![]() |
Rudyard Kipling |
Soapbox. Axe to
grind. Whatever you want to call it,
everyone has something that makes them heated.
As I write this, it’s difficult to avoid clichés—blow steam, get under
the skin, fly in the ointment. Perhaps
it’s no surprise that we have so much tired language relating to issues of
great frustration because life is full of them.
My big gripe is with fiction that uses a character from
another author’s creative work. There’s
a whole slew of these novels, ranging from Jean Rhys’s well-regarded (by many) Wide
Sargasso Sea to the dreamy escapades of Darcy-craving Austen fans. No matter the craft and intention behind such
novels, I categorically reject this practice of stealing others’ creative
property, and when my writer friends seem baffled or say it’s not “stealing”, I
have only to ask them how they would feel if someone else took one of their
characters and appropriated that character to a re-telling. That invariably makes them realize that using
somebody else’s creation to one’s own ends is at best a questionable
practice. I should point out that a book
like John Gardner’s Grendel bothers me less (in fact, I admire it),
since Beowulf belongs to an entire culture and is not the product of a
single author with an individual intent.
Even the re-casting of premises or conflicts doesn’t bother me the way
using another author’s character does.
And so it would seem that turning an actual, historical
person into a fictional character is also a questionable practice, but once
again, I’m more lenient here. However
mythologized they may be, historical figures once existed and hence are
property of this world which fiction—good fiction—probes and reflects. I appreciate the separation between fiction
and nonfiction; hence, a book like The DaVinci Code does not give me
fits the way it made many confused souls think that there might be factual
truth in a genre and form that has little, if anything, to do with factual
truth. So too do I recognize that a
fictional rendering of an historical person is exactly that—fiction, an
imagined version of something that has been, or might have been, a certain way.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/8b700/8b7003d052368b27b19dc51c6260f84fd52998e8" alt=""
Still, Vinton hits on the emotional truth of the situation:
that the dreamers in our midst, the ones who dispense with the regimented
business of the world because they give credence to what is interesting,
charming, and deeply felt, may suffer dismissive behavior from others, and yet
those dismissive others are powerfully enriched and enlarged by their contact
with such dreamers.
The New York Times review of The Jungle Law
recognizes the book’s choice to portray Kipling as this open-minded dreamer,
though the reviewer feels “it’s important to know [Vinton’s version] is not the
whole story.” The reviewer, Mark Kamine,
calls attention to Kipling’s real-life, “monumentally offensive” poem “The White Man’s
Burden.” Fair enough. In fact, Kamine’s review does a nice job of
delicately reminding readers that fictional portrayals should not affect our
overall understanding of an historical figure’s actual achievements. His review seems a tacit nod to the danger of
popular portrayals like The Brownings of Wimpole Street, an overly
sentimental 1934 film which did impact critical reception of Elizabeth Barrett
Browning’s poetry.
As with last Tuesday’s book, The Jungle Law’s ties to
my preparatory reading for the Squaw Valley Workshop may be difficult to
trace. And, just as The Golden Mean’s
editor will be at the workshop, so too will The Jungle Law’s editor,
Anika Streitfeld, be in attendance. I’m
looking forward to catching a glimpse of women whose work takes place primarily behind the scenes.