unless
you're portraying your story as 'The Truth'. The best thing would be to
strike a balance between the real and unreal, blurring the lines so
that no one is quite sure which is which.
or,
use the real life name, get out there and do your research and make the
work as true to life as you can manage - which is great for a
non-fiction book, but for the purposes of a novel, can be extremely
tedious. Most novelists bend the rules of 'reality' in order to make
their story fit.
Sorry
to take so long to answer your question, I have been away taken a well
deserved break! In answer, I think that if you fictionalise a place and
then use its real life name, you are aking for trouble as people will
inevitably draw comparisons. The best thing to do is either to make up
your own name for the place and then use its real life counterpart as
basic foundation for the work; (continued)
hello!
just checking the site and proud to be among you all...who's coming on
saltpetre radio show first then? come and read ya story on
air...wednesdays 11.30pm...see you on tour, rock on saliva va va x
If
a writer creates a work of fiction set in a real location and using its
real name, what responsibility does he have to give an
accurate picture of that place and get his facts right about it.
For
example if I were to write a story set in Harlesden and grotesquely
exaggerate the extent of gun crime there, should I be surprised if
local residents are cross with me? How should I respond if they
complain?
