In reading on-line histories of the Clifford Irving hoax case, I
note that an episode that the movie rushes through–Irving
and his sidekick make a copy of a manuscript penned by a former Hughes aide named Noah Dietrich–played an important part in
the actual events. According to Wikipedia, reporter James Phelan ghosted Dietrich’s memoir, and Irving surreptitiously got a hold of it. When Irving’s
book came out "Phelan read an excerpt of the book and realized that a
few of the facts had been taken from his book." Infoplease is
a little more emphatic: "But investigative reporter James Phelan
discovered that Irving had pilfered portions of Phelan’s own
unpublished manuscript on Hughes."
The movie glosses the incident for obvious reasons. In the hierarchy of writerly sins, being a fabulist is glamorous–Cervantes was one, so was Fitzgerald–while stealing another writer’s work is scummy. A fabulist is by definition original, a plagiarist isn’t. It’s no wonder Hollywood is immunizing Irving from this more serious charge.
