TEPPY!
I know we can't read it here (pre-pub internet pub not acceptable), but I do want to see it, damnit.
YOWSA!
Spike ,'Same Time, Same Place'
A place for Buffistas to discuss, beta and otherwise deal and dish on their non-fan fiction projects.
TEPPY!
I know we can't read it here (pre-pub internet pub not acceptable), but I do want to see it, damnit.
YOWSA!
Go Teppy!
Yay, Tep.
Thanks, Kessie - it'll probably be in the late summer, but I don't know anything specific yet.
Congrats, Teppy!
Steph L. .. Congrats!!
Susan , Hope you´ll feel better soon! The writing will come soon, I´m sure, it always does *good vibes*
There might be a way around it -- I could maybe post it and delete it after, say 30 minutes. Like I said, this publication is one of the newsprint monthly free publications that one finds in supermarkets. I fully expect to line many birdcages.
t edit Having said that, I gotta run out the door to my writing class, so if I do post-and-delete, it won't be until later or tomorrow.
HOORAY TEP!!!!
Teppy, that's marvelous! Go you! I'd love to read it, too.
Writers group had a wangle yesterday over "creative nonfiction." Member brought a piece which was lovely. Based on a factual relationship and a true event, but she'd changed the setting, imagined a house that wasn't, decorated in a way that never existed.
I think it's fine to base a fictional story on a real event, an actual relationship, etc. And it's also fine to look at facts in a refocused way in a nonfiction piece. For example, a story about a family funeral when the writer was a child: rather than describing a house and yard that never existed, the "creative" part could have been her describing the house that did exist in a hyper aware and detailed way. The winter sunlight shining through burlap curtains that her aunt had carefully raveled to make fringed edges, the worn boards of the floor, the scarred black varnish of the front door, etc.
Was I right? Or have I misunderstood the creative part of creative nonfiction?
Damned if I know, Bev. I've never heard the term before, or stopped to consider that there were strict forms.
It seems to me that the result - did the piece work as fiction? - is far more important that the terminology being used to categorise it.
It worked fine as fiction, but she was calling it "creative nonfiction."
All the definitions I've heard of that blasted confusing term seem to indicate that the subject be actual fact, or perceived fact, but that the view of the event or, or, fact ferpetessake, be "creative," rather than journalistic.
It's a tough concept to get across, but lots of schools and con ed classes are teaching "creative nonfiction." It would be so much simpler if they'd just stick to fiction and non-fiction. I think. As I said, confused.