I remember reading Nicholas Evans's "The Horse Whisperer" years ago and enjoying the world I imagined from the novel. Later, I saw the movie with Robert Redford, and while the movie got some stuff right, it didn't come close to the world I imagined from the words. The same with Haruf's "Our Souls at Night." Splendid little novel, and while the movie (again with Redford) was fine, it didn't match the images in my head. So whether the novelist cons us with words, or invites us to be collaborators in a fictional world, I think it's a trip worth taking.
Well done! I should probably bring myself to my reading more...as sometimes I feel lazy like I’m just expecting the author to do all the work but I should and can definitely participate more - really enjoyed this!
I don’t agree that readers are participating in a con. The essence of being conned is that the victim is not aware of the con. Readers knowingly suspend disbelief. That’s not the same thing as erroneously believing.
Coming at it from another angle, a mere untruth is not a lie, in my view. I think that a lie is an untruth communicated to someone who has the moral right to know the truth. This is why theatre & fiction do not involve lies - there is no moral right to the truth when the person being “deceived” is aware of the existence of the deceit and in fact, desires and invites it.
I agree that the reader participates in the creation of a novel by filling in the details while at the same time being under the control of the author. And sometimes that control involves misdirection - which is what any adult reader knows when he picks up the book.
This doesn’t mean that there are not books which are presented as non-fiction but are, in fact, fictional. A Journal of the Plague Year comes to mind. If marketed as a true account, then that’s a con, but the con lies in, well, the lie that it’s truthful, with the expectation that it will be taken as truth. Consider ghostwritten political biographies...
In short, “My mistress’ eyes are nothing like the sun...”
Very interesting and incisive. I like your point that the reader is a kind of co-conspirator. I enjoyed the book Billy Liar, by Keith Waterhouse, a nd a film called The Good Liar, with Ian McClellan and Helen mirren
I remember reading Nicholas Evans's "The Horse Whisperer" years ago and enjoying the world I imagined from the novel. Later, I saw the movie with Robert Redford, and while the movie got some stuff right, it didn't come close to the world I imagined from the words. The same with Haruf's "Our Souls at Night." Splendid little novel, and while the movie (again with Redford) was fine, it didn't match the images in my head. So whether the novelist cons us with words, or invites us to be collaborators in a fictional world, I think it's a trip worth taking.
Well done! I should probably bring myself to my reading more...as sometimes I feel lazy like I’m just expecting the author to do all the work but I should and can definitely participate more - really enjoyed this!
I don’t agree that readers are participating in a con. The essence of being conned is that the victim is not aware of the con. Readers knowingly suspend disbelief. That’s not the same thing as erroneously believing.
Coming at it from another angle, a mere untruth is not a lie, in my view. I think that a lie is an untruth communicated to someone who has the moral right to know the truth. This is why theatre & fiction do not involve lies - there is no moral right to the truth when the person being “deceived” is aware of the existence of the deceit and in fact, desires and invites it.
I agree that the reader participates in the creation of a novel by filling in the details while at the same time being under the control of the author. And sometimes that control involves misdirection - which is what any adult reader knows when he picks up the book.
This doesn’t mean that there are not books which are presented as non-fiction but are, in fact, fictional. A Journal of the Plague Year comes to mind. If marketed as a true account, then that’s a con, but the con lies in, well, the lie that it’s truthful, with the expectation that it will be taken as truth. Consider ghostwritten political biographies...
In short, “My mistress’ eyes are nothing like the sun...”
Very interesting and incisive. I like your point that the reader is a kind of co-conspirator. I enjoyed the book Billy Liar, by Keith Waterhouse, a nd a film called The Good Liar, with Ian McClellan and Helen mirren