ABSTRACT

I claim that we should reject a sharp distinction between fiction and non-fiction according to which documentary is a faithful representation of the facts, whilst fiction films merely invite us to imagine what is made up. Instead, we should think of fiction and non-fiction as genres: categories whose membership is determined by a combination of non-essential features and which influence appreciation in a variety of ways. An objection to this approach is that it renders the distinction too conventional and fragile, undermining our justification for criticising documentaries like Bowling for Columbine or The Hunting Ground for playing fast and loose with the facts. I argue that this objection is misguided, misidentifying the justification for criticising non-fiction films that mislead or deceive. I develop an alternative account that explains why we also criticise many fictions for inaccuracy.

摘要

我主张，我们应该拒绝小说与非小说之间的鲜明区分，在这种区分中，纪录片是对事实的忠实代表，而小说电影只是邀请我们去想象是由什么组成的。取而代之的是，我们应该将小说和非小说视为流派：其类别由非必要特征的组合决定并以各种方式影响欣赏的类别。对这种方法的反对意见是，它使这种区分过于传统和脆弱，破坏了我们批评诸如鲍林·哥伦拜恩（Bowling for Columbine）或狩猎场（The Hunting Ground）等纪录片的理由。对于事实的快速和松散的玩法。我认为这种反对是错误的，误导了批评误导或欺骗的非小说类电影的正当性。我提出了一个替代性的解释，解释了为什么我们也批评许多虚构的小说。