So, among other things, I'm pointing a little bit at Da Vinci Code here. See, it was a super fun story, very well researched and plotted. Not super well written, but that's another point. The problem I have is when Brown claims in the beginning that all the cult evidence and art clues are totally legit, when of course they're not. That all the clues mean what he's saying they mean. So is that just part of his fiction, or is he crossing some line?
This happens a lot in movies and documentaries too. People trying to pass off something as true. There's the other extreme, too, where people say reading any fiction is just a waste of time, because it isn't true. In my opinion, both sides have it wrong.
Trying to pass of fiction as "true" is just dumb. I mean, people find out. What, really, is the point? Its almost condescending, an insult to the readers intelligence. The real reason this subject came up is that I watched a movie with my roommates last night that did this very thing, and after we did some scant researched and figured out it was all fake, one roommate said it was just a waste of two hours. I guess they do it so that the story will have more impact. But in good fiction, we are being totally honest with ourselves and our understanding of human nature, and to me that is Truth with a capital T. That's why the people who say fiction is pointless are wrong. Their minds are closed to the reality that there are some Truths we learn better through fiction than anything else. That's how I see it, at least. I hope I'm making sense.
Lying is taking a story and trying to pass it off as truth. Fiction is an attempt at using story to reach Truth.
What do you think?