Does a memoir have to be quottruequot in order to be valuable as a work of literature?

Question

Does a memoir have to be quottruequot in order to be valuable as a work of literature?
Is it possible for an autobiography to be entirely accurate? If not, is there a minimum level of truth we as readers have a right to expect, or should we treat memoirs like any other novel?

Answer

For me, this is a question of genre. Whats the difference between quotautobiographyquot and quotmemoirquot, if both purport to be true and written by the person who occupies the central perspective? Since memory is necessarily faulty it wont correspond to the actual quotfactsquot, we must expect a certain degree of fabrication. But this is a slippery slope, which leads us to blurring the lines between fiction and nonfiction. I find that the emotional truths derived from the text are far more important, and even more real, than any supposedly factual truths, but that doesnt amount to an excuse for misrepresenting a clearly ficionalized piece as memoir. It comes down to a sincerity of the author, who chooses a genre knowing full well the expectations of the audience based on that choice. The text remains valuable even Freys wholly debunked work has a unique value to it, in that it brings these questions to light despite the misrepresentations, but the community has spoken or rather, has vacantly agreed with the force of O Freys going back to flipping burgers.