Ah, but Dreams is a memoir not an autobiography. The book’s preface states that some events and characters are intentionally fictitious.
Ah yes. The composite thing. How could one forget? The drug use, the other names, the other countries, the feelings, the fantasies ... still, G, with one's name on the cover as "author," could one be forgiven for thinking the man might at least have read the damn thing?
Just because I couldn't handle Ayers' deathless prose doesn't mean the subject of his efforts shouldn't try.
So it should be treated as if it's just a load of BS?
Does this prove the author is also just a figment of our imaginations as well?
Was the book written with malicious intent to deceive in anyway, i wonder?
Just a rhetorical question, how could any of us possibly know how his mind works.