Here’s something mind-bogglingly stupid from yesterday’s Slate. The piece, by one Jack Shafer, is about allegations that David Sedaris embellished his humorous essays:
Sedaris and company want to erect a penumbra that shields humorists from criticism when they blend fiction into their nonfiction but still insist on calling it nonfiction. The logic behind this is difficult to follow. If writing fiction is the license Sedaris and other nonfiction humorists need to get at “larger truths,” why limit this exemption to humorists? Let reporters covering city hall, war, and business to embellish and exaggerate so they can capture “larger truths,” too. I’m sure that Stephen Glass, Jayson Blair, Christopher Newton, and Slate’s “monkeyfishing guy” would back this idea, especially if applied retroactively.
Is Shafer for real? Does he really think there’s no difference between a humorist writing personal essays and “reporters covering city hall”? That is just a stunning lack of nuance. I am flabbergasted.
And, we now return you to your regularly-scheduled lack of blogging.