True, but here I am on the opposite side of the fence from Brian, I think that by leaving reality behind, you can, in a sense, create something 'more real'.
Minor example, but I was talking with a writer who had set a story in Cleveland, and he had invented a setting whole cloth downtown, but people who read the book said they recognized it, or claimed to have been there, when, in fact, nothing like it really exists. But it captured the feeling, in general, of Cleveland's bleak lakeside. If he had instead set the scene on the real Cleveland lakefront, it would have been missing a few details that round out not the reality of a scene, but the feeling and characterization of a place.
That's sort of what I mean by being 'more real than reality'.
Though, you are right, I'm arguing tangentally to Brian's well-documented dislike for the gross machinations of your standard pulp plot. Heck, I think we all know dreck when we read it. Just some of us can turn our minds off and enjoy the dreckiness of it. :)
Re:
Minor example, but I was talking with a writer who had set a story in Cleveland, and he had invented a setting whole cloth downtown, but people who read the book said they recognized it, or claimed to have been there, when, in fact, nothing like it really exists. But it captured the feeling, in general, of Cleveland's bleak lakeside. If he had instead set the scene on the real Cleveland lakefront, it would have been missing a few details that round out not the reality of a scene, but the feeling and characterization of a place.
That's sort of what I mean by being 'more real than reality'.
Though, you are right, I'm arguing tangentally to Brian's well-documented dislike for the gross machinations of your standard pulp plot. Heck, I think we all know dreck when we read it. Just some of us can turn our minds off and enjoy the dreckiness of it. :)