I have no opinion on Frey's book, but I disagree with your characterization of what book clubs should be about. Some book clubs may be limited to a discussion of literature, but they needed all be. Inspired by the books we have read, my book club has had enlightening discussions on a number of subjects, including racism in the US, "what we want to do when we grow up" (we are all in our 20s and 30s), our views on romantic relationships, and many many other topics. Some of these discussion have arisen out of non-fiction works, but some have been inspired by traditional literature, for instance we had a great discussion on the substance of human nature inspired by the novel "Life of Pi."

Indeed, isn't one of the main hallmarks of great literature that it impacts our view of the world around us and our place in it? Moreover, there are many memoirs and works of non-fiction that are worth discussing with one's peers in a book club. While "A Million Little Pieces" may not be one of these books that are worth discussing, the fact remains that I'm glad that Oprah doesn't limit her book club discussion to literary analysis.

I promise I didn't curse!

I haven't read Frey's book, but in general I find memoirs to be interesting precisely because they may not to be entirely truthful, and its fun to guess what parts are made up. For some good examples, read the works of James Herriot, David Sedaris, Henri Charrière, Robert Pirsig, and John Steinbeck.

In interviews at the time the book came out, Frey never claimed it was strictly autobiographical.

There was nothing damning in the Smoking Gun article. So he exagerated his criminal record. So he was less than friendly to a reporter. So what? The memoir is not about Frey's "niceness" or even about his criminal record. It's about his addiction and recovery.

Yes, he calls himself "a Criminal." I wonder if Traister has ever met an addict. Part of the psychology of addiction is a deep-rooted feeling of being instrinsically bad.

And to say Frey is a pot-smoking frat boy just because maybe he wasn't charged with felonies, well, that's just silly. There is a big difference between being a pothead and an alcoholic/crack addict.

If Traister has never had experience teach her this difference (if she has never known a true addict), she's a very, very lucky woman.

oops! i thought rebecca traister had written that article. nope. hillary frey.

but i still stand by everything else i said.

I've spent 36 years of my life going to NA and AA meetings. Although I've only read portions of Frey's book, those excerpts read like typical 12-Step newcomer braggadacio. Anyone who has spent any time around recovery programs learns to discern the difference between the truth and the adolescent aggrandizement, prevarication and confabulation exemplified in Frey's "bad boy" tales. Unfortunately Oprah does not have the benefit of experience that would teach her to hear the difference.

When people accumulate time in recovery and work the Steps that teach them to live and speak with honesty and humility, their stories become truthful. Since Frey is not interested in changing his dishonest attitude or behavior, that is unlikely to happen for him.

I'll save my money for more worthwhile reading material.

Says areader:

I haven't read Frey's book, but in general I find memoirs to be interesting precisely because they may not to be entirely truthful, and its fun to guess what parts are made up. For some good examples, read the works of James Herriot, David Sedaris, Henri Charrière, Robert Pirsig, and John Steinbeck.

Fair enough, but the difference between James Frey and (for example) David Sedaris is a) Sedaris admits embellishing and flat-out Making Stuff Up and openly dares readers to figure out where, and b) Sedaris has never held himself up as a bad-boy-makes-good role model for millions of people.

James Frey's very reputation rested on the idea, further advanced by Oprah's endorsements, that everything he wrote was absolutely the truth, that he survived crack addiction, alcoholism, blood, vomit, serious jail time, physical altercations with police, and the tragic deaths of women he loved, and therefore, the reader could derive comfort and hope from reading of his experience and his ability to "hold on." If most of what he wrote was subsequently found to be demonstrably false, he is a fraud, not an entertainer.

Oprah, presumably, would never have featered Frey on her show if there had been any question in her mind whether the events depicted in the book actually took place -- not when she found herself having to peek at the end of the book to remind herself that the author was still living. Perhaps Ms. Winfrey needs to invest in a fact-checking team to comb over subsequent memoirs featured on her show, particularly when arrest and imprisonment records are at issue.

Seems from the back-story here, and from reading the Smoking Gun article (6 pages worth, very detailed, with on-the-spot interviews of the cops who WOULDA been involved if the stories were true), that this is just one of those little-bitty harmless lies that then blow up out of all proportion -- by which time it's way too late to do anything about it.

As novels, both Frey books were okay -- a bit much, a bit over-the-top maybe, a few too many coincidences, a few too many characters who are just too perfect to be real ("cinematic," as one of the Smoking gun writers puts it) -- but still okay. But, someone in the publishing chain points out, they'd sell SOOO much better if they were memoirs...

And that's all she wrote. Ironically, if they had been left to stand on their own as fiction, the books might have sold nicely, and made everyone a few happy dollars, and no-one's the worse for it. But of course, once you start claiming they're non-fiction -- the only reason they blew up to mega-seller status in the first place -- it's then too late to change the story, and, inevitably the lies multiply and become more tangled, and people have to choose sides between disillusionment & an increasingly-difficult defense of the author.

Pity, that. Sure hope he doesn't relapse. (If he was ever a real addict at all, that is.)

More important, I sure hope that none of the REAL addicts-in-recovery out there who have been relying on these success stories for hope and as role-models wind up set back by their disillusionment, or by any failures to live up to a "reality" that even its progenitor never really lived. If apologies are owed, it is to them more than anyone else.