Check out this comment in the Times from the agent of another fictional "memoir" --
“It is not an industry capable of checking every last detail,” said Ira Silverberg, an agent
Of course, that's bs. He should see the Fact Checking Department at The New Yorker which does tend to get less egg on its face than some of these other rags. The Times, in particular, has been scammed like this a couple of times, including by their own reporters! (Can you imagine getting a journalism gig like writing for the Times, and then making up your stories?)
As a retired (small town, but award winning) journalist, this story just makes me see red. What is the matter with these people? They obviously have talent, but they are liars, no, worse, sociopaths.
Peggy could have written a novel about this, but it would have been much harder to sell. She could have written her own memoir, about a girl who grew up in Sherman Oaks running with the gangs (as she appears to have done. I think) but really, her race and background would detract from her street "cred" and again, harder to sell the book.
The funny thing is, with Riverhead pulling copies as fast as they can, that the book becomes instantly collectible and they could sell a whole lot more copies now than if there had not been this scandal.
I hope Miss Peggy has to give back every penny and I hope they sue her for fraud. Mind you, her editor bears some blame. They didn't even bother to check with L.A. County Children's Services to see if this person (or these people) ever existed!
Argh. Most of the stories that run on this site make me sick, make me terribly sad, make me tired. This one makes me furious. As clearly it does you, also, Steve. But I think that's because we're scribes. Others are probably not nearly so hot under the collar.
The one thing I'm not clear on, is if she actually lived as this Margaret B. Jones character, or if that was just a charade she put on for the Times reporter.
Another one? We're up to two a month now! I just got done reading about 71-year-old Misha Defonseca last week. She's the one who claimed to have lived with wolves when she was 4 years old during the Holocaust...turned out to be fiction, she wasn't even Jewish..
Great article on all of the recent 'busted' memoir writers on the NYT Paper Cuts blog: http://tinyurl.com/38vhza
Larkin, you're right about why it makes me mad. I'm probably prey to a little class bias of my own. I grew up in a racially-mixed, poor rural area. Life wasn't dangerous compared to South Central, but poverty is poverty, too (to be clear -- we were poor, but my folks were brilliant at making us forget it, in many ways).
Let me tell you all -- I'm pretty sure this woman was stranger than anyone even knows, yet. I'm hanging on to the good stuff right now, but I think it'll come out, eventually.
Don't STOP now, Steve H! Go with the REALLY GOOD stuff. I mean, there's 4 years of material over at livejournal? And who knows where else, eh if its also yahoo & MySpace.
Like, who's the father of her daughter? Why did the sister so quickly drop the dime (47 year old hatin' on 33 year old? 1st wife dau hatin' on 2nd wife dau perhaps)? Where are her parents? What's Ronald in for?
And what's this about a BOGUS non-profit? It took in money? Got a grant for doing nothing? Hey, True Crime here tends to be violent, but breaking California corporation laws and perhaps SEC/Fed laws is a whole other story.
Let it roll. Have some FUN.
['cause you got another Georgia-girl heart-breaker coming up out of Chapel Hill just now]
PS My daughter worked only for Berkley & Ace imprints at Penguin/Putnam. Riverhead was on a whole other floor and there's been turnover. She knows NOTHING!
[Her exact words. "You would think they would have learned after Frey. Its just so much easier dealing with authors who do medieval who-dun-its or conjur up vampiric Knights of the Round Table."]
Oh, it makes me furious too and not because I'm a writer, but because I really hate fakes and liars. I don't think her intentions were at all good or righteous.
The more I think about it, John, the more I agree with you.
In the end, she was just indulging in the most delusional, rank sort of attention-whoring imaginable.
Literary hoaxes such as this happen quite often. It is an easy way for an otherwise mediocre writer to distinguish him or herself.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/
Cat...Literary_hoaxes
This one reminds me a little of "J.T. Leroy":
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lau...ki/
Laura_Albert
Reminded me of both J.T. Leroy and James Frey. Literary hoaxes have made me laugh in the past (schadenfreude, I guess), but there was something more grating about this one. Anyone who reads that interview of Seltzer that was posted on Penguin's website at one time will start grinding their teeth, imho.
Actually, the J.T. LeRoy story is kind of fascinating in whole. The author actually toured with a shirttail relative posing as J.T. LeRoy (and the author as a kind of side-kick.) The papercuts link can take you to those stories. It's kind of like watching a car crash, hard to look away.
Thanks for your thoroughness with this post. I'm furious by this news. As a person who works with people who are from South Central Los Angeles, I've seen the real hardships people have gone through; it makes me so upset that this white girl (btw I'm a "white girl" too!) has the gall to pull this kind of stunt; there's many disenfranchised people I meet on a daily basis who have REAL stories to tell and probably will never have the opportunity to do so in a way that she had. Who the hell does she think she is? She's a complete fraud.
Actually, I think the real story is how Peggy met the Bloods. I think she's got some real gang pals, who told her their stories, and knew she was writing them down. Was it a scam? Maybe, but I think the stories are true, they're just not hers. Her MySpace is very interesting.
Peggy could have written a novel about this, but it would have been much harder to sell. She could have written her own memoir, about a girl who grew up in Sherman Oaks running with the gangs (as she appears to have done. I think) but really, her race and background would detract from her street "cred" and again, harder to sell the book.
Oh, yes, the Gangs of Sherman Oaks. LOL. The people she writes about wouldn't have jack to do socially with a plain-faced, self-righteous, New Age ecobrat like Peggy Seltzer. It appears whatever little knowledge she has comes from the Internet and brief slumming from the outside looking in.
Peggy Seltzer could not have sold a novel because she is a terrible writer. End of story.
The reason no one in publishing figured it out is because the publishing industry is composed exclusively of people who grew up in wealthy families. They have no bull detector when it comes to stories about the poor.
Peggy Seltzer is a filthy pig. I think it's been underplayed that one of her lies was about being sexually abused as a child. What an awful thing to lie about to get yourself some cheap sympathy and add drama to your story.
By the way, my work actually involves the child welfare system which she lied about being in. It's actually rare for blood relatives to sexually abuse their children. It's much more common for them to be abused by stepparents, stepsiblings, or in foster care. This is further evidence she really didn't know what the hell she was talking about when she made up that story. It wasn't her earnest effort to tell the true stories about voiceless others; it was a cheap ploy for success and attention.
They didn't even bother to check with L.A. County Children's Services to see if this person (or these people) ever existed!
This, they can't be blamed for. Child welfare matters are confidential by law.
Hey Olivia -- you've probably actually met some white women who surround themselves socially with members of the black underclass, especially men. Would you agree with me that those women look and act nothing like Peggy Seltzer? 
Holly,
You might reconsider your statement regarding "It's actually rare for blood relatives to sexually abuse their children." That's old information and no longer true at best; at worst it was never true to begin with and is responsible for for the myth that goes something along the lines of "People (or insert name here) would never do that (or insert abusive behavior here) to their own children".
They can and they do. In alarming proportions.
They didn't even bother to check with L.A. County Children's Services to see if this person (or these people) ever existed!
This, they can't be blamed for. Child welfare matters are confidential by law.
And maybe reconsider this one also. While many child welfare matters are "confidential" many others (ile. the identity of individuals serving as foster parents) are not.
Miss Peggy is a fraud, and she has exploited the plight of children in the welfare system for her own gain. I guess I don't see where making comments like "Peggy Seltzer is a filthy pig" adds to this thread.
Nor do I understand what you mean by "white women who surround themselves socially with members of the black underclass, especially men . . .act and look nothing like Peggy Seltzer" or how that could be construed as anything but racist.
As a white woman living in a predominantly black urban neighborhood (for choice) I can tell you that the white women I've seen who "surround themselves with members of the black underclass" run the gamut, just like they do anywhere else.
Nor do I understand what you mean by "white women who surround themselves socially with members of the black underclass, especially men . . .act and look nothing like Peggy Seltzer" or how that could be construed as anything but racist.
Wow, Larkin, you sure do wilt at the slightest challenge. That was pretty self-righteous. I don't consider it racist to remark that someone's dress and makeup and hair don't jive with the culture she claims to be a part of.
Especially when we're talking about a woman who put on a display for a Times reporter that included cooking pork necks and black-eyed peas, and serving Hennesey and Coke, to show how steeped she is in "black culture." There's no way to talk about this story without talking about race and culture. She dresses like an ecobrat granola hippie chick, and that is not what I've observed from the women who are what she pretended to be. Upper-class white granola trustafarians sometimes also target black people socially and romantically. That's who her dress and grooming resembles.
It appears you are emotionally invested in believing her intentions were noble, despite all evidence to the contrary.
Calling her a filthy pig gives vent to my anger and frustration at her phoniness and other privileged people's willingness to believe her. I think what she did is deeply immoral, but that just doesn't carry the contemptuous tone of insult she deserves.
Holly,
You might reconsider your statement regarding "It's actually rare for blood relatives to sexually abuse their children." That's old information and no longer true at best; at worst it was never true to begin with and is responsible for for the myth that goes something along the lines of "People (or insert name here) would never do that (or insert abusive behavior here) to their own children".
They can and they do. In alarming proportions.
It is not old information, it is my current observation based upon the caseload I carry. The definition of "alarming proportions" is of course subjective. However, it is much, much less common than abuse by non-related people in the home.
Holly wrote, "The reason no one in publishing figured it out is because the publishing industry is composed exclusively of people who grew up in wealthy families. They have no bull detector when it comes to stories about the poor."
I gotta say, I think you're exactly right, Holly. I wouldn't change a word of that statement.
That said, let's tone it down a little, please -- everyone. What Larkin wrote was pretty reasoned, if you really read it. It didn't strike me as heated or angry, but your response did.
Steve
Another thing that makes me angry is that this woman has a daughter. It appears she had this child deliberately as a single parent, perhaps to bolster her "street cred," and put her on public display in service of her lies. I hope there is a public shaming of Seltzer strong and lasting enough to prevent her daughter from adopting her mother's bad morals.
I just saw your comment, Steve. This Seltzer situation does push several of my buttons so that may be making me touchy.
While the continuing episodes of outright hoaxes in the publishing world are egregious, and this latest example is particularly offensive, I have no emotional investment in believing anything about Miss Seltzer. Certainly I never thought her work was "noble," I was simply presenting a variety of scenarios in which she might have legitimately published her book. As fiction.
It's unfortunate that someone who "works with the child welfare system" would find it appropriate to extrapolate the ire she feels towards a stranger into suppositions (not supported by fact) about the circumstances surrounding the birth of that person's child. This little girl deserves our sympathy rather than our contempt.
For the record, I don't think that talking about race or culture is racist. However, making sweeping generalizations about whole groups of people based on the color of their skin and their socio-economic status, is.
It's unfortunate that someone who "works with the child welfare system" would find it appropriate to extrapolate the ire she feels towards a stranger into suppositions (not supported by fact) about the circumstances surrounding the birth of that person's child. This little girl deserves our sympathy rather than our contempt.
For the record, I don't think that talking about race or culture is racist. However, making sweeping generalizations about whole groups of people based on the color of their skin and their socio-economic status, is.
OK, that's twice. Steve, I can't take this as anything less than self-righteous, unsupported posturing. She is using a patronizing, faux-compassionate tone to do it, but nevertheless these are fighting words. From another former reporter, no less.
A big part of this blog is about profiling. Now, suddently, it's racist to analyze the dress, makeup, and other behavior of someone who did a bad thing? It's suddenly racist to examine their culture, and how it might affect their behavior?
As for my "suppositions" about Seltzer conceiving and raising the girl out of wedlock, they are supported by the NYT articles Steve linked to. Given this woman's posturing in other matters, it's not a stretch to extend the suspicion about her motives to her motherhood. I did not say the "little girl" deserved contempt, I said her *mother* did. IF this mother tried to sell us this bill of goods, imagine what she's teaching her daughter.
I suspect what really bothers you about my comments is the dismissive remarks about upper-class granolas and phony white ecobrats. Those are the people who tend to brag smugly about dwelling voluntarily around minorities, as if that makes you one of them. You may share some cultural commonalities with Seltzer. But you know you won't get any sympathy for that beef, so you accuse me of racism and cruelty to children to try to claim the upper hand for yourself.
Let's take another look at Larkin's original comment:
They obviously have talent, but they are liars, no, worse, sociopaths.
Peggy could have written a novel about this, but it would have been much harder to sell. She could have written her own memoir, about a girl who grew up in Sherman Oaks running with the gangs (as she appears to have done. I think) but really, her race and background would detract from her street "cred" and again, harder to sell the book.
I will repeat my charge that Larkin is emotionally invested in this woman's intentions being noble. She made positive comments about Seltzer's talent and credibility (saying she probably did run with gangs, when there is no evidence to support this statement). She even suggested that Seltzer had a good novel in her about the subject, but faced prejudice from publishers for her whiteness. Apparently, I irked her by disagreeing with her assessment.
Holly, please back off, now. I'll just delete the entire exchange, Larkin's posts as well, if you don't. Couch it however you like, you're still trying to flame. You've both made interesting, intelligent, and insightful posts in the past, and I'd like for you to keep doing so, but I have enough problems with people trying to tongue-lash one another on my site as it is.
Thank you.
Steve
"... makeup and hair don't jive with the culture...."
Holly, the word is jibe, not jive.
Steve~o,
I read James Frey's book about his addiction and rehab thinking it was true and when I found out it was all a pack of lies I felt VIOLATED!
I am so very, very, very (did I say very?) glad that you wrote about this latest case of pathological~authorial lying. I would have hoped that anyone with a memoir in mind would think James Frey before fabricating something and saying it is NON FICTION.
This is a HUGE PROBLEM AND ISSUE that MUST BE ADDRESSED....and thank you Steve for starting out the conversation on this.
I think this is great. So here is a hat tip to you for scooping everyone I've definitely linked you and the Radar piece to my blog.
However, sure, you can ask "who the hell does she think she was?" Well, we already know the answer. She's a privileged white woman from Sherman Oaks who spun her writing talent into one big ass lie. She really must have started to believe that she could get away with it because this lie took years to construct and maintain. For sure, reading some of her quotes about education and seeing her posing with red rag piss me off royally because I grew up in South Central L.A. I know that the colors issue is no joke. I was lucky as my parents did shelter me from all of that and I got myself into and out of a good university, so to have her spinning negative yarns about education makes me livid. I just see that as one part of a bigger story. I'm not going to waste my time trying to figure out what psychological disorder Seltzer has to spin a lie of such pathological proportions.
The question of why didn't her publisher bother to check is very valid because people like Seltzer are going to test and push the limits and someone has to call them on it when they do. In this case, her publisher is trying to fall back on her signing a contract saying she'd tell the truth. What liar is going to start off by not signing that contract and not promising that their story was legit?
The reasoning behind that lame justification that "she said it was true!" is completely asinine. Liars swear they're telling the truth. You've got to check them out. To not do so is just foolish.
ExpatJane -- thanks for the links, for one thing. For another, you're right, about the privileged white woman part.
Something about growing up an underprivileged white kid must contribute to why this story pisses me off as it does. Just not sure how, yet.
I'm thinking for all of us kids who grew up on the less privileged side of the fence find this story to be personally offensive. It does feel like a slap to my real life to have this fraud accepted with no questions asked. If only I faced no questions or barriers. Wouldn't that be nice to have a memoir in the works with no questions asked?
Her gall does just irk me. How to classify it? I'm not sure, but I'm trying not to focus on her as much because people lie. Now her lie is of grand proportions. It is a maddening and condescending maze, but she's not the only one. We've got another memoir writer, Misha Defonseca, lying about wolves, Nazis and the Holocaust.
These stories seem to pop up every now and then. They serve to remind us that the folks in publishing in New York seem to exist in a strange bubble at times. Therefore, I want to focus on the publishing industry having a stellar screw up, looking at how exclusionary it must be to have had this memoir get to publication and suggest ways it can clean up its act.
It's absolutely ridiculous Seltzer got as far as she did.
,"... makeup and hair don't jive with the culture...."
Holly, the word is jibe, not jive.
Semolina G..
Oops. Thanks, Semolina. It's a common mistake but I still should have known better.
Therefore, I want to focus on the publishing industry having a stellar screw up, looking at how exclusionary it must be to have had this memoir get to publication and suggest ways it can clean up its act.
I had a Latina friend who was trying to get a nonfiction book published. Not really a memoir, more academic, but it did involve some experiences of hers. The process worked a bit differently than we'd thought. We imagined all the books get read, and then analyzed for quality and salability. But both agents and publishers seemed to heavily weigh the issue of what connections she might have who could help publicize the book. Their applications asked a lot about that.
The pitch process was a full-time job. I don't see how outsiders ever break in, frankly. And she was middle-class and well-educated. Someone who had really been through what Seltzer claimed to have been through would probably not be able to succesfully navigate that process.
I also get the sense that publishers and influential agents have plenty of talent within their insular circle, so they don't feel the need to explore outside for that rare diamond in the rough. Think about how many people try to write books, versus how many are any good. So it's more efficient and productive to focus on channels were the produce has been prescreened and comes from a selective pool.
It seems really easy for kids from Harvard, Yale, Princeton and other wealthy Eastern colleges to get published. I can see why it's tempting to focus on that population, as let's face it, its graduates probably produce better product than the average nobody. Going outside would be a lot of work for little comparative gain. Rather than bother with vetting random outsiders, the industry may be better off taking its lumps from the occasional Seltzer situation.
You're very welcome, Holly, and thank you for so graciously accepting (and responding to) the correction. No jive! 
IMO there is way too much focus in today's society on "selling a story" and not "telling one". And for the most part I blame the media and that the public buys into it so easily. Now the conundrum here is that I am one that supports tabloid magazines and such because I do buy them as my budget allows. I do feel that the ones I purchase are far better about fact checking. Steve, I know that you are one of the writers with integrity and respect for others. So they really do exist. The other type just gets more exposure. And that sucks for the real writers.
"Peggy could have written a novel about this, but it would have been much harder to sell. She could have written her own memoir, about a girl who grew up in Sherman Oaks running with the gangs (as she appears to have done. I think) but really, her race and background would detract from her street "cred" and again, harder to sell the book." (I can't get this to italicize sorry! User error but it's still not working 
)
I agree whole heartedly with this statement, Larkin. There are so many good writers out there that deserve to be published (clear nod here to Steve and I applaud you that you haven’t “sold your soul” to sell a book.) Maybe this will be like the backlash of the China-made- toy situation and folks will realize that true quality product is better in the end and we shouldn’t settle for pieces of crap that simply are easier and cheaper to get.
C+C Momma....
For italics, use the pointy brackets with an "i" in at the beginning of the part you want to italicize, and use the pointy brackets with a /i where you want them to stop.
There are so many good writers out there that deserve to be published (clear nod here to Steve and I applaud you that you haven’t “sold your soul” to sell a book.) Maybe this will be like the backlash of the China-made- toy situation and folks will realize that true quality product is better in the end and we shouldn’t settle for pieces of crap that simply are easier and cheaper to get.
I'll play devil's advocate now: Does anyone reading think there's a *real* person out there with Seltzer's story? I suspect no. Yes, there are certainly white girls raised by black foster families. I've seen some. None so far that made good in a way likely to impress the average book buyer, however.
There are certainly many white and black children in the foster system who go on to have decent lives. But would they have the colorful childhood stories Seltzer claimed? Would they have sold drugs in the street for gangs? Would they have been socially accepted by the criminal characters in Seltzer's book? I doubt it.
My point is that the reading public shares blame with the publishers. We don't want to read about average folks who have unglamorous problems and rise above them to lead unglamorous lives. We want to read about theatrical gangsters who graduate from fancy colleges and become stars with well-decorated homes. Reality doesn't jibe with the jive we want to read.
I guess I should have clarified my thoughts a little better. I do blame the reading public as well (myself included), but I also think that it is sad that often because of the lack of sensationalism great writers are not as easily published and/ or read.
In regards to the italized item - still can't get it to work for me, but thanks for the help Larking. Amazing that I can do architectual designs and renderings for a living but can't do a simple command like that! Oh well... I blame the time change.
C+C, it's natural to like true, exciting stories. Don't beat yourself up for liking celebrity gossip -- that's what celebrities are for, to entertain us. And we're all on this site because we like true stories.
The danger is when people aren't satisfied with the truth, because it's too messy and boring. So they stretch it. Or they eagerly swallow the stretched version.
I think she must be mentally ill? I am NOT saying that is an excuse by the way. I didn't know JT LeRoy had been pronounced a faker...he was quite feted in literary circles wasn't he?
Her mom's name is Gay Seltzer and there's a Gay Seltzer that writes childrens stories. Don't know if this children's writer is Peggy's mom.
What I cannot get my brain around is how Seltzer thought she could maintain her charade once the book was published and her image became public. Aside from her family, what about former schoolmates? Friends? Neighbors? Did she think they would all remain silent about who she really is?
She and her ilk--James Frey, et al, who think they are "above" somehow--do trouble me greatly, both as a writer and as a person. Trying to pass off their fictional lives as truth makes a mockery of those people who have actually lived through a sexual assault, gang life, poverty, addiction, etc.
Seltzer, Frey, and their kind make me sick. They should be banned from publication for a long period of time, just as poachers are banned from hunting privileges--same difference: an illegal/immoral taking.
Commenting by HaloScan
