January 10, 2006
The Chronicle's Heidi Benson follows up on the San Francisco reaction to JT LeRoy's unmasking. Stephen Beachy--who first alleged that LeRoy was Laura Albert's creation in a New York magazine piece--says "The hoax needed to be revealed in order for us to ask the really important questions -- about what we want to believe and why, what we project onto 'outsiders,' and the magical aura we grant celebrities."
Dave Eggers says the LeRoy stories are well-written no matter who penned them, Armistead Maupin is incensed by the idea of someone using a fiction of AIDS and childhood abuse for sympathy, and Daniel Handler aka Lemony Snicket is "bemused," as is his delightful wont: "The only question is, did the person who wrote these things have as colorful a history as some people seem to believe?" Handler asked. "That's a question you could ask about Jack London."
Posted by Rachel at January 10, 2006 10:18 AM
Comments
Was it sympathy that JT Leroy attracted, or was it a nihilistic fascination that lured those slumming luminaries? Exposing THEM for their pretentiousness makes this a slam-dunk literary hoax in my book. (Frey's just a low-octane punk parlaying his frat-boy hi-jinks into a book whose message is the same as Nancy Reagan's: Just Say No!)
Posted by: Michaela at January 18, 2006 01:38 PM
Post a comment
Thanks for signing in, . Now you can comment. (sign out)
(If you haven't left a comment here before, you may need to be approved by the site owner before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Thanks for waiting.)
