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 claims 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 wonder 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 book’s plot or characters are based on some aspect of the author’s own life, gives the book more credibility? More sexy powers? Or does a book stand on its own merits, whether or not it is based, in part, on the autobiographical elements of the writer?

Know that done Y fiction Are they blurred do they add any value or credibility to the novel/story?

It is a well-known fact that the Belgian writer george 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 stories of the American writer raymond carpenter (1938 – 1988) have some autobiographical elements (ie drunkenness, divorces, and marital 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 topics related to marriage and divorce.

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 to be the case, does it add any additional quality to Foer’s book?

What if the perpetrator hadn’t told us what the description of the rape was based on?

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

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 the two 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 relative to each other; their “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, only 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; or they may see colors in the food they taste or they may associate colors with emotions).

Knowing that Nabokov had synesthesia could explain why some of the characters in his books suffer from 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): 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 knowing that the writer has had similar experiences as their 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 inside the heads” of their characters and describe them in a more believable way (which, in the long run, can give the novel more credibility and perhaps make make it a “better” novel with broader universal appeal).

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

Entering 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 it comes to “unconventional” people (murderers, lunatics, and the like), it can be even harder to get inside their heads.

When it comes to literature, there are those who claim that good writers, who have a keen eye to observe and record, can get inside the head 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 encounters” with a similar case or not… Often when the work of fiction draws us in and impresses us, it doesn’t. . make any difference.

Or if?