31st January 2006, 12:43 PM
If he was advertising it as fiction, that would be one thing. That's like doing a seance under the guide of a magician doing a stage trick.
What he did was claim that the story was accurate, and that is the problem. If he makes that claim, he must abide by it and be honest. Otherwise, if he intends on writing fiction, then he must make it clear it is fiction. That's what is the issue here. If the lesson stands on it's own, then it can stand being sold as fiction.
That said, if he had been honest about the book being a work of fiction we wouldn't even be having this discussion.
To say it was honest and not embellished at all, despite whether or not that is common practice, is still just as desceptive as a magician with a parlor trick trying to con people out of money by claiming they really can talk with ghosts.
What he did was claim that the story was accurate, and that is the problem. If he makes that claim, he must abide by it and be honest. Otherwise, if he intends on writing fiction, then he must make it clear it is fiction. That's what is the issue here. If the lesson stands on it's own, then it can stand being sold as fiction.
That said, if he had been honest about the book being a work of fiction we wouldn't even be having this discussion.
To say it was honest and not embellished at all, despite whether or not that is common practice, is still just as desceptive as a magician with a parlor trick trying to con people out of money by claiming they really can talk with ghosts.
"On two occasions, I have been asked [by members of Parliament], 'Pray, Mr. Babbage, if you put into the machine wrong figures, will the right answers come out?' I am not able to rightly apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such a question." ~ Charles Babbage (1791-1871)