"The Match" book description

[Dan King]

Tom Huckaby writes:
it was so obviously historical fiction, I don't care what he or his publishers call it.

Frost believes he is writing non-fiction. His publisher believes he is writing non-fiction. His fans believe he is writing non-fiction. I believed he was writing non-fiction (very poorly.) The only one who seems to be making the claim he is writing fiction is you.

People keep diaries and talk about their feelings all the time. It isn't impossible to write about peoples inner-feelings as a non-fiction writer. It just requires work and crediting sources.

I've seen numerous critiques of Frost's books where readers have said they learned new things. But there is no way of knowing if it is new historical facts or just information coming from Frost's imagination. What difference does it make in the grand scheme of things if 5,000 people lined Highway 1 to watch the match or not? As long as it makes an interesting story! Why do you care?

Cheers,
Grandan King

Anybody can make history. Only a great man can write it.
 --Oscar Wilde

[Dan King]

Robert Thompson writes:
That said, he's one of the few writers to bring major attention to golf design. As he told me, Cypress is treated like a character....

The problem for many writers writing about golf design is that have to bother with research, something that often takes time. Many of them could pump out a lot more words on design if all that was needed was to make up crap. Find enough gullible people, and you've brought plenty of attention to golf design.

What if Cypress wasn't a character?

Cheers,
Grandan King

History will be kind to me for I intend to write it.
 --Winston Churchill

[Tom Huckaby]

Tom Huckaby writes:
it was so obviously historical fiction, I don't care what he or his publishers call it.

Frost believes he is writing non-fiction. His publisher believes he is writing non-fiction. His fans believe he is writing non-fiction. I believed he was writing non-fiction (very poorly.) The only one who seems to be making the claim he is writing fiction is you.

People keep diaries and talk about their feelings all the time. It isn't impossible to write about peoples inner-feelings as a non-fiction writer. It just requires work and crediting sources.

I've seen numerous critiques of Frost's books where readers have said they learned new things. But there is no way of knowing if it is new historical facts or just information coming from Frost's imagination. What difference does it make in the grand scheme of things if 5,000 people lined Highway 1 to watch the match or not? As long as it makes an interesting story! Why do you care?

Cheers,
Grandan King

Anybody can make history. Only a great man can write it.
 --Oscar Wilde

Well, it does remain exceedingly strange to me that something so obviously NOT non-fiction can be sold as such by anyone.  

But maybe I'm just that much smarter than the entire world?

Since that can't be correct, I fall back on people believing what they want to believe.

And I continue to believe that Greatest Game was a hell of a fun read, and no historical errors bothered me at all.

As for the rest though, as is usually the case, you make great points.  I know you are basically correct about all of it, and this type of thing SHOULD bother me.

But why is it that it doesn't?

Because for me, fun trumps all.

TH

[Phil Benedict]

I get really exorcised when Rudy Giuliani makes up data about his tenure as mayor of New York, but Mark Frost's inaccuracies just don't bother me that much, although I must admit that the only one I could pick out for myself in the Match was the statement that Tom Watson won 7 majors (he won .

As far as the Greatest Game is concerned, the story is just so compelling that I felt Frost performed a service just by retelling it.  I did object to the addition of a love interest in the movie, however.

[David Stamm]

For the record, I recommended this book a few weeks ago because it was entertaining. I've gotten so used to writers mucking up the facts that I hardly notice anymore. But that's no excuse. I agree that if someone sells himself as non-fiction, then get the facts right. The reason I bought it was because of the interview Venturi had given years ago about this match and it sounded incredible. Plus, any chance to read something about CPC is always a plus. With all these inaccuracies, I feel ashamed I recommended it and I need to pay more attention and not get so lazy with my reading. It's entertaining, nothing more.

[Tom Huckaby]

David - don't feel bad.  It's just the fellow writers themselves who complain about these things.  Us consumers need not have any issues.  And I'd say their complaints stem from envy at Frost's commercial success, but if I did I'd offend a few guys I consider friends, so of course I am not saying that.

Phil, my take on Greatest Game is exactly the same as yours - well said.  Hope I didn't doom you to the kids' table with me now.

 

[Dan King]

Tom Huckaby writes:
It's just the fellow writers themselves who complain about these things.  Us consumers need not have any issues.

Backtracking a bit?

It was you or your evil twin who wrote:
but I guess it took something hitting relatively close to home to get me bothered.

Because this DOES bother me.

Are you bothered or not bothered?

And I'd say their complaints stem from envy at Frost's commercial success, but if I did I'd offend a few guys I consider friends, so of course I am not saying that.

I'd say I'm one of Frost's biggest detractors, and it has nothing to do with envy of his success, though it does bother me when he gets attaboys such as this one:

Phil Benedict writes:
As far as the Greatest Game is concerned, the story is just so compelling that I felt Frost performed a service just by retelling it.

The story was compelling before Frost got near, the story is still compelling after Frost finished changing it.

or this one:
Robert Thompson writes:
That said, he's one of the few writers to bring major attention to golf design.

You know what would make WWII more interesting to read? If Adolph Hitler was Jewish. Wouldn't that add an interesting twist to WWII history? There is no reason to let the fact that he isn't Jewish get in the way of ignoring a good story. All you have to do is write it in a book, walla, compelling history books.

It's sad you golf nuts are so desperate for attention that you'll applaud no matter who pays attention to your game.

Cheers,
Grandan King

You can bend it and twist it... You can misuse and abuse it... But even God cannot change the Truth.
 --Michael Levy

[Bob_Huntley]

David - don't feel bad.  It's just the fellow writers themselves who complain about these things.  Us consumers need not have any issues.  And I'd say their complaints stem from envy at Frost's commercial success, but if I did I'd offend a few guys I consider friends, so of course I am not saying that.


 

Tom,

I am not a fellow writer but I am a stickler for the facts. The recent piece from the Week End Journal about the writer hooking his ball into the sea off of the first hole at Carnoustie was a palpable untruth. One blooper can be excused (but not by me) more than one and the article is consigned to the waste paper basket.

I await Mr Frost's mea culpa with interest.


Bob

[Tom Huckaby]

Grandan (love that name, btw):

I am bothered by what are reported to be inaccuracies in The Match, because they do hit close to home.  But they don't bother me enough to wholly renounce Frost and all his works (and empty promise - whoops, lapsed into an old Catholic thing there).

Are you SURE Frost's commercial success has nothing to do with things?

Come on, you can tell me.  It's OK.

TH

[Tom Huckaby]

David - don't feel bad.  It's just the fellow writers themselves who complain about these things.  Us consumers need not have any issues.  And I'd say their complaints stem from envy at Frost's commercial success, but if I did I'd offend a few guys I consider friends, so of course I am not saying that.


 

Tom,

I am not a fellow writer but I am a stickler for the facts. The recent piece from the Week End Journal about the writer hooking his ball into the sea off of the first hole at Carnoustie was a palpable untruth. One blooper can be excused (but not by me) more than one and the article is consigned to the waste paper basket.

I await Mr Frost's mea culpa with interest.


Bob

Bob:  you can live happily as the exception to my rule here.

 

[Dan Kelly]

I'd say their complaints stem from envy at Frost's commercial success, but if I did I'd offend a few guys I consider friends, so of course I am not saying that.

And I you did say that, I would say (in the words of a friend of mine, named Joe Soucheray):

B as in B, S as in S.

I have a request:

Get rid of the stupid smileys, Tom, and say what you really think!

P.S. You didn't offend me. You pissed me off!

[Phil Benedict]

Phil Benedict writes:
As far as the Greatest Game is concerned, the story is just so compelling that I felt Frost performed a service just by retelling it.

The story was compelling before Frost got near, the story is still compelling after Frost finished changing it.

I commute to New York 5 days a week and need something to read on the train.  Along comes a book about something I was vaguely aware of that entertained me for a couple of days while I schlepped into work (not too enthusiastically).  Could someone have done it better than Frost?  Probably, but nobody else did in book-length form that I am aware of.  Am I mis-informed about the story recounted in the Greatest Game because Frost is my only source?  Maybe.  

But the basic story gave me so much pleasure that I am happy he wrote it regardless of the damage he has done to accuracy.

[Tom Huckaby]

Dan:

I live by the smiley.  Sorry, my friend.

To that end, I am just having fun with this.  But since you asked, here is what I really think - no smileys, no bs.

1.  Greatest Game was a very fun read and at least for me, did flesh out a story I only knew the barest details about.  Dan pointed out historical inaccuracies that bothered him, but didn't change a thing for me.  I also really could care less how it is labelled, as for me it was obviously historical fiction at best given he quotes from inside the minds of people long since dead.

2. The Match seems to be making errors about an area I tend to know a bit about, and tells a story I really don't care that much about, so not having read it yet.... well... if these errors are correct, well they do bother me.  But not that much such that I'd call the guy out and want to kick his ass, as my friend Dan seems to want to.

3.  The part about you writers being jealous was just a fun attempt to call you out, you know, shit-giving?  I didn't think it possible to piss any of you off - least of whom YOU, but if so, well then I apologize.

There, no smileys.  That's the way it is.

TH

[Dan Kelly]

My wife read it, thinking it really happened to this guy, and was enthralled by it. I think she would have enjoyed the read every bit as much if the publisher had called it, accurately, fiction.

You know her immeasurably better than I do -- but I doubt it.

[George Pazin]

What always bugs me about situations like this - modifying historical events to sell a story - is simply that the original story is usually more than good enough to sell. The writer is just being lazy, imho (and I know all about laziness!).

There is pretty much nothing he can say to justify his errors, other than he just didn't care enough to find out the real facts, or thought too highly of his own version to present the real facts. Either sucks, imho.

No envy, no smileys, just pure unadulterated annoyance.

[Dan Kelly]

Some trial lawyer somewhere is trying desperately to find a plaintiff who's suffered irreparable damage....

Now THAT'S non-fiction!

 

So is this -- from www.amlpsettlement.com:

Welcome to the Information Web Site for the

A Million Little Pieces Litigation
www.amlpsettlement.com
(Last updated on May 31, 2007)

This website was established to provide information in connection with the settlement of a lawsuit concerning the book A Million Little Pieces.

The proposed settlement involves persons who purchased the book A Million Little Pieces in any format (including, but not limited to, in hardback, paperback, cassette, CD, or any other electronic media), on or before January 26, 2006.

The Class Notice and other documents explain the settlement, the benefits it provides, and the options that you have, including how to submit a Claim Form. Claim Forms are due by October 1, 2007. If you would like to download a Claim Form online, please click here.

You may obtain further information about this Settlement by clicking on the appropriate link(s) at this website. For more detailed information, please click on the Class Notice.

Certain documents are in Adobe Acrobat PDF format. If your computer is not already configured with the Acrobat software to view and print these documents, you may get Acrobat for free by clicking the logo below.


   

[SL_Solow]

Tom;  I have been thinking about this for awhile.  You know I am not a writer and I spend little or no time envying others' success.  I think I have figured out why this type of work bothers me so much.

I place a significant value on truth.  I know that may sound a bit dramatic but it really troubles me that we are prepared to let someone distort the truth for the purpose of our entertainment.  Its probably irrelevant that the embellishments weren't needed to make the story interesting.

But it is relevant that the errors could have been avoided by careful research and editing.  Either the author was too lazy to get it right or he didn't care.  I am not sure which is worse.

As I previously noted, had the author acknowledged that this was a work of fiction based on historical facts seeking to interpret what the parties must have been thinking/feeling and had he accurately described the events, I would have had no problem.  But I suspect the book would not have sold as well.  In my view honesty was traded for profit.  Not the first time, but not a trade I choose to make or reward.  Nor do I find it entertaining.

[Dan Kelly]

Tom;  I have been thinking about this for awhile.  You know I am not a writer and I spend little or no time envying others' success.  I think I have figured out why this type of work bothers me so much.

I place a significant value on truth.  I know that may sound a bit dramatic but it really troubles me that we are prepared to let someone distort the truth for the purpose of our entertainment.  Its probably irrelevant that the embellishments weren't needed to make the story interesting.

But it is relevant that the errors could have been avoided by careful research and editing.  Either the author was too lazy to get it right or he didn't care.  I am not sure which is worse.

As I previously noted, had the author acknowledged that this was a work of fiction based on historical facts seeking to interpret what the parties must have been thinking/feeling and had he accurately described the events, I would have had no problem.  But I suspect the book would not have sold as well.  In my view honesty was traded for profit.  Not the first time, but not a trade I choose to make or reward.  Nor do I find it entertaining.

Bravo.

[Dan Kelly]

I didn't think it possible to piss any of you off - least of whom YOU, but if so, well then I apologize.

Apology accepted.

[Bob_Huntley]

Tom;  I have been thinking about this for awhile.  You know I am not a writer and I spend little or no time envying others' success.  I think I have figured out why this type of work bothers me so much.

SL,

You should be.

Bob

[Bill Shamleffer]

These are GOLF books!  These are not books about REAL history.  Whatever inaccuracies were written, or whatever thoughts the writer made up for the story line, none of this is about real life.

When I read about wars, presidents, inventors, industrialists, I will expect the writer to do impeccable research.

But when I read about athletes or actors, all I expect is that the writer accurately portray the essence of the people being written about.  But in the end, these types of books are just entertainment about entertainers.

[Tom Huckaby]

Shel:

As always we can count on you for wisdom and balance.  I understand now quite well why all of this bothers you.

But let me ask you this:  did you read "Greatest Game?"

If so, then please do point out what historical errors bothered you, if you could...

See, that's the thing.  Dan was bothered by what he saw as massive historical errors.  I can understand that; he's into golf history.  But I'm not exactly a slouch myself when it comes to golf history Judge, at least relative to most golfers, and for sure relative to the general public.

And I never noticed a single error until Dan pointed them out to me in discussions here.

So you see... well... I get that writers ought to be more diligent and careful and try harder.  I get the principles here.  Truly I do.

It just seems like so much ado about so little to me, that well... I tend to give shit rather than take it all that seriously.

Pin me down and force me to take this seriously, and yes I can see Frost should have done better.

I just kinda refuse to get all that hot and bothered about it.

And that extends to the current book as well.  Though an error like putting Highway 1 next to Cypress does bother me, well... like I said, it doesn't bother me enough to want to kick the guy's ass, or wholly condemn him.

I guess this is difficult to explain.  Lord knows you did a hell of a lot better job explaining your position than I have with mine.  Yours also is much easier to defend.

Oh well. I yam what I yam.

TH

[George Pazin]

These are GOLF books!  These are not books about REAL history.  Whatever inaccuracies were written, or whatever thoughts the writer made up for the story line, none of this is about real life.

Non-fiction is supposed to be about real life. Not some lazy mischaracterization, but actual real life.

[Dan Kelly]

Man: "Son, why are smashing your head against that wall?'

Son: "Because it feels so good when I stop!"

I stop now.

Oh, and it does feel good.

[Tom Huckaby]

Dan:  come on, don't bail on me now!

But I understand.  Sides aren't tending to budge at all in this issue.  Such happens in here.  Oh well.

But maybe, if you want to take a couple more whacks at the wall, well....

Did you read Greatest Game?

If so, did you notice errors in it?

That seems to be the real sticking point between me and Dan King.  If errors are in that book - and he sure pointed them out to me years ago when this first came up - they seemed so inconsequential and so trivial that well... I couldn't see getting that hot and bothered about it.

I guess I have no absolute love for the truth.

TH