What is done And what it is fiction in novels and short stories

In literature, the line between fact and fiction is sometimes blurred. In Fiction it often happens that the writer affirms not consciously with the intention of including autobiographical elements in the novel/story. But isn’t he/she? And does it make any difference to us, the readers, and/or to the quality of the book?

In any case, when you read a novel or a short story, you probably rarely ask yourself what is in the fictional book and what is based on the author’s autobiographical elements. And why would you? Does knowing one way or the other make any difference? Knowing, for example, that part of the plot or the characters in the book are based on some aspects of the author’s own life, does it give the book more credibility? More attractive powers? Or does a book stand on its own merits, whether or not it is based, in part, on the writer’s autobiographical elements?

Know that done Y fiction Are they blurry adding any value or credibility to the novel/story?

It is a well known fact that the Belgian writer Jorge Simenon (1903 – 1989), author of some 500 novels and short stories, has based many of his characters on well-known characters.

It is also known that many of the short stories by the American writer Raymond Carver (1938 – 1988) have some autobiographical elements (ie drunkenness, divorce, and couple fights).

A similar case is found in Jonathan Safran Foercommentary on his latest book (“Here I am”, 2016). Eleven years after Foer published her last book (“Extremely loud and getting closer”, 2005), her new novel is about relationships.

When asked if the book is based on autobiographical elements, Foer replied that the same question is often asked. She admits to divorcing her ex after 10 years of marriage, and also says that for the past 11 years she has been constantly writing about marriage and divorce related topics.

Thus, without having received a clear answer, we see that, once again, reality and fiction seem to blur, intermingle and intertwine.

And once again, knowing that this is the case, does it add any additional quality to Foer’s book?

What if the author had not told us what the description of the rape was based on?

jessica moundThe debut novel of “Luckiest Girl Alive” (Simon & Schuster, 2016), describes, very credibly, a gang rape of a 14-year-old girl. Some of the reviewers asked Knoll about the research she had done before writing the book, which helped her portray rape so believably. Several weeks after the book’s publication, Knoll admitted in an interview that the rape scene happened to its (as Knoll explained on “Lenny,” a newsletter and website for young women, on March 29, 2016)

If Knoll should have No told us, would this have made any difference? How often do authors not tell us? And does it really matter if the “fiction” is based, in part, on some of the author’s autobiographical elements?

Can an author write passionately about love and eroticism without having had a personal experience?

The Israeli author’s novel judith katzir “Dearest Anne” (The Feminist Press, 2008) tells the erotic love story between a 14-year-old girl and her 27-year-old teacher. Apparently, their love is “unique” for both of them. But would it have been possible for the author to describe love and sex in such a detailed and aesthetic way without having had a (similar, to say the least) personal experience?

Could it be that an author who dedicates pages upon pages to describe, in great detail, an erotic love between two; their lengths to each other; his “sexual games”; Hasn’t his addictive and forbidden love been based, at least in part, on his own experiences (to the point of “using” the writing process as self-therapy)?

Reading Katzir’s book, one might wonder how many autobiographical elements the book is based on. Such lovely, vivid, explicit and emotional descriptions of love and attraction – is it possible that they all came only from Katzir’s imaginary mind, or is it possible, just possible, that she must have experienced at least some (similar) level of love and attraction to be able to write about it so convincingly?

Katzir’s “Dearest Anne” is just one example, among many, showing that in literature it is not always possible to differentiate between the author’s imagination and elements based on the author’s life. The two are often blurred..

it does knowing that Nabokov Did synesthesia make a difference?

It may not be known that the Russian-American writer Vladimir Nabokov (1899 – 1977; famous for the novel “Lolita”, 1955) – had synesthesia (a neurological condition in which stimulation of one sense produces experiences in an entirely different sense. For example, people with synesthesia can see colors in letters; either they can see colors in the food they taste or they can associate colors with emotions).

Knowing that Nabokov had synesthesia could explain why some of the characters in his books have synesthesia (including the novels “The Defense”, 1930 and “The Gift”, 1952).

Nabokov used to tell how having synesthesia helps and enriches the lives of the characters (as well as the readers’ lives): the writer can use synesthesia as a literary device, describing people, places, events, and emotions in terms of multiple senses. [which is often the case in poetry]. This “technique” makes the reader feel more “in touch” with the story/poem).

However, the question again is: does it make any difference to the reader to know that the writer has had experiences similar to those of his characters? Does it add any value to the novel/story?

we don’t know. However, having had a similar experience might allow the writer to “get into the heads” of their characters and describe them in a more believable way (which, in the long run, may give the novel greater credibility and perhaps make it a “better” novel with broader universal appeal).

Between fiction and reality: where does the quality of the story lie?

Getting inside the mind of another person, even a “normal” person, is a difficult undertaking. Not even psychiatrists, psychologists and other therapists can do it without doubts and difficulties.

When dealing with “unconventional” people (murderers, madmen, and the like), it can be even harder to get into their heads.

When it comes to literature, there are those who claim that good writers, who have an eye for observation and recording, can get inside the heads of their personalities, whether they are “normal” or “deviant.”

Still, this is not an easy task, and many times we don’t know if the writer has had any “close encounter” with a similar case or not… Often, when the work of fiction attracts and impresses us, it doesn’t. . make any difference.

Or if?