It was back in December when I first heard Mike Daisey perform his monologue “The Agony and the Ecstasy of Steve Jobs”.
I was captivated by his performance, which takes the audience from the theatre directly to the low-tech factory lines where much of our high-tech stuff is put together, while exposing the dumpy joints so many humans are stuck working in.
Through his performance and the subject matter, he continues to help build awareness about the deplorable working conditions we still see in many countries around the world today.
But by performing this piece the way he did and subsequently allowing of it to be aired on a journalistic radio shows, Daisey unwittingly added himself as subject matter to the ongoing discourse regarding truth and the art of storytelling.
“Art is the lie that enables us to realize the truth,” said artist Pablo Picasso.
Here's a concise version of what happened with Daisey and his monologue, which led to the reinvigoration of this discussion, plenty of backlash and eventually an apology.
Daisey performed his piece, captivating audiences with first-hand facts about a trip he took to China to explore the inner workings of an Apple products manufacturing plant called Foxconn. He clearly created an intrigue in the topic, as Daisey was invited to talk about it on the radio show This American Life (TAL), which is distributed by Public Radio International.
After an initial positive reaction to the appearance, the radio show, which purports itself as a journalistic program, sent out a retraction a few months later. It was revealed by another reporter that some of the truths Daisey claimed to have witnessed might not have actually happened in his presence.
A backlash against Daisey and his work came soon after and with it a debate began brewing over the veracity of his entire monologue.
Daisey, an accomplished theatre performer and artist, stood behind his work but admitted to mistakenly bringing it on journalistic programs.
“Everything I have done in making this monologue for the theatre has been toward that end, to make people care. I'm not going to say that I didn't take a few short cuts in my passion to be heard. But I stand behind my work,” he said, during an on-air response on TAL aired March 16, following the retraction of the initial story.
“My mistake, the mistake I truly regret, is that I had it on (TAL) as journalism and it's not journalism, it's theatre. I used the tools of theatre and memoir to achieve its dramatic art. And of that art and that work I am very proud, because I think it made you (Ira Glass – TAL's host) care and I think it made you want to delve and my hope is it makes and has made other people delve.”
He continued, “I agree it is not up to the standards of journalism...I'm not saying it's the only way to get through to people emotionally. I'm saying that this piece, in how it was built for the theatre, follows those rules. But I'm not saying that it's the only way to do things.”
Daisey, reflecting on the situation this past weekend, released a statement on his blog Sunday apologizing for misleading the public and making the jobs of some more difficult than they have to be.
There is no doubt there are other ways to tell stories and have an effect on people, in striving for truth or using fiction.
Journalism comes to mind, as do politics and sermons. Likewise, fables, satires, novels, poems and plays are also able to tell stories and have an effect on those paying attention.
And then there is truth. What is it? Where does it fit in? Is there even such a thing?
Sure, we ought to expect truth in a piece of work purported to be truthful but because we expect it to be true and the creator claims it's true, does it necessarily make it true?
I think we could come to a conclusion pretty quickly, pondering politicians' promises nearing the next election.
But even in blatant fictions there are things often claimed as truth. Do we automatically discount them because they are part of a fictional work?
Some of us still believe working conditions are terrible for many people but since Daisey admittedly lied about being present for some of what he said was true, does that invalidate everything he says or we believe?
I think not. And until all the humans in this world are able to live and work under great conditions, I for one will go on accepting lies about the truth, as absurd as that sounds.
“Truth is so hard to tell, it sometimes needs fiction to make it plausible.” Francis Bacon, a pioneer of the scientific method.
