![Very Happy :D](./images/smilies/icon_biggrin.gif)
There are many omissions of strange intentions throughout the book so I am convinced that much of it was written with spin in mind, for the benefit and pleasure of his readers. It makes it only easier for me not to become pedantic about the truth.
Ironically, a large portion of the made-up part of the story will be his friendship with Karl May, who teaches him how to become a famous and wealthy writer by making up entirely everything; why bother with travel? Doesn't this attitude reflect so much of what goes on today? And here will be my story itself half made up, taking apart the frailties of truth and honor and humility to warn against the pitfalls of hubris.
Is it wrong to to have the means justify the end? If I stuck to the absolute truth, the Slocum story would become just another predictable, unexceptional adventure story, falling in lockstep with Slocum's plans which have become obsolete by the whirligig of time .
I treated My Dog Tulip the same way and got a kick out of it when Sierra once remarked that she didn't remember a certain part I showed here being in the book. In both instances I take care to state that my films are merely based upon the book of the same names. Ackerley says as much himself in Tulip's epilogue. Even Christopher Plummer, who reads the voice of Ackerley, changes the narrative just by his very unique and personal delivery, which in turn influenced the way I illustrated certain scenes -- opposed to my initial intentions before Plummer's recording. Sandra had her own readings of how I drew things and gave scenes a changed meaning by the colors she selected and the style in which she painted them... it's all just part of the joy of creation.