I am new to your work (and have read just two of your posts), but your style is delightful. And I am sure your book about non-existent islands will be, too.
"There is now less space between fiction and non-fiction in my mind. These were once completely separate shelves, which had clear distinctions that didn’t intersect, yet that divide seems, at this point, for me, both less accurate and less important, though this change has happened slowly, almost imperceptibly, in a gradual coalescing of categories. Even though the time that I’ve spent reading fiction has always felt more serious—it is more vital, more human, more fundamental to life, more salubrious, more relevant, more realistic—this literary hierarchy is less important to me, now that all the commonplace distinctions have begun to fade.
"... whether a story is factually true, in the admissible in court version of the term, isn’t really necessary if you seek narrative, if your objective is to locate an original voice on the page that reveals a unique and provocative and vibrant sensibility ..."
This is always the curious relief about being 'scooped' on a topic: it often turns out that a different person writes something quite different than what you are writing or plan to write about it.
If there can be scores of biographies about Churchill, there is certainly room for a second and I’m sure much more engaging book about Phantom islands!
To me it's more in the execution. Stories are often pieces and parts of others melded together in new and different ways. I'm sure your creative execution will have it's own unique flair - plus the other was nonfiction so totally different readers in my opinion.
I am new to your work (and have read just two of your posts), but your style is delightful. And I am sure your book about non-existent islands will be, too.
well, if you publish it (in english), I'll buy it.
"The other, more intriguing possibility is that this book shows the limits of nonfiction."
Charles Schifano references the flickering dance between fiction and nonfiction repeatedly in his own writings. Perhaps no more clearly than here:
https://charlesschifano.substack.com/p/true-fiction-b3c
"There is now less space between fiction and non-fiction in my mind. These were once completely separate shelves, which had clear distinctions that didn’t intersect, yet that divide seems, at this point, for me, both less accurate and less important, though this change has happened slowly, almost imperceptibly, in a gradual coalescing of categories. Even though the time that I’ve spent reading fiction has always felt more serious—it is more vital, more human, more fundamental to life, more salubrious, more relevant, more realistic—this literary hierarchy is less important to me, now that all the commonplace distinctions have begun to fade.
"... whether a story is factually true, in the admissible in court version of the term, isn’t really necessary if you seek narrative, if your objective is to locate an original voice on the page that reveals a unique and provocative and vibrant sensibility ..."
This is always the curious relief about being 'scooped' on a topic: it often turns out that a different person writes something quite different than what you are writing or plan to write about it.
I can’t wait for your version. Sounds incredible!
If there can be scores of biographies about Churchill, there is certainly room for a second and I’m sure much more engaging book about Phantom islands!
To me it's more in the execution. Stories are often pieces and parts of others melded together in new and different ways. I'm sure your creative execution will have it's own unique flair - plus the other was nonfiction so totally different readers in my opinion.