Quote Originally Posted by luna65 View Post
I've been involved for several years on a biographical project, and it has helped to enforce the realization that all anyone can do is tell their truth, not the truth. I don't believe an objective truth exists when it comes to personal histories. I have documented several instances in which the person I'm chronicling has an entirely different recollection to an event than the other participants, and the reasons why are myriad, many of them political. We tend to want history to be kind, which is why people are most kind to themselves in the telling.

That is one reason I appreciate the doc, because everyone was blunt in various recollections. It takes courage to not only state your truth, but to state it in such a way which displays your own foibles.
I agree with everyone that it is natural for every individual to have their own version of the truth. I expect that anyone who tells a story does so with their own biases, recollections, and value systems. But Luna, I have to say I do have a problem when autobiographies contain lots of contradictions, inconsistencies, and facts that can be easily refuted. To me, it is incumbent upon the author to do some basic fact-checking if they want their story to be viewed as credible. I personally feel cheated as a reader if they neglect to make a good-faith effort to get their version as accurate as possible.