books

Any honest assessment of this book has to grapple with two things at once - the quality of the prose on the page and the catastrophic fraud behind it. Published in 2000 as a memoir by a half-Navajo writer named Nasdijj, the book was revealed in 2006 to be the invention of Timothy Patrick Barrus, a white man from Lansing, Michigan, with no Native heritage whatsoever. That context is not a footnote. It is the lens through which everything here must now be read.

Taken purely as writing, the book is striking. Its language is spare and elemental, built from short, declarative sentences that accumulate weight like stones stacked into a cairn. The central story - Nasdijj's adoption of a boy called Tommy Nothing Fancy, born with fetal alcohol syndrome, who dies at six years old on a fishing trip - is rendered with devastating restraint. The passages about Tommy's short life and his father's grief achieve a rare and controlled emotional power. There is a discipline to the sorrow here that keeps it from tipping into sentimentality, and the imagery of the desert Southwest provides an austere, beautiful backdrop to a story built on loss.

But the book has real structural weaknesses that existed long before the hoax was exposed. It reads less like a cohesive memoir and more like a writer's notebook - a collection of episodic vignettes arranged without chronological logic or thematic progression. Topics shift abruptly between homelessness, reservation life, fetal alcohol syndrome, and cultural identity without the connective tissue that would make them cohere into a unified whole. Repetitions surface throughout, and while these are framed as deliberate refrains, they often feel like evidence of standalone pieces stitched together after the fact. Compared to a memoir like Angela's Ashes, which navigates similar terrain of poverty and suffering with narrative momentum, this book drifts.

And then there is the fraud itself, which poisons everything. Barrus appropriated Navajo identity, fabricated a dead child, and commodified real Indigenous suffering - all to build a literary career that had stalled under his own name. Native writers and activists rightly condemned this as cultural theft. Sherman Alexie raised alarms before the book was even published, flagging what he considered plagiarism of his own work and that of other Indigenous authors, but his warnings were ignored by the publisher. When the LA Weekly finally exposed Barrus in 2006, his books were pulled from shelves and reclassified as fiction.

The tragedy is that the writing talent is genuine - Barrus can build a sentence and evoke a landscape with real skill. But skill deployed in the service of a lie this damaging does not deserve admiration. It deserves scrutiny. The book remains a compelling case study in how the publishing industry's appetite for authentic marginalized voices can be exploited by those willing to fabricate one.