Okay, not literally. Well, okay, maybe literally.
Just a little purposeful over-reation to the fact of progress.
I have a novel that I put on the back burner. It takes place here in Chicago. As such, I've gone around town and took notes (mental, written and general impressions) about specific places. Then I wrote them, specificially, into the story. I'd hoped it would have an authentic feel.
I'll of course be revamping that back-burned novel whenever I wind up getting back to it so as to make it a little less exact... but then, some of the places and 'objects' are heavily woven into the story! Besides, I had wanted people to be able to visit these places themselves (if the spirit so moved them.)
Makes me wonder if it's better to create a fictionalized city like Jeremy Strache's "Chicago" or if the realism adds that extra believability. Seems like there's good reason for both ways.
No comments:
Post a Comment