come from? - S. Komae (talk) 21:34, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Fixion

Wouldn't the fact that Frey initially tried to hock the exact same text to a variety of publishers (whom all turned it down) as fiction be mentioned? Yes, it really is that bad. I mean, clearly the history of the book is a history of deception, all the way; from decieving the publishers, to deceiving the buyers, to decieving the critics. I even tried this myself; I gave the book to a friend of mine (who wasn't privy to it being a work of fiction), telling her that it was a real account. When she was halfway through the book, I disclosed the true nature of the book. She didn't even finish it. It really is that bad. The only value the book has is when the reader is decieved to believe it's real. For what it's worth; AMLP is as real as Three Little Piggies, and Frey has as much credibility as H.C. Andersen. --82.181.48.38 19:37, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Capitalization

I do not believe the capitalization of nouns is random; rather, I am pretty sure he capitalizes only people (e.g., "my Sister") and places (e.g., "the Office"), and always capitalizes these types of nouns. It also seems very informal to say that he capitalizes them "for No Apparent Reason." 71.206.101.147 03:59, 15 June 2007 (UTC)Emily

[edit] Stylism or lack of talent?

"Frey also uses heavy repetition of words throughout the text, which is consistent with his repetitive use of alcohol and drugs as well as his repetitive run-ins with the authorities." This seems like someone is making excuses for his mediocre writing ability and small vocabulary. 220.235.3.45 14:39, 14 October 2007 (UTC)