I read to the end ready to comment that history is riddled with fiction but you covered it. Gallagher talks so much crap on a regular basis he probably is reading fiction right now. (This is part of what makes him fun). Books are a product of their time so they show you things you can’t access in fact lists. Also, songwriting, is horrible when it’s factual Noel. 🙂
I almost titled this post, “Fiction Is Nonfiction, Nonfiction Is Fiction.” If you read Gallagher’s whole screed, he seems mainly upset that authors are acting superior to others by virtue of their being authors—which is a strange complaint.
I love "Fiction is Nonfiction..." It's even clearer with film. Documentries are a lot less honest art form that a drama. And when a film says "based on a true story" the Coen brothers really showed that up for what it is.
During the lockdown, I overheard a teacher explaining to my first-grader over Zoom the difference between fiction and nonfiction, “Nonfiction is something that really happened. Fiction is a story that is fake.” I wanted to take the ipad, shake it and yell at the teacher to stop saying nonsense! I understand that it may be challenging to find proper words to explain to first-graders the difference between fiction and nonfiction, but if you sign up for the job, you gotta put in an effort into it. I wholeheartedly agree with what you say. When reading fiction, we know it is made-up or “manipulated” information, but the story can reveal truth nonetheless. Nonfiction can be and sometimes is manipulated, but reading it we expect it, at least subconsciously, to be “real.” Whatever real may mean. So in some ways, nonfiction is more dangerous (not that I would advocate against reading it).
I love this. I’ve struggled with this myself, and spent years of my life disregarding and maligning fiction. I’ve now spent the last few years undoing, and trying to atone for that mistake and I’ve seldom read anything that explains my new love and admiration for great fiction so well.
Wow, good question. I’ve been on a reading journey in the last couple of years to broaden my horizons, and read books I would never have considered before. I’ve been writing about it here.
I’d say the best one lately has to be Tangerine, by Christine Mangan - part travel, part romance, part thriller. Absolutely fantastic.
Joel, I love your article. I have been teaching the value of novels for years in my speeches on leadership. If you want to understand people and what makes them tick, then read novels. Novelists have to understand people to write a novel. Business books will only teach you so much. Novels teach you about people. Daniel Goleman published Emotional Intelligence in the 1990s and it has been taught to leaders since. I recommend people read novels instead. Powerful message.
Hard to argue with any of that Joel. Yes, novels are mirrors. Of society. Of our psyche and nature. Of our world at large. I'm really at a loss as to how an artist like Gallagher can think that way, other than that he's always been a cantankerous contrarian (he's had some odd musical views as well). Fried is just the latest in a long line of a certain scientist/engineer/business type who wear their ignorance of the humanities at large and its contribution to civilizational progress like some sort of badge of honor. The kind of people who brag about how they never took a liberal arts class their whole time as an undergraduate. Fools. And yes, they would think fiction is fake.
Brothers K changed my entire outlook on the world. I can't think of one nonfiction book that ever had that kind of impact personally. I guess it would depend on how we are classifying something like the Bible maybe? Or some of the great philosophers? Now that's a high standard, and very few fiction works throughout history are that profound. And yes, when I read a mediocre or bad piece of fiction, I can be left with the feeling of "I just wasted a bunch of time on that." And with an equivalent nonfiction book, I may not feel quite like that ("at least I learned something?").
One other thing that I took away. The continued importance of scholarly interpretation and criticism of great fiction works. The excavation of the background inspiration that you don't find in the primary work. That's how you find out how the author may have plausibly constructed the story. What their influences were. What they saw in the world as they wrote. Sometimes footnotes will tell you some of that. But often you have to hear it from someone else.
“Those of us who have been true readers all our life seldom fully realise the enormous extension of our being which we owe to authors. We realise it best when we talk with an unliterary friend. He may be full of goodness and good sense but he inhabits a tiny world. In it, we should be suffocated. The man who is contented to be only himself, and therefore less a self, is in prison. My own eyes are not enough for me, I will see through those of others. Reality, even seen through the eyes of many, is not enough. I will see what others have invented.
Even the eyes of all humanity are not enough. I regret that the brutes cannot write books. Very gladly would I learn what face things present to a mouse or a bee; more gladly still would I perceive the olfactory world charged with all the information and emotion it carries for a dog."
Thank you for writing this I wholeheartedly agree and particularly the point about psychology. So why do I read more non-fiction? Partly because some is unavoidable, but mainly because it's easier.
Modern life is filled with interruptions. As I write this, loud drilling next door disrupts my thoughts. I couldn't focus on fiction with that racket going on. Public transport used to be great for reading, but now it's a barrage of announcements and distractions.
There’s a lot of value in nonfiction, too, of course. But there’s something to be said for finding a quiet corner and immersing yourself in a novel. My favorite is when I have enough time in a day or two to start and get all the way to the finish.
A teller of stories is the upholder of a sacred oath. A pledge to deliver us to a deeper sense of ourselves. A vow to draw us closer into the radical reality of our alive-ness. Stories and storytellers reveal to us the inner reservoir of truth and meaning that are constantly flowing in us, throughout us, and all around us.
For the assignment editor: it would be interesting to read a “serious” piece on why “serious” people don’t like novels. I’m curious, and wonder if this is just a form of perverse contrarianism.
I read to the end ready to comment that history is riddled with fiction but you covered it. Gallagher talks so much crap on a regular basis he probably is reading fiction right now. (This is part of what makes him fun). Books are a product of their time so they show you things you can’t access in fact lists. Also, songwriting, is horrible when it’s factual Noel. 🙂
I almost titled this post, “Fiction Is Nonfiction, Nonfiction Is Fiction.” If you read Gallagher’s whole screed, he seems mainly upset that authors are acting superior to others by virtue of their being authors—which is a strange complaint.
I love "Fiction is Nonfiction..." It's even clearer with film. Documentries are a lot less honest art form that a drama. And when a film says "based on a true story" the Coen brothers really showed that up for what it is.
During the lockdown, I overheard a teacher explaining to my first-grader over Zoom the difference between fiction and nonfiction, “Nonfiction is something that really happened. Fiction is a story that is fake.” I wanted to take the ipad, shake it and yell at the teacher to stop saying nonsense! I understand that it may be challenging to find proper words to explain to first-graders the difference between fiction and nonfiction, but if you sign up for the job, you gotta put in an effort into it. I wholeheartedly agree with what you say. When reading fiction, we know it is made-up or “manipulated” information, but the story can reveal truth nonetheless. Nonfiction can be and sometimes is manipulated, but reading it we expect it, at least subconsciously, to be “real.” Whatever real may mean. So in some ways, nonfiction is more dangerous (not that I would advocate against reading it).
I love this. I’ve struggled with this myself, and spent years of my life disregarding and maligning fiction. I’ve now spent the last few years undoing, and trying to atone for that mistake and I’ve seldom read anything that explains my new love and admiration for great fiction so well.
Welcome to the club, Tom! I’m glad the post resonated. What’s the best novel you’ve read lately?
Wow, good question. I’ve been on a reading journey in the last couple of years to broaden my horizons, and read books I would never have considered before. I’ve been writing about it here.
I’d say the best one lately has to be Tangerine, by Christine Mangan - part travel, part romance, part thriller. Absolutely fantastic.
Joel, I love your article. I have been teaching the value of novels for years in my speeches on leadership. If you want to understand people and what makes them tick, then read novels. Novelists have to understand people to write a novel. Business books will only teach you so much. Novels teach you about people. Daniel Goleman published Emotional Intelligence in the 1990s and it has been taught to leaders since. I recommend people read novels instead. Powerful message.
Spot on. Thanks, Harley!
Hard to argue with any of that Joel. Yes, novels are mirrors. Of society. Of our psyche and nature. Of our world at large. I'm really at a loss as to how an artist like Gallagher can think that way, other than that he's always been a cantankerous contrarian (he's had some odd musical views as well). Fried is just the latest in a long line of a certain scientist/engineer/business type who wear their ignorance of the humanities at large and its contribution to civilizational progress like some sort of badge of honor. The kind of people who brag about how they never took a liberal arts class their whole time as an undergraduate. Fools. And yes, they would think fiction is fake.
Brothers K changed my entire outlook on the world. I can't think of one nonfiction book that ever had that kind of impact personally. I guess it would depend on how we are classifying something like the Bible maybe? Or some of the great philosophers? Now that's a high standard, and very few fiction works throughout history are that profound. And yes, when I read a mediocre or bad piece of fiction, I can be left with the feeling of "I just wasted a bunch of time on that." And with an equivalent nonfiction book, I may not feel quite like that ("at least I learned something?").
One other thing that I took away. The continued importance of scholarly interpretation and criticism of great fiction works. The excavation of the background inspiration that you don't find in the primary work. That's how you find out how the author may have plausibly constructed the story. What their influences were. What they saw in the world as they wrote. Sometimes footnotes will tell you some of that. But often you have to hear it from someone else.
I think you’re right about good criticism. Books are tools for thinking and good critics help add more nuance to the thoughts available to us.
Love this.
I wrote something in a similar vein last year: https://open.substack.com/pub/janell/p/the-very-real-lives-of-fiction?utm_source=share&utm_medium=android&r=2rddb
Thanks for sharing that!
Is your Substack name a TS Eliot reference?
It is! An ode to his Ash Wednesday poem...peace among these rocks
Great post! More books added to the never ending list...😁
Thanks, Melody! A never-ending TBR seems like a good picture of great future.
The Road is one of my favorites as well. Till We Have Faces has been on my TBR for awhile. Need to bump it up!
I’ve read TWHF probably five or six times over the years. I’ll definitely read it again.
Book of continuing surprises! One of which for surfers of depression is the possibility of futility leading to glory. Thank you for a kindling post.
In the words of CS Lewis,
“Those of us who have been true readers all our life seldom fully realise the enormous extension of our being which we owe to authors. We realise it best when we talk with an unliterary friend. He may be full of goodness and good sense but he inhabits a tiny world. In it, we should be suffocated. The man who is contented to be only himself, and therefore less a self, is in prison. My own eyes are not enough for me, I will see through those of others. Reality, even seen through the eyes of many, is not enough. I will see what others have invented.
Even the eyes of all humanity are not enough. I regret that the brutes cannot write books. Very gladly would I learn what face things present to a mouse or a bee; more gladly still would I perceive the olfactory world charged with all the information and emotion it carries for a dog."
100% What a wonderful quote.
Martha simply never misses.
Not in my experience.
Thank you for writing this I wholeheartedly agree and particularly the point about psychology. So why do I read more non-fiction? Partly because some is unavoidable, but mainly because it's easier.
Modern life is filled with interruptions. As I write this, loud drilling next door disrupts my thoughts. I couldn't focus on fiction with that racket going on. Public transport used to be great for reading, but now it's a barrage of announcements and distractions.
There’s a lot of value in nonfiction, too, of course. But there’s something to be said for finding a quiet corner and immersing yourself in a novel. My favorite is when I have enough time in a day or two to start and get all the way to the finish.
A teller of stories is the upholder of a sacred oath. A pledge to deliver us to a deeper sense of ourselves. A vow to draw us closer into the radical reality of our alive-ness. Stories and storytellers reveal to us the inner reservoir of truth and meaning that are constantly flowing in us, throughout us, and all around us.
Amen.
Just wait till you get to your July classic! 😂🥰
I’m looking forward to it!
For the assignment editor: it would be interesting to read a “serious” piece on why “serious” people don’t like novels. I’m curious, and wonder if this is just a form of perverse contrarianism.