Hi all, long time no blog...

I have been thinking of this superficial distinction that many of us have between fiction and non-fiction. Any subject, no matter how well researched can only be written/described as a map of the terrain covered and the only map that can be a complete description of the subject being mapped is a map as large as the subject itself (in which case it's not really a map anymore...). Anything less than that is made complete through belief in what fills the gaps between the bits of information in the limited map. By extension, any history of any aspect of the world is missing the feelings and direct perceptions gained from the actual event that is not contained in even primary sources held in ones's hand (unless one has the power of clairvoyance...). No one can ever be an expert on anyone else's experience without actually having been there, and even still, they only have access to their own feelings and not the "other's." Any such claim to authenticity is inaccurate and false. I no longer believe in "non-fiction." It does not exist and is a creation of our imagination and belief system.

Try an experiment: change your belief about something, and see if it stays the same, or if it changes. Life is not only stranger than fiction...it actually IS fiction.

:)

Have I been reading too much Franck Herbert?

peace,

paul