Non-fiction records reality whereas fiction merely reflects it. Thus, an investigative journalist writes a book about a recent event. He refers to then Prime Minister Tony Blair among many other real people. We all (?) remember Blair and can confirm his existence and activities by consulting many printed or on-line sources, not just this single book - which I recommend. Indeed, Blair has been represented on screen by an amazing number of actors. I cannot find any total number. Dramatizations and docudramas are sources of information although they must be checked against nonfictional sources.
Poul Anderson writes a series of narratives of different lengths about fictional future events. He refers to two public figures among many other fictional characters. We have never heard of either of these two figures before reading Anderson's accounts of them and these accounts are our only sources of information about these characters although we must imagine that other people living in the same fictional timeline would have access to multiple, multi-media sources comparable to ours about Blair.
Freelady Hanny Lennart, a vice president of Global Cybernetics, is described as the guiding genius of the Home Companies which is one of the two cartels that have coalesced within the Polesotechnic League. As such, she converses with Nicholas van Rijn twice - in our hearing, I mean. Later:
4 comments:
Well, non-fiction -purports- to represent reality -- often, it's just wrong.
Kaor, Paul and Mr. Stirling!
Paul: Yes, good biographies of well-known public figures have to be based on a multitude of sources, selected by their authors. These biographies will stress this or that aspect of their subjects, among many. Biographies can range from the scrupulously fair minded/accurate to being malicious hatchet jobs.
Mr. Stirling: I agree. And even otherwise honest biographers either make mistakes or have biases distorting what their subjects were actually like.
Ad astra! Sean
We must either suspend judgement or, if sufficiently motivated, make our own judgements based on critical reading of multiple sources.
Kaor, Paul!
One very interesting book I read years ago was THE MEDDLESOME FRIAR AND THE WAYWARD POPE, by Michael de la Bedoyere. The author told, very vividly, the story of the conflict between Fra Savonarola and Pope Alexander VI. He often seems very convincing in what he says about these two men, but I've never quoted from or referred to it as something to be taken seriously. Because de la Bedoyere cited no sources, did not give footnotes to sources backing what he says, and doesn't even give a bibliography. To be used either not at all or only with the most extreme caution.
I tried to find my copy but, to my frustration, I seemed to have misplaced MEDDLESOME FRIAR.
Ad astra! Sean
Post a Comment