Is authenticity something we can control?

I think one form of authenticity is a story that seems so true-to-life that people begin speculating about the lives of the characters outside the story. They seem so much like real people that people think they know them.
 
Can fiction ever be completely authentic? Aren't we really talking about plausibility/realism?
No. I was trying to talk about something else. Perhaps you could re-visit the OP and help me re-phrase?
 
My point is that it's an extremely hard thing to pin down,
Precisely why I offered it as a point for discussion here. Different folks shed different lights.
whether an author is writing from a place of authenticity.

The OP was more about an author being authentic, not the story. True to themselves, as it were.
Actually, I was talking about the quality of the story, not the author's actual state of mind. "is a quality in a story such that it seems as if the author were writing from within,"
 
No. I was trying to talk about something else. Perhaps you could re-visit the OP and help me re-phrase?
Re-reading the OP, I think that you are talking about the writer's authenticity rather than the story itself. It amounts to writing for yourself, not what somebody else wants, which I agree with, at least for the amateur writers here.

EDIT: just seen the post above. Seems like I misunderstood what you were getting at.
 
Last edited:
Surely the wide ranging answers and debate about the very definition of the word that have been shared in this thread answer the question posed in the title.

No.
 
Can fiction ever be completely authentic? Aren't we really talking about plausibility/realism?
Authenticity in this context doesn’t have to do with truth or falsehood.

You might as well ask how it can be “realistic” if “fiction isn’t real.” It can be because that’s how our words work. Same goes for “authenticity.”
 
Authenticity in this context doesn’t have to do with truth or falsehood.
What is it about, then?

You might as well ask how it can be “realistic” if “fiction isn’t real.” It can be because that’s how our words work. Same goes for “authenticity.”
I think I said exactly that. Fiction, by definition, is not real. or authentic, and I don't have a problem with that. Some writers may be skilled enough to come close to a story that feels real, and good for them.
 
I think I said exactly that. Fiction, by definition, is not real. or authentic, and I don't have a problem with that
Let me go back and re-read. Maybe I got you all wrong.

Yes, there it is: You’re postulating that we can talk about realism in fiction, while simultaneously doubting that we can talk about authenticity.

Are you now walking that back, and saying we can’t talk about either?
 
Let me go back and re-read. Maybe I got you all wrong.

Yes, there it is: You’re postulating that we can talk about realism in fiction, while simultaneously doubting that we can talk about authenticity.

Are you now walking that back, and saying we can’t talk about either?
Er, no. Nothing to walk back. I stated my view. You can talk about whatever you like.

Fiction is not real. A story may be influenced by real-life experience, but it is still fiction. You may consider it authentic
 
Back
Top