One is, as a nonfiction writer yourself, would you prefer not to have your books quoted out of context in that length between "this is a great sentence" and "outside the bounds of fair use"? Is context enough of an issue for what you write that you'd just not prefer to see longer quotes pulled?
The other is...a bit more problematic for me, I guess. If someone reports in their memoir that their mother called them worthless scum, when in fact she called them worthless slime and they just thought scum read better, that's one thing. If someone reports that she called them worthless scum when what she said was "pick up your room, please, dear," that seems like another. I agree that memoir should not be read as a journalistic report, but there's a big difference between the kind sales clerk wanting to help but being shackled by the system and a sneering sales clerk who belittles women who wear larger sizes but still gets them the available clothing. Maybe the introduction to her book addresses this question; I don't know. But I do know that the general point isn't necessarily the same, and I do know that many of the people commenting on this snippet including the woman who reposted it did not seem to be reading under the same reader protocols as you were, even leaving aside background in the author's work. She commented that it was sad that a department store should behave like that: not just that size prejudices are sad, but that the specific presumed fact was sad.
An author can't be responsible for all misreadings of her intent, but memoirs that seem to take no account of verifiable data points (like the point someone else mentioned about Chinese women's foot-binding and whether it was voluntary, like the department store, etc.) bother me, especially when I see people responding to them as people clearly have.
no subject
One is, as a nonfiction writer yourself, would you prefer not to have your books quoted out of context in that length between "this is a great sentence" and "outside the bounds of fair use"? Is context enough of an issue for what you write that you'd just not prefer to see longer quotes pulled?
The other is...a bit more problematic for me, I guess. If someone reports in their memoir that their mother called them worthless scum, when in fact she called them worthless slime and they just thought scum read better, that's one thing. If someone reports that she called them worthless scum when what she said was "pick up your room, please, dear," that seems like another. I agree that memoir should not be read as a journalistic report, but there's a big difference between the kind sales clerk wanting to help but being shackled by the system and a sneering sales clerk who belittles women who wear larger sizes but still gets them the available clothing. Maybe the introduction to her book addresses this question; I don't know. But I do know that the general point isn't necessarily the same, and I do know that many of the people commenting on this snippet including the woman who reposted it did not seem to be reading under the same reader protocols as you were, even leaving aside background in the author's work. She commented that it was sad that a department store should behave like that: not just that size prejudices are sad, but that the specific presumed fact was sad.
An author can't be responsible for all misreadings of her intent, but memoirs that seem to take no account of verifiable data points (like the point someone else mentioned about Chinese women's foot-binding and whether it was voluntary, like the department store, etc.) bother me, especially when I see people responding to them as people clearly have.