3 ms·

I will come out and say it: categorically dismissing fictional books as "not real" (and therefor uninteresting) is both strange and stupid. Fiction can be as r

I will come out and say it: categorically dismissing fictional books as "not real" (and therefor uninteresting) is both strange and stupid. Fiction can be as real as the author wishes to make it, as an endeavor to elucidate their ideas and insights regarding the 'real world' through the telling of a story. I'd never be so audacious as to state "I hate non-fiction, there's very little to learn from boorish, presumptuous, and poorly considered interpretations of the author's reality" This sort of navel-gazing article is uninteresting and of questionable real-world value, reminiscent of breathless puff pieces on the (soon to be forgotten) luminaries of .com technology that were so popular in the mid to late 1990s.

fnid 17y ago
It's not real. At best it is anecdotal. It's a story. It's imagination. It's entertainment. It's a very expensive form of entertainment when you value your time.
- antonovka 17y ago
  It's not real. At best it is anecdotal. It's a story. It's imagination. It's entertainment. Why are ideas presented in the form of non-fiction any more "real" than ideas presented in the form of fiction? Even the most literal non-fiction remains an expression of the author's opinion and ideas. It's a very expensive form of entertainment when you value your time. I find what I learn from well-chosen fiction and non-fiction to be equally valuable, and I value my time quite a bit. I also would be very surprised that anyone who has time to comment here doesn't have time to read a fiction (or non-fiction) book.
  - fnid 17y ago
    It's not about having the time or not, it's about what you choose to read when you do have the time. The difference is that when you read fiction, you are in a world, a physical land that is entirely constructed by the mind of the author. The characters aren't bound by the same laws of physics that you and I are. When characters make decisions, the other characters react in the way the author wants, but real people may not react that way. With nonfiction, there are rules. With fiction, there are no rules. In fact, you don't know what the rules are when you read fiction. You know that quote about those who don't read history are doomed to repeat it? Well, there is a lot of history to read. They're two different universes. One, fiction, is framed in a universe where we don't exist. The other, nonfiction, is in the same universe we all share here. In fiction, what goes up may not come down. If you shape your life or make decisions based on fictional ideas, they don't always apply in the real world. Sometimes they may, but mostly they do not. Yes, you are right, lots of insights can be gained from fiction. I learned a lot reading slaughterhouse five. It's fiction, but it's also pretty real in a way. I learned a lot from 1984. I learn a lot from science fiction. But there are is also a lot to learn and a lot of insights to be gained from nonfiction as well. Truth is stranger than fiction. Think of it this way. If you only read fiction for the rest of your life, could you program a computer? Could you build a house? Could you understand quantum mechanics or any myriad other practical skills? Probably not. This of course is my opinion, but if I had to choose between a future life of only fiction reading or a future life of only nonfiction reading, I would choose nonfiction. I think nonfiction is a better learning tool and a greater benefit to my life than fiction, because through nonfiction, I can learn facts that I can't learn through fiction. It's actually difficult and confusing sometimes to decipher truth from fiction.
    - antonovka 17y ago
      Think of it this way. If you only read fiction for the rest of your life, could you program a computer? Could you build a house? Could you understand quantum mechanics or any myriad other practical skills? Probably not. My practical skills are only useful in their relation to my human condition, both of which warrant exploration. This of course is my opinion, but if I had to choose between a future life of only fiction reading or a future life of only nonfiction reading, I would choose nonfiction. Fortunately for all of us, that choice is entirely unnecessary, and I've no problem suggesting that anyone who actually dismisses either fiction or non-fiction is demonstrating a remarkable, frightening lack of insight.
      - deleted 17y ago
        [deleted]
      - fnid 17y ago
        Do you believe the human condition cannot be explored through nonfiction? Would you entertain the idea that perhaps it may be possible to explore the human condition deeper and more profoundly through nonfiction than through fiction? I think it's actually quite insightful to understand that. Find me a fiction book more profoundly descriptive of the human condition than The Divided Self by RD Laing.
        antonovka 17y ago
        Do you believe the human condition cannot be explored through nonfiction? No. Would you entertain the idea that perhaps it may be possible to explore the human condition deeper and more profoundly through nonfiction than through fiction? It's not a contest. Find me a fiction book more profoundly descriptive of the human condition than The Divided Self by RD Laing. You don't believe his book is an exploration of his own personal perspective on reality and meaning?
        fnid 17y ago
        I believe it is a contest, because we have a limited amount of time on earth. If you could do either A or B and you believe B is better, then why would you do A? Of course The Divided Self is his exploration of the topic, but it's sold in the nonfiction section.
- kingkawn 17y ago
  I'd be hard pressed to argue that our imagination does not change our reality.

fnid 17y ago

It's not real. At best it is anecdotal. It's a story. It's imagination. It's entertainment. It's a very expensive form of entertainment when you value your time.

antonovka 17y ago
It's not real. At best it is anecdotal. It's a story. It's imagination. It's entertainment. Why are ideas presented in the form of non-fiction any more "real" than ideas presented in the form of fiction? Even the most literal non-fiction remains an expression of the author's opinion and ideas. It's a very expensive form of entertainment when you value your time. I find what I learn from well-chosen fiction and non-fiction to be equally valuable, and I value my time quite a bit. I also would be very surprised that anyone who has time to comment here doesn't have time to read a fiction (or non-fiction) book.
- fnid 17y ago
  It's not about having the time or not, it's about what you choose to read when you do have the time. The difference is that when you read fiction, you are in a world, a physical land that is entirely constructed by the mind of the author. The characters aren't bound by the same laws of physics that you and I are. When characters make decisions, the other characters react in the way the author wants, but real people may not react that way. With nonfiction, there are rules. With fiction, there are no rules. In fact, you don't know what the rules are when you read fiction. You know that quote about those who don't read history are doomed to repeat it? Well, there is a lot of history to read. They're two different universes. One, fiction, is framed in a universe where we don't exist. The other, nonfiction, is in the same universe we all share here. In fiction, what goes up may not come down. If you shape your life or make decisions based on fictional ideas, they don't always apply in the real world. Sometimes they may, but mostly they do not. Yes, you are right, lots of insights can be gained from fiction. I learned a lot reading slaughterhouse five. It's fiction, but it's also pretty real in a way. I learned a lot from 1984. I learn a lot from science fiction. But there are is also a lot to learn and a lot of insights to be gained from nonfiction as well. Truth is stranger than fiction. Think of it this way. If you only read fiction for the rest of your life, could you program a computer? Could you build a house? Could you understand quantum mechanics or any myriad other practical skills? Probably not. This of course is my opinion, but if I had to choose between a future life of only fiction reading or a future life of only nonfiction reading, I would choose nonfiction. I think nonfiction is a better learning tool and a greater benefit to my life than fiction, because through nonfiction, I can learn facts that I can't learn through fiction. It's actually difficult and confusing sometimes to decipher truth from fiction.
  - antonovka 17y ago
    Think of it this way. If you only read fiction for the rest of your life, could you program a computer? Could you build a house? Could you understand quantum mechanics or any myriad other practical skills? Probably not. My practical skills are only useful in their relation to my human condition, both of which warrant exploration. This of course is my opinion, but if I had to choose between a future life of only fiction reading or a future life of only nonfiction reading, I would choose nonfiction. Fortunately for all of us, that choice is entirely unnecessary, and I've no problem suggesting that anyone who actually dismisses either fiction or non-fiction is demonstrating a remarkable, frightening lack of insight.
    - deleted 17y ago
      [deleted]
    - fnid 17y ago
      Do you believe the human condition cannot be explored through nonfiction? Would you entertain the idea that perhaps it may be possible to explore the human condition deeper and more profoundly through nonfiction than through fiction? I think it's actually quite insightful to understand that. Find me a fiction book more profoundly descriptive of the human condition than The Divided Self by RD Laing.
      - antonovka 17y ago
        Do you believe the human condition cannot be explored through nonfiction? No. Would you entertain the idea that perhaps it may be possible to explore the human condition deeper and more profoundly through nonfiction than through fiction? It's not a contest. Find me a fiction book more profoundly descriptive of the human condition than The Divided Self by RD Laing. You don't believe his book is an exploration of his own personal perspective on reality and meaning?
        fnid 17y ago
        I believe it is a contest, because we have a limited amount of time on earth. If you could do either A or B and you believe B is better, then why would you do A? Of course The Divided Self is his exploration of the topic, but it's sold in the nonfiction section.
kingkawn 17y ago
I'd be hard pressed to argue that our imagination does not change our reality.