Just the Facts, Ma'am
In my January 6th blog about Harlan Ellison, I mistakenly wrote that one of the episodes he wrote for The Outer Limits was titled The Glass Hand, when it was actually titled Demon with the Glass Hand. Not a big deal, until you think about it from the writer's perspective.
How would you like to have your work mis-titled and flung into the ether of the Internet? I don't like it when someone who has met me before calls me Tim...or Beverly. Have you ever been in some event or play and had them misspell it? It's not a big deal, but it still feels diminishing, because inaccuracy diminishes the truth.
I make mistakes. I sometimes think one thing and type another. So I read and re-read and re-read what I write, including this blog, to catch mistakes.
As a 35-year veteran private investigator, I have written thousands of reports. I do not use templates. I write each report, checking my facts, down to the correct ZIP code for an address or area code for a phone number. In my investigation business, I have to get it right. My clients depend on my getting it right.
Apparently, my blog about Mr. Ellison, aroused the ire of at least a couple of his fans. One of them posted on Mr. Ellison's Web site the link to this blog in case--to paraphrase--there was a libel issue, but he told everyone they should wait to post any comments on my blog until "Harlan gives his permission."
Needless to say, this person doesn't know the definition of libel and was reacting only to his hero being called an asshole. But if I had written something untrue about Mr. Ellison and it could be proved that it damaged his reputation (which would be hard to do, since most of what I've read about him as a person isn't too flattering), libel could then be the basis for a lawsuit. But I checked my facts and conclusions carefully.
And for us fiction writers, the facts matter, too. I read things about private eyes that just make me shake my head. When I watch TV and see how private eyes are portrayed in using the methodology of their business, I can't watch. Too many writers perpetuate inaccurate investigative methods by reading other writers' versions of inaccurate investigative methods. The facts would actually make it more interesting. Here's an example:
In many novels, private eyes always identify themselves then ask questions. In fact, private eyes only identify themselves and ask questions about 30-40% of the time. The rest of the time we're using a pretext (a "gag"). How often do you read about private eyes pretending to be someone else to get information out of someone? Not too often. But wouldn't it be more fun to read? Of course. The truth will not only set you free, it'll get you entertained.
Whether I am writing fiction, non-fiction, plays, screenplays, or a daily blog, I intend to get the facts. I can still be creative. I can write fantastical things if I want. But when it comes to certain known things, I better get it right, because when a reader catches something that is not correct, it diminishes my work.
How would you like to have your work mis-titled and flung into the ether of the Internet? I don't like it when someone who has met me before calls me Tim...or Beverly. Have you ever been in some event or play and had them misspell it? It's not a big deal, but it still feels diminishing, because inaccuracy diminishes the truth.
I make mistakes. I sometimes think one thing and type another. So I read and re-read and re-read what I write, including this blog, to catch mistakes.
As a 35-year veteran private investigator, I have written thousands of reports. I do not use templates. I write each report, checking my facts, down to the correct ZIP code for an address or area code for a phone number. In my investigation business, I have to get it right. My clients depend on my getting it right.
Apparently, my blog about Mr. Ellison, aroused the ire of at least a couple of his fans. One of them posted on Mr. Ellison's Web site the link to this blog in case--to paraphrase--there was a libel issue, but he told everyone they should wait to post any comments on my blog until "Harlan gives his permission."
Needless to say, this person doesn't know the definition of libel and was reacting only to his hero being called an asshole. But if I had written something untrue about Mr. Ellison and it could be proved that it damaged his reputation (which would be hard to do, since most of what I've read about him as a person isn't too flattering), libel could then be the basis for a lawsuit. But I checked my facts and conclusions carefully.
And for us fiction writers, the facts matter, too. I read things about private eyes that just make me shake my head. When I watch TV and see how private eyes are portrayed in using the methodology of their business, I can't watch. Too many writers perpetuate inaccurate investigative methods by reading other writers' versions of inaccurate investigative methods. The facts would actually make it more interesting. Here's an example:
In many novels, private eyes always identify themselves then ask questions. In fact, private eyes only identify themselves and ask questions about 30-40% of the time. The rest of the time we're using a pretext (a "gag"). How often do you read about private eyes pretending to be someone else to get information out of someone? Not too often. But wouldn't it be more fun to read? Of course. The truth will not only set you free, it'll get you entertained.
Whether I am writing fiction, non-fiction, plays, screenplays, or a daily blog, I intend to get the facts. I can still be creative. I can write fantastical things if I want. But when it comes to certain known things, I better get it right, because when a reader catches something that is not correct, it diminishes my work.
Comments