Comments: FACTITIOUS.

Seems like "invalid" or "inauthentic" is meant.

I think that your problem was that you actually knew what the word meant. I just looked it up, and found that I didn't. I knew it was something bad, though -- I only see it in polemic. I think that there has been an extension from "ad hoc special pleading", which is the polemical use of the word I'm familiar with.

Posted by zizka / John Emerson at May 24, 2004 05:27 PM

OED's meaning number 3 for factitious is "Got up, made up for a particular occasion or purpose; arising from custom, habit, or design; not natural or spontaneous". This can fit, I think.

Posted by Renee at May 24, 2004 05:37 PM

In that context I feel like it isn't the established word factitious, but rather a new one meaning "half-factual, half-fictional". You know, like "mockumentary".

Posted by Matt at May 24, 2004 05:57 PM

I think she meant something closer to 'fabricated', but was influenced by 'fictitious' and probably thought that factitious was just a suitably fancy way of saying that. Perhaps she even meant 'fictitious but fact-based'. Once you get way out there on the skinny part of the limb, who knows?

Posted by John G. Fought at May 24, 2004 06:03 PM

I think she meant something closer to 'fabricated', but was influenced by 'fictitious' and probably thought that factitious was just a suitably fancy way of saying that.

I have seen this happen in other places with the same word. At least, that's what I think happened. When you're writing a review for the New Yorker, hey, any extra pretense is good wherever you can get it, I guess.

I think it's becoming more and more socially unacceptable for people to admit that they don't know what a certain word means. Nod and smile, but dear god, don't actually admit that you don't know. So we end up with these words, used in their proper context elsewhere, picked up by people -- writers who don't ever open dictionaries, I guess -- and used in situations like this one.

I've probably done it myself, but I try to look up definitions. I could understand not looking things up if it was a big hassle, but we have this here interweb thing now.

Posted by Mike at May 24, 2004 06:27 PM

Another vote for the "half-factual, half-fictional" interpretation. When I read the paragraph I immediately wondered whether it was a deliberate piece of wordplay -- fictitious but with a leavening of fact.

Posted by Jonathon Delacour at May 24, 2004 06:58 PM

From the context, I read it as meaning that the work is "faction" - as Matt says, fact and fiction mingled (like mockumentary). However, I can't see why Cusk should link it with "breezy complacency", unless she's somehow bringing "facetious" into the mix too.

Posted by Ray at May 24, 2004 07:37 PM

Yes, it was the "breezy complacency" that threw me completely off the rails. Thanks, everyone, for a very illuminating discussion!

Posted by language hat at May 24, 2004 08:11 PM

I took it as the half-fact, half-fiction also, or perhaps as docu-drama.

Posted by Charles at May 24, 2004 10:58 PM

Ray, you've summarized contemporary literature:

... fact and fiction mingled (like mockumentary) ... somehow bringing "facetious" into the mix too.

Posted by brillig at May 25, 2004 03:42 AM

Is it possible the reviewer meant "facetious"?

Posted by Robbyn at May 25, 2004 04:39 PM

Context would suggest that 'factitious' refers to something which is fictitious, but which is ultimately based on fact. The character in question appropriates factual events from other people's lives and presents them as coming from her own.

Posted by rogueclassicist at May 25, 2004 07:57 PM

I'm thinking it's just a typo.

Posted by David Weman at May 25, 2004 08:35 PM

A typo for what? "Fictitious" doesn't work any better in context. Furthermore, if it were a typo you'd think they'd have fixed the online text, as the Times did with the Sontag quote in the Addendum.

Posted by language hat at May 25, 2004 09:54 PM

The word "factitious" posed a problem for Esther Greenwood in Sylvia Plath's Bell Jar. Esther's creative writing tutor scrawled the word on a short story she wrote; she didn't know what it meant and had to look it up. The meaning Plath gives, if I recall correctly, is "artificial, a sham".

Posted by Jonathan at May 26, 2004 10:24 AM

It has ben said before. "I read the newspapers avidly. It is my one form of continuous fiction"
Aneurin Bevan
http://www.saidwhat.co.uk/quotes.php?id=481&type=

Posted by scarabaeus stercus at May 26, 2004 02:04 PM

Dictionary.com gives:

2. Lacking authenticity or genuineness; sham
- The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition
Copyright © 2000 by Houghton Mifflin Company.

"Sham" in particular seems to make sense in context.

Posted by Joshua at May 26, 2004 02:26 PM

yeah, journalists are leading the way to make "factitious" a kind of derogative, in the same way they have made "substantive" a meaningless intensifier. welcome to the TWENNY FIRS CENCHRY!

Posted by graywyvern at May 28, 2004 10:56 AM