39 Comments
⭠ Return to thread

Garner has always walked the fine line between fiction and non-fiction. I don’t try and work out what what is real and what isn’t because the ‘truth’ will always be through her experiences and therefore there will always be elements of fiction.

When I read her diaries I try and put all the noise and criticism aside and just be taken along for the ride of her amazing observation. I’m surprised with how affronted I feel with Astrid’s criticism of the diaries even though I rationally see the points you are making. My initial reaction is, do we have to critique everything, can’t some things just be for pure enjoyment? But I don’t know where you would draw the line. Astrid, would it make you feel better if it wasn’t marketed as non-fiction?

The part about being scared to say you don’t like a popular author has made me realise it feels so much more personal to criticise an authors work compared to just not liking a musicians song or album. I wonder if that’s because of the effort that we know goes into writing something? I never give less than 3 stars on Goodreads (your favourite Bri) even if they are an international best seller.

I completely agree that we would all be up in arms if it wasn’t a straight white male who was portrayed in the villain but holy moly isn’t it just juicy sweet revenge for how awfully he treated her. I love the diary entry where he asks her not to write about him in her diary. ooooops!

Thanks for sparking such an interesting discussion!

Expand full comment

'Along for the ride' is EXACTLY how I feel with the diaries. Yes.

And YES to the part about him asking her not to write about him LOL.

Expand full comment

Along for the ride, ha! I just wanted to fall of the bandwagon. ;)

Expand full comment

Yes! If these were published as ‘fiction’ I think I would have enjoyed the reading experience more. That wouldn’t answer the age old question with Garner’s work as to how much fact is in her fiction, but it would be a fundamentally different public assertion of intent.

And thank you for replying even though you felt a little affronted! I feel very out on a limb here because most people react that way (hence why I was hesitant in the first place). I think you are right - it does feel more personal to criticise a writer as opposed to a musician. Maybe it has something to do with how we consume writing? As in, reading is mostly a solitary experience, whereas listening to musician can be communal and public.

Also.. yes. This is totally ‘juicy sweet revenge’!

Expand full comment

But even if they were sold as 'fiction' people who still be doing the same guessing game about who is who, wouldn't they?

Astrid can you explain what you mean by 'different public assertion of intent'?

Expand full comment

Oh, agreed. People would still guess.

‘Different public assertion of intent’ is not very clear, is it? I meant releasing a work as fiction tells the reader some (or all) of the work is made up, whereas releasing a work as non-fiction asserts that most (or all) of the work is true.

Expand full comment

Are biographies classified as non-fiction? They almost need their own classification of ‘non-fiction-ish. I never pick up a biography thinking I’ll get the facts and figures of someone’s life. I know all their experiences are coloured by their values and experiences.

The guessing game as to who is who is part of the fun, like you’re reading something you shouldn’t be. That might just come down to a difference in personality or different reasons why we read.

Expand full comment

Yeah they go in the nonfiction section of a bookstore but I agree with the 'ish'.

Expand full comment

Thanks to Bri and Astrid especially, from me too for sparking such an interesting discussion. There's a few threads but as a singer and a songwriter (not famous) I had to comment on the strange idea that it's more personal to criticise an author's work than the work of a musician or songwriter. Singing is especially personal and the most arresting singers expose themselves, make themselves vulnerable. Afterall it's the actual visceral voice, the body that is expressing itself. Of course songs can be fluff but the good ones are both personal and universal.

I'm not a Garner fan, but haven't read much of her. Like many others here I found TFS confused, strangely unhinged from Garner's previous feminism, biased and even arrogant. Having known of Garner's amazing work at the Pram Factory in earlier times I wonder if our feminism is never absolutely consistent; we change as times change, as language becomes more precise, as our ideas more solid.

Isn't some of the diary just plain gossip? Is that worthy of anything?

Expand full comment
Error