thestig, 2/22

“Does reality actually outstrip fiction?”

In class, we debated whether or not reality outstrips fiction. I think that yes, reality does outstrip function. This is why:

Reality is something that is not able to be fully absorbed on television, which is what I would argue is non-fiction, not reality. Reality is an occurrence that one experiences with an emotional state that can only be felt when present. Utilizing and making sense of your five senses is reality. There is a difference between being in New York during the week of 9/11, and reading about it in the Times or watching a news segment/documentary. I can tell you first hand what the chaos was like. I could feel it in the tone of peoples’ voice; I could smell the disaster from my apartment, five or so miles from ground zero; I could see the smoke. What is on TV is not necessarily fiction, but it isn’t reality. It is coded reality; it is fiction reality. The images depict what happens, nothing more. Furthermore, who knows if what you’re seeing on TV is actually “real?” You can’t get the full experience from the TV: if you haven’t been to New Orleans, then you don’t know what it’s like to be there, I promise. You don’t know the stench, the scope of the disaster, or the morale of the native people. Only an extremely sophisticated piece of film can come close to depicting reality. We are also desensitized by images and video clips that are on loop 24/7 on the web and major networks. We saw images of the planes crashing into the world trade center over and over on that day, but each of these images simply depicted a reality. Fiction is what we want: it is the desired outcome, it is the “let’s cut to the chase” of the story. So does reality outstrip fiction? You bet. Reality is a being, fiction is a notion, non-fiction is a depiction.