My subject of research is dead, some people they know are still alive, but all were close to them.
The problem is that a number of parts of this person’s narrative are turning out to not be true. We are talking at the level of not actually serving in the military when they weaved in saying in the press they are a veteran as part of their narrative.
I now find myself doubting anything they said that cannot be verified. How do you handle this when writing about a subject that heavily padded their own narrative.
Part of the challenge of academic history is the fact that people lie and embellish things all the time! One of the great tasks of historical work is finding primary sources to verify or refute claims.
You mention, for example, a subject lying about having served in the military. They have established a narrative for themselves that is not entirely true, and so it’s the job of the historian to sift through records over months and years searching for evidence that can shine light on a true or untrue part of this person’s story. Then, as you get a sense of their honesty about their life and story, that can become part of the narrative about them that you can control. What claims did they make about themselves during their life? How true were those? What does this tell us about the person? Most stories and claims have corroborating or conflicting evidence out there somewhere, whether it’s an account of someone who lived at the same time, official records, established understandings of major events, etc.