Memiors Of A Geisha

Well, I feel a little unsatisfied and ripped off upon finally finishing the reading of Memiors Of A Geisha.

I was under the impression that it was a biographical piece. Told from the view of a Japanese lady, Sayuri. But translated/blanks filled in by Arthur Golden.

Looking back through the book, I should of actually paid more attention to who wrote the Translator's note - Jakob Haarhuis. I believed the note and thought that it was a real story. Having said that, I thought it was really weird that this woman, who would have been an old lady at the time she told the story, was able to remember thing's so clearly.

It wasn't until I read the "Acknowledgements" section. A section that I'm sure hardly anyone ever reads. The section begins with "Memiors of a Geisha is a novel and the character of Sayuri and her story are my own inventions." It's safe to say I actually felt decieved.

A couple months ago when I did an autobiographical class at uni. In that class we were learning about the truth in autobiographical texts and it's relation to the reader. Many of the other people in my class were speaking about different stories and how they felt decieved after finding out it wasn't real. The whole time we were studying this I was thinking "How could you feel like that from a book? Gees, get over it."

I now understand what they mean.

Although I do think the story is brilliant. It works in the first person perspective. I don't think it would have been as powerful if it was written in another format. Believe me, I was sucked in. I actually cared what happened to Sayuri, I was really angry at certain characters that made things happen to her, and I was so happy with the ending. That was until I found out it wasn't real.