Ishmael Beah wrote a popular memoir of his time as a boy soldier in Sierra Leone. I’m just finishing the book, and Ishmael is an excellent storyteller who has been through harrowing times. I remember when the memoir was published, not long after the James Frey memoir was found to be largely fabricated. The publisher questioned Beah on the specificity of his memoir, and he reassured her that growing up in a culture rich with oral tradition had honed his memory.
A few days ago, the newspaper The Australian quoted a couple who claim to have discovered that the events in Beah’s book occurred over one year, rather than the three years he claims in his book. This would mean he was a soldier for a few months rather than two years. Beah denies this. Whether Beah was a child soldier is not in question.
Whether Beah is right or wrong, this points me to the question of what I want to get out of a memoir. Whether a particular detail is right or wrong doesn’t matter to me: I’m seeking to gain an broad understanding of the challenges faced by child soldiers (both during and after the war). If it turned out that Beah wasn’t a child soldier at all, that would affect my experience with the book. If he just got some dates wrong, that doesn’t affect much. Likewise with Rigoberta Menchu’s memoir recounting atrocities commited against Guatemala’s native peoples: even if it turned out to be a composite of many people’s experiences, no one denies that these atrocities took place.
Some memoirs, like Alexandra Fuller’s Don’t Let’s Go To the Dogs Tonight or Ruth Reichl’s Garlic and Sapphires, are just great stories, so whether they turn out to be perfectly factual or not is not terribly important. (Those elements of them that ring true are just as valuable as elements of novels that ring true: very valuable!)
With other memoirs, such as Gandhi’s or Nelson Mandela’s, much of what I’m seeking is to learn from the personal integrity and experience of this individual, so if I learned that these were consciously fabricated, I would be disappointed.
Ultimately, I believe all memoirs have an element of fiction, whether consciously constructed or not. We humans just don’t remember that well, and our perceptions of what we experience involve so many assumptions that ultimately we’re each writing our own novel. So maybe my novel can learn from someone else’s novel.
David Evans' personal blog 
I’m so glad to have found your site. Will be spending more time here!
Beth
Welcome!
I agree completely with your perspective. All memoirs have fictionalized elements whether it is intended or not; as you said, our memories just aren’t that perfect (some cultures are better than others, particularly when there is a rich oral tradition).
I don’t think there should be a comparison between the inconsistencies of Rigoberta’s memoir, and possibly Beah’s, and that of James Frey.
I think the three have different purposes behind the inconsistencies. Rigoberta was – I think – trying to further political purposes (they were good political purposes, but still political purposes). Beah may have made some mistakes or may have embellished a little in the context of telling a good story. (I know Beah has cited the rich oral tradition as giving him good memory, but I wouldn’t be surprised if rich oral traditions also led to people being good at embellishing and evolving the stories.)
Frey – it seems – was just trying to sell books. That said, his story resonated with a lot of people (before they found out it was false). I’m inclined to feel like whatever felt true before was still true after, independent of the author’s particular intent.
Beah has lied in his book about quite a number of essential things. He has gone on the offensive when confronted with the inconsistencies. There can be no doubt that the inconsistencies raise serious questions about the book’s claims. He has, therefore lied, but also been given an opportunity to confess to its faults, and in my mind that makes him an author who is now wilfully lying twice over. I really wish the literary, and media establishment as well as the general population would come to the same conclusion that many of us have…that we have heard enough form this cad and spinner of deceptions.
[…] on whether it matters if Ishmael Beah was telling the truth A few weeks ago I blogged about whether it was important if Ishmael Beah’s account was not entirely accurate is his memoir A […]
Yes, it matters if Beah is lying.It matters because Beah is not just another “child soldier”; he has made himself the spokesperson of all child soldiers the world over. If he is lying, and the evidence is very clear that he is, he’s impugning the evidence of each and every child soldier. And that is his real crime, not his self-promotion from the book he wrote. If he’d called it a “novel”,nobody would have minded.