论文部分内容阅读
报道这一件民事官司,既由于案由是对一位作家的作品提起侵犯名誉诉讼,具有新闻性,也因为作品是“纪实小说”,感到有必要引起作家和读者们的关注。“纪实小说”是在十多年前出现的一种新文体,简单说来是作家们根据一件真实的事情写成一篇人物虚构的小说,“查有此事,查无此人”,真真假假,真假难分。当时,上海解放日报曾就此文体展开过一次讨论,发表过不同意见的文章。讨论在“且慢否定,让时间来鉴定它的价值和得失”声中告一段落。十多年过去,“纪实小说”已很少见,但还有人在写,本案就是一例。看来,当时的争论中,就有专家指出“这种文体很容易引发讼争,作家要加强法制观念”,意见是正确的。我们认为:小说是完全虚构的,纪实是完全真实的,两者难以1+1=2。报告文学作家们都已经拒绝虚构,写小说则完全有虚构的自由,创新要尊重文学规律,也要遵循新闻规则。希望“纪实小说”诱发的官司不再出现。
It is necessary to draw the attention of writers and readers both because of the fact that this case of civil lawsuit was reported because of the fact that the case was an infringement of a reputation lawsuit against a writer’s work, newsworthy, and because the work was a “documentary novel.” “Documentary fiction” is a new style of writing appeared more than a decade ago. To put it simply, writers write a fictional novel based on a real thing. True or False, True or False. At that time, Shanghai Jiefang Daily had held a discussion on this style and published articles with different opinions. The discussion comes to an end in the phrase “And slowly denying time to identify its worth and gains and losses.” More than a decade later, “documentary novels” have been rare, but there are still people writing, the case is an example. It seems that during the controversy at the time, some experts pointed out that “this style of writing can easily lead to litigation and that writers should strengthen the concept of legal system”. The views are correct. We think: the novel is completely fictional, documentary is completely true, the two are hard to 1 +1 = 2. Reportage writers who have rejected fiction, write fiction is completely fictitious freedom, innovation must respect the laws of literature, but also to follow the rules of the press. I hope “novels” induced by the lawsuit no longer appear.