now seems that literature and film have to be to Oliver Stone, and the Truman Capote: attached to reality. Imagine, invent, no longer are cool. Most people read or go to the movies and the first criticism, and sometimes the only thing, is how true is what you see on the screen. Since you can not even lie. This is over.
The biggest controversy in recent times has been the movie and the book The Da Vinci Code. The main scandal is based on the author decides to imagine that Maria Magdalena and Jesus are couples with children. The rarity of the case, is not the first author, nor the last, that you imagine. But if the most criticized, which, incidentally, gave a fortune with which you can sit and imagine any bullshit you can think and write in peace from the comfort of your home, which I guess already made from before , but hey, I get the idea.
These last two days I've been also reading a review, for example, The Curious Incident of the Dog in , little novel that I liked, and in which the narrator is a 14-year Asperger syndrome. To begin the discussion or controversy began based on the false premise that the child was autistic. Someone wondered why it was common to write about gifted children with autism when in fact there are no gifted autistic children., For starters, I do not know whether or not there. And they want to tell you, neither is a fact that I lose sleep, a writer, I believe, can give literary license, you can invent or create characters with the features you want. The reader assumes, from the first page of a novel, which tells the writer is real within the world of fiction is the novel, need not expect or want that reality or truth that assigns the fictional world and installed in life real. Sometimes happens, sometimes not, and this is a strict decision of who writes. But it seems now give less power of invention, now the thing has to be in addition to credible, real, Poor Harry Potter, now go into a tailspin.
I just saw the movie Across that interested me, besides being Mexican, because it's a former University classmate, Gustavo Loza. The truth is that it is a movie that moved me, although in some respects, has a resolution too easy. But when he got home and read some reviews, I was surprised that some would accuse of too naive or unlikely, even superficial is how migration. It seems to me, after reading these opinions, then the thing was not understood. Three stories of children, with the vision of children. And children are naive, children know the world in its own way, and imagine what you do not know their way, and is perhaps why we seem naive to think that the "other side" is the other side of a pond and thought the child star of one of the stories. But ... why would a ten year old boy from a village in Michoacán, who lives in the countryside, have to know where is the other side? Why would a Cuban boy can not believe that Florida can get mounted on a wheel when other, as adults, have tried? The beauty of the film lies in its simplicity. And if it turns out that a white handler suddenly falls in love with a girl and helping her find her father, for what happens, what the traffickers can not have a heart? Or the author of the film can not imagine or wish you had it?
And, or two, especially in the two examples above, or the writer no longer is allowed to lie and lie, or do not know see the world through the eyes of children.
