Seriously. I will fight this till I die. There is fiction (not real) and nonfiction (true events). It's easy. (Sparing all the metaphysical arguments about how one determines what is "real")
Creative nonfiction is simply nonfiction written well. You don't need a subcategory for that. That's like saying we need creative photojournalism. It's a pointless subcategory to make people feel special.
And if a nonfiction writer 'only changes some things to fit a greater storyline' that's what I call "bullshit". That's a fictionalization of true events. Calling it creative nonfiction is misleading and wrong.
Rant over.
5 comments:
If you haven't read Sedaris or any *good* creative nonfiction, don't pass judgement. It's fucking amazing and there's no other way to describe it...
Face it, there is a difference between a dissertation and a story, a recounting of events and a tale. Both may be nonfiction, but there HAS to be some way to differentiate between the two! It's like saying that the difference between a dissertation, a lecture, and a speech is pointless because they're all different versions of the same thing. It's like saying that there is no difference between artistic photography and tourist photography, it's like saying there is no difference between Harry Potter and 1984.
Bob hit shirley with a baseball bat causing blunt force injury and leading to bob's incarceration.
vs.
Bob swung his bat toward shirley and it seemed like time slowed down, making the tension in the room raise audibly just before the bat cracked against her head, much like one would imagine an avalanche and having similar repurcussions.
There is a difference and it does deserve notation.
What the hell else should you call it? It's nonfiction written creatively? Just as there is historical fiction: fiction that is written extremely close to actual historical events using actual historical people written creatively with slight embellishments.
It's not subfiction because it really is true. It's not self-help. It's not fiction. It's not nonfiction (it's actually worth reading for entertainment!). It's not a textbook, biography, documentary, dissertation, philosophical manuscript, thesis, treatise.
Find another non-misleading term and I can agree. Otherwise, we need words and phrases to differentiate between similar objects. Why else would there be 30 types of metal, 50 types of rock, 20 types of pop, 60 types of techo, etc.?
I don't have to prove you anything sir. You want to assert your rightness do it on your turf. Here I am law, and it's a pointless subcategory.
I think people categorize things far too much as an excuse for actually talking about things.
"Well I like postmodern exotic blue phase necromantic goth rock!" Fuck all of that. What ever happened to describing what it is you're talking about?
Creative nonfiction is pointless and I'll pass judgement on whatever I want thank you very much. And how the hell do you know I haven't read any?
I'm pretty insulted with how you conducted yourself here.
I'm partially amused.
What is your position on stereotypes, then? Descriptive adjectives? Classification? Taxonomy?
And I was on a role and a rave when I wrote all that, so if you genuinely took offense, I apologize. People were pissing me off and it might have seeped into my other writings and conversations. (This has been a *very* frustrating day!)
And I'm not asserting rightness, lol. I'm debating a point.
Post a Comment