
When does pseudonymity gloss over into full-fledged fraudulence?
(That's not a set-up for a punch line, but a sincere query.)
My interest in this distinction was recently piqued as I re-viewed one of Roe Ethridge's portraits from 2001 of JT LeRoy which shows the young writer -- identity duly concealed by cutting off his head -- sporting a raccoon baculum pendant while peeling a piece of fruit.
By taking this photographic portrait, was Ethridge knowingly complicit with Albert in perpetuating a media delusion?
And what was the full extent of actor Michael Pitt's involvement with this ploy, as the marketing photograph used to sell Sarah-related merchandise depicts the actor shirtless and wearing a signed version of the sexual amulet?
The authentic and the disingenuous can be found to coincide as seamlessly as an object and its mirror reflection.
Please disabuse me . . .