I never thought I'd like to see the day when a political blogger makes a big point about someone getting a new literary agent.

Is this the new litmus tests for presidential candidates -- No switching literary agents!!!

Jacob, take a deep breath...did you get the memo? Hate is out this season, unity is in.

Wow.  Seriously, this is worth blogging about?  

You must have a phenomenally boring life and large expanses of time to kill.

Precious time from your life to write that.

If you knew anything about writing, you would know how cannot encompass every detail. You combine, elide, and ABOVE ALL edit. So you tell the larger truth that way. Simple really.

Don't go there with this as some kind of scandal. Have you read Hillary's autobiography? How much did she actually write?

Maybe you need another site to post this. I'd suggest a republican one now that democratic party is unifying around the nominee...

Who happens to have written his own book and, in case you missed it, is probably one of most literate candidates for president you've ever had.

Now, this is an amazing piece from that NYT article, demonstrating how Obama was recognized as a brilliant mind and how he was recruited to teach at one of the top law schools in the country.

Mr. Obama was given an office to write in at the University of Chicago through a surprising connection. Douglas G. Baird, a professor who was head of the law school's appointments committee, had learned of Mr. Obama from Michael W. McConnell, a conservative constitutional scholar then at Chicago whom President Bush would later make a federal judge.

"I don't remember his exact words, but it was something to the effect that, `Well, in fact, I want to write this book.' What he really wanted was the Virginia Woolf equivalent of a clean, well lighted room." So Professor Baird got him one, a small office near the law library, along with a law school fellowship that Professor Baird hoped might later lead to his full-time teaching.

I noticed that too, normally it's either fiction or non-fiction. there is a new kind of history that allows some making up of stuff, but it's not quite acceptable, or at least it's still controversial, but that's not writing about your own life, it's about real history, from some time where no one really knows anymore.  Totally strange, glad someone picked up on it.  I'd like to know if agents like this kind of thing. I suppose he wrote an introduction saying he'd made some of it up, and so it isn't really non-fiction, but a fictionalized autobiography (is there such a category?)  

Yawn. Troll. Not even a very good one; this is particularly unconvincing. To be an effective troll, you at least have to raise the ire of some Obama supporters, or choose a topic that might ensnare some rational Clinton supporters.

This part is also quite impressive:

Mr. Obama completed "The Audacity of Hope" in the summer of 2006. This time, he distributed drafts to several dozen friends and Senate staff members, many of whom now advise his campaign. They included David Axelrod, his chief political strategist; Anthony Lake, who was a national security adviser for President Bill Clinton; Gene Sperling, a former economic adviser to Mr. Clinton; and Samantha Power, who recently stepped down as a foreign policy adviser to Mr. Obama after calling his opponent, Mrs. Clinton, "a monster."

"He wrote very polished first drafts," said Cass R. Sunstein, a University of Chicago law professor who read drafts of chapters on the Constitution and economic policy. "He was very clear to me that these were drafts on which he hoped for comments. I wrote very detailed comments. And afterwards he accepted a small minority of my comments. I gave him some potential formulations for what he might write. He always put it in his own words. Not once did he use my words."

You obviously didn't get the memo that we Democrats (and the MSM) are all one big happy family now.

i fart in your general direction.

Only these lyrics fit a bit better:

This was a triumph.
I'm making a note here: HUGE SUCCESS.
It's hard to overstate my satisfaction.
I'm so CONCERNED
I do what I must
because I can.
For the 'good' of all of us.
Except the ones who are calm.
But there's lots sense crying over every mistake.
You just keep on being 'concerned' till you run out of cake.
And the Doubt gets sowed.
And you annoy the bold
For the people who are still calm.

I'm not even concerned.
I'm being so insincere right now.
Even though you broke my talking points.
And mocked me.
And tore my points into pieces.
And threw every piece into a fire.
As they burned it hurt because I was so concerned for you!

Now these points of "data" make a beautiful line.
And we're out of talking points.
We're concerned all the time.
So I'm GLaD. I got concerned.
Think of all the things we tried
on the people who are still bold.
Go ahead and leave me.
I think I prefer to stay concerned.
Now who will I vote for...?
Maybe r0n pav1!!
THAT WAS A JOKE.
HAHA. FAT CHANCE.
Anyway, this concern is great.
It's so delicious and moist.
Look at me still talking
when there's doubt to be sown.
When I look out there, it makes me GLaD I'm concerned.
I've diaries to right.
There is logic to fight.
from the people who are still bold.
And believe me I am still concerned.
I'm doing not so well and I'm still Concerned.
I feel CONCERNED but you're still calm.
While you're calm I'll be still concerned.
And when you're victorious I will be still concerned.
STILL CONCERNED, still concerned

Your diary makes Fox News look credible.

Quotes you intentionally left out in order to slant your post:

"His memoir is, as one publisher put it, "the single most vetted book in American politics right now." Written at a time when Mr. Obama says he was thinking less about a career in politics than about simply writing a good book, it leaves an impression of candidness and authenticity that gives it much of its power. Reporters have questioned Mr. Obama's use of fictional techniques like composite characters, but some editors and critics say that is common in memoirs."

In the introduction, Mr. Obama acknowledged his use of pseudonyms, composite characters, approximated dialogue and events out of chronological order. He was writing at a time well before a recent series of publishing scandals involving fabrication in memoirs. "He was trying to be careful of people's feelings," said Deborah Baker, the editor on the first paperback edition of the book. "The fact is, it all had a sort of larger truth going on that you couldn't make up."

about next week is that people like you will have lost.  

I took the time to read your other concerned diaries and as all others it lacks accurate context, partial quotes and other assorted desperate acts.

By the way, I hope you enjoyed his book, I did. (without a ghost writer)

The problem with responding to being baited is one ends up sounding even more idiotic and angry than the baiter.  Better to just step back I think and let people rant and vent.

http://vermontersforobama.org/?s=kilmead e

THIS IS NOT TRUE

Obama's original introduction acknowledged the composite characters. NOT THE NEW ONE. HE NEVER TRIED TO PASS it OFF AS FACT.

Which is good, since we wrote about a roommate who did hard drugs, among other things.

The new intro/preface is here, under the "feature" tab.

Furthermore, your disloyalty quote comes from the former head of Obama's first publishing company.

I have an agent and everything. ;)

Okay, a couple of points.

Dumping the agent who got him that deal is indeed disloyal. The question is, is this consistent with a larger pattern in Obama's career?

Second thing. James Frey tried to sell his "memoir" as fiction - he was upfront in telling his agent and the publishing company that though the book was based on his life, he himself considered it a novel. Once the decision had been made to publish it as a memoir, he bought into his own fictionalized life story. That was what got him in trouble.

Sure, combining characters, exaggerating events, all of those things happen when attempting to write history. Sometimes this is because we don't know the facts of what happened, sometimes it's because "the facts" are subject, and sometimes it's because the historian in question has an agenda that he/she is attempting to promote.

The fact that the new version of Obama's "autobiography" is published with this foreword suggests to me a significant divergence from "facts" and events in his life as they are commonly agreed upon.

He was trying to create a certain life story, to present himself as a character with certain attributes.

I'm not comfortable with it, personally. That's why I write fiction, and label it as such.

but who gives a sh*t? I mean, really. I haven't read the book, but if your point is that he lied and/or embellished, need I remind you that all politicians (and indeed all "regular people") do it? Half the Obama supporters around here just couldn't shut up about Tulza-gate, and that annoyed the hell out of me. I don't have any desire to turn around and nitpick every little fact in his book to try to determine whether he was lying, embellishing, telling the truth, or "misremembering".

And let's compare to how Hillary wrote her life story:

/January 8, 2001
Media Talk; Mrs. Clinton Seeks Ghostwriter for Memoirs
By DAVID D. KIRKPATRICK - NY Times

Now that Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton has sold the rights to publish her memoirs for $8 million, who will she pick to help write it, and how much will that person be paid?

Whomever she hires will face a delicate job: producing a manuscript that balances Mrs. Clinton's priorities with those of her publishers at Simon & Schuster, who must approve the book. Mrs. Clinton may hope for a book that advances her political career. Simon & Schuster, of course, aims to sell books.

Some of Mrs. Clinton's previous collaborations have been rocky. People who have worked with her say she took a decidedly active role in her previous books. Both Barbara Feinman, an author hired for Mrs. Clinton's ''It Takes a Village,'' and Cheryl Merser, hired for ''Invitation to the White House,'' left the projects before Mrs. Clinton considered them finished. Ms. Merser parted amicably, and Ms. Feinman bitterly. In both cases, Mrs. Clinton thoroughly overhauled their manuscripts with the help of aides.

Still, dozens of hopeful writers have already applied for the job of helping shape her intriguing memoir. Simon & Schuster has sent Mrs. Clinton a tall stack of potential collaborators' previous books for her perusal. Within the next month, she is expected to interview candidates and pick one. People involved say she is likely to pick a woman.

The more than two dozen writers under consideration include journalists, novelists, and professional collaborators. One is Linda Bird Franke, a former journalist and author who has worked on books by Geraldine Ferraro, Rosalynn Carter and several other prominent women. She was also a Clinton delegate to the Democratic National Convention. Others whose names have come up include William Novak, who kicked off a ghost-writing boom with his work on ''Iacocca.'' Another likely candidate is Jane Scovell, who collaborated with Kitty Dukakis, among others. Mrs. Clinton also remains on good terms with Linda Kulman, a senior writer at U.S. News & World Report, who helped assemble Mrs. Clinton's anthology of letters to the first family's pets. People at Simon & Schuster asked the journalist and author Anna Quindlen if she was interested; she declined.

Lissa Muscatine, an aide to Mrs. Clinton who has worked as a reporter for The Washington Post, is helping Mrs. Clinton with the selection process and may help write the book herself, say people involved. All the potential ghostwriters either could not be reached for comment, or declined the opportunity to do so.

People involved say the most a collaborator for Mrs. Clinton's book will receive is probably about $500,000. Although that seems stingy next to the $8 million advance, it is near the top of flat fees paid to collaborators. In contrast, those who sign on before a proposal is sold often make half the author's advance.
DAVID D. KIRKPATRICK /
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.ht ml?res=9E01E3DF153AF93BA35752C0A9679C8B6 3&sec=&spon=&pagewanted=prin t

Another lame diary by a deadender cheered on by the the usual suspects.

yawn! wake me up when this is over.

This is an interesting blog post about Obama's time working in NYC, from the perspective of a former coworker.  

http://www.analyzethis.net/blog/2005/07/ 09/barack-obama-embellishes-his-resume/

I do think its a little weird that nobody in the media has really systematically taken a look at these things.  Personally, I don't really care.  But he does seem to have embellished quite a bit, shaping a dramatic narrative arc out of what was likely a pretty mundane experience with this company.

I'm confused....was Hillary's version of Tuzla right in her book or in her stump speech?

How can this obvious troll diary and hit piece be recc'ed 19 times by now?

"The only thing that would be really 'unusual for Barack Obama' would be holding him to the same standards that apply to ordinary people like you and me."

This was an insightful and poignant synapsis of one of the problems I see with the unmitigated deference to Barack Obama.  His adoring treatment by the media and unquestioning loyalty in his fan base sets off the exact same alarms I felt during George W. Bush's 2000 and 2004 campaigns.  It's a different emperor, but I still don't see the clothes.  

In a few years most reasonable minds will run out of excuses for Barack Obama, just as the nation has for George W. Bush.  I can only hope he doesn't take the whole party down with him.  

This diarist is obviously just looking for fault in this situation.  Plenty of writers look for another editor if they don't get a good book deal.  Perhaps she didn't offer him enough, perhaps she didn't want his second book, Perhaps she ripped him off concerning royalties.  Anyone can create a scenario if they're looking for it.  I know it's difficult, but eventually it becomes necessary to use factual information rather than conjecture.

And as far as "lying" in a biography is concerned, in the contemporary oral, written and visual storytelling tradition of western countries it is rational for those of us with half an imagination to create a narrative structure out of our lives.  

It's been verified by psychologists that the older we get the more we filter out details that we find inconsequential or even inconsistent with the tales that we create about our lives.

This isn't so much lying as it is a way to create a logical and cohesive image of our history, beliefs and overall worldview.  Why do you think older people have such great stories with epic hardships, trumphs and grand conclusions?  

It's unreasonable to suggest that older people are disqualified from writing biographies because of this tendency. As long as all of the factual information is correct, it's up to the individual to create their own narrative.  After all most of the public reads them for a dual purpose: to learn about incidents and time period and also for the unique perspectives that they offer.

I read this diary, and then I read all the links.  The diarist grossly mischaracterizes a NYTimes article, even including the word "new" in his quote about the introduction to "Dreams From My Father."  Although a new introduction was written for the republication of the autobiography, it's clear that the ORIGINAL introduction acknowledged the use of composite characters and out of sequence storylines.

Also, a composite character made up of two or more people you know in order to hide the identity of both is different from a "made up" person.  The memoir is far from "fake."

By the way, your link to Slate about fake memoirs does not mention either Obama or his books.

At some point the Obama excuse bucket will run empty and the Obama excusers will simply mumble to themselves.

The diarist, like Oprah, clearly does not understand memoir.