How far can we go?

Well, my first thought was "who's that?"

Then I Googled it. I don't see a problem with inventing a legend to go along with the volcano. But if it worries you, why not create a fictional Chilean volcano?

As long as the legend is believable and logical, I don't see how it'd be considered improper at all.

jillianburks said:

I need to make up a legend about Osorno Volcano. How far do you think authors can go before they’re deemed improper? Is it okay for me to create a legend or do you think it would ruin a reader’s opinion of me?

Click to expand...

Why would it ruin anyone's opinion?

As long as you're writing fiction, I think it's completely valid to create whatever works best for your story. When I'm reading fiction, I don't expect the author to be bound by what actually is. Now with non-fiction, obviously, that would be an opinion killer..

p.s When I first read, 'Osorno Volcano' I thought it was a person's name. It wasn't until the ChaosTitan's post that I realized it was a volcano.

I say the further you take it, the better.

You're writing a novel. People expect legends to be made up. Make it whatever you want it to be.

If it truely bothers you, I've seen books with something like this under the dedication:

Orsono Volcano is real. I made up the stuff about the chocolate rabbit sacrifices though.

IdiotsRUs said:

If it truely bothers you, I've seen books with something like this under the dedication:

Orsono Volcano is real. I made up the stuff about the chocolate rabbit sacrifices though.

Click to expand...

That's a real sacrifice! Giving up your chocolate.

Yeah you can make up a legend out of something that exist, as long as it's logical enough to be believable. That's the bit that would drive people to google in the first place - they read your stuff, they believe it and think, 'Really? Wow. I'm gonna check that out.'

If it's stupid, they'll laugh at your book (probably do it here on AW lol) and wouldn't even bother with google, because they already know when they do that they'll find the thread on AW that calls it stupid lolol Just playing around, mate, but you get my drift.

Apparently, there is already a legend to go along with the volcano. Look up "Osorno Volcano legend."

And I wouldn't make up my own. I'd feel like I was disrespecting the very real people who created it/passed it down. Either I'd create a fictional volcano or use the existing legend.

unicornjam said:

Apparently, there is already a legend to go along with the volcano. Look up "Osorno Volcano legend."

And I wouldn't make up my own. I'd feel like I were disrespecting the very real people who created it/passed it down. Either I'd create a fictional volcano or use the existing legend.

Click to expand...

I echo unicornjam's comments with a couple added words: cultural misappropriation.

Problem with making up a legend about an existing place is that because the place is real your readers are likely to think that it is fact and think that legend really does exist and then the people of that area may legitimately feel they have been misrepresented.

Check out this excellent blog post by our very own Polenth regarding a published book that got this whole thing horribly wrong: Cultural Appropriation in Fiction

Also, if someone does do research and finds out there is already an existing legend nothing like the one you've created for the volcano they're likely to have a less than favorable opinion of your own research skills.

However (pauses for breath), if you do use the existing legend than you really, really need to make sure that you do your research concerning the believers of that legend and don't mistakenly misrepresent or misbrand them or their culture.

When a novel takes place in a real city, I expect the setting to be true, unless it obviously isn't.

For example, let's say your story takes place in London. London is a real place and let's say you pick up a real area of London, called Camberwell. I would expect the descriptions of the area to match what the area of Camberwell looks like. If however, it took place in Justiohin, London, I know it is a fake area of London and therefore you can make it look like whatever you want. Equally, if the story contained an urban legend about Camberwell, I would hope the urban legend wasn't made up. But if it's an urban legend about Justiohin, well, I would know it is made up.

Through novels, people travel to places and other cultures, and therefore, it is a bit disappointing that a story that seems almost real to the reader is based on wrong facts. However, readers are also pretty happy to travel to made up places, but you have to be upfront about it.

Through novels, people travel to places and other cultures, and therefore, it is a bit disappointing that a story that seems almost real to the reader is based on wrong facts. However, readers are also pretty happy to travel to made up places, but you have to be upfront about it.[/quote]


I agree with this completely. I also have read books where the author takes time to tell you what is real and what is not. Those are really good too. But i hate not knowing if the platform 9 3/4 is real in London even if i know it does not lead to a magic train.

Forks is a real place and so is La-push. But the legend of the cold ones isn't. Stephenie made it up.

Life is what happens, while you're busy making other plans. -- John Lennon

Isaac Espriu said:

I echo unicornjam's comments with a couple added words: cultural misappropriation.

Problem with making up a legend about an existing place is that because the place is real your readers are likely to think that it is fact

Click to expand...

only a problem if the reader can't understand the difference between fiction and non-fiction.

and think that legend really does exist and then the people of that area may legitimately feel they have been misrepresented.

Click to expand...

Again, I think you're assuming the fiction/non-fiction distinction is much more problematic than it actually is. I can watch "Texas Chainsaw Massacre" without assuming isolated farmhouses in the deep south are always occupied by inbred, cannibalistic families. I can watch "Indiana Jones" without thinking India is comprised exclusively of thugee death cults. I can watch Hong Kong martial arts films without believing the backstreets are constantly teeming with acrobatic street fights.

All my examples above were films, but the principle applies to any other media. Unless something poses as fact I don't see why it should have to defend itself against as weighty a charge as misappropriation.

If people couldn't make stuff up what would be left with?

Aschenbach said:

only a problem if the reader can't understand the difference between fiction and non-fiction.

Again, I think you're assuming the fiction/non-fiction distinction is much more problematic than it actually is. I can watch "Texas Chainsaw Massacre" without assuming isolated farmhouses in the deep south are always occupied by inbred, cannibalistic families. I can watch "Indiana Jones" without thinking India is comprised exclusively of thugee death cults. I can watch Hong Kong martial arts films without believing the backstreets are constantly teeming with acrobatic street fights.

All my examples above were films, but the principle applies to any other media. Unless something poses as fact I don't see why it should have to defend itself against as weighty a charge as misappropriation.

If people couldn't make stuff up what would be left with?

Click to expand...

It is an issue and one we need to be aware of as writers, particularly if we set our novels in real world places, using real cultures as a base. You don't have to think it's an issue, but my advice to the OP still stands.

Go read the blog post I linked to and tell me if what that writer did was okay.

I agree, it is an issue, but I would say it is one of misrepresentation than misappropriation.

When you talk about the latter, do you really mean the former? Fiction should never be read as claiming to represent reality. I have never read it as such. Obviously it is different if you write about another culture and present it as travelogue.

Aschenbach said:

only a problem if the reader can't understand the difference between fiction and non-fiction.

Click to expand...

But there lies the gray area. It's fiction, yes, but you're also using a real location. You make up a legend about Mt. St. Helen, for example. Since it's a real volcano, your readers may think the legend is also real. This is different than, say, having your fictional character doing something or things happening during the course of the story at that location.

That's certainly not illegal, but you may end up angering some readers who do believe the legend is true.

Nothing a little disclaimer can't fix, however.

Aschenbach said:

I agree, it is an issue, but I would say it is one of misrepresentation than misappropriation.

When you talk about the latter, do you really mean the former? Fiction should never be read as claiming to represent reality. I have never read it as such. Obviously it is different if you write about another culture and present it as travelogue.

Click to expand...

The fact that the writer presented it as a travelogue made it worse, but even if she hadn't it still would've been bad. If she hadn't self-published and the book had been picked up by a publisher i bet they would've told her to go and fix all that crap. Or perhaps that was the reason she wasn't having any joy initially with getting it to an agent/publisher. Because of all the glaring cultural errors.

The term i really meant to use was 'appropriation' - seeing as misappropriation generally refers to money.

But misrepresentation and appropriation have very similar meanings in this context. Sure we're going to create things, but--and particularly with cultures that have already had their rights abused terribly--we need to make sure we are as accurate as possible if we're using that culture as a base for our story. If we base our story off of generalizations about said culture, than we likely run the risk of being accused of prejudice.

I don't know how much of jillianburk's story revolves around Chile, but the advice was given with that in mind.

You may say, Aschenbach, that fiction should never be read as claiming to be reality, but here's the thing: if a story has a real-world setting, historical or present-day, people expect the writers to have done their research and while they might expect liberties they also generally expect the basis to be in fact. So while they'll read something as fiction, they'll also subconsciously add that knowledge to what they believe about a certain people, culture, etc. We no longer live in the days when a writer can create a villain based solely on their race or culture, which is a very good thing indeed, because it's one less way to breed hate.

And that advice is also a safeguard. There's not a lot worse for a writer than to write something, putting a lot of love and effort into it, and then to get accused of racial or cultural insensitivity, misrepresentation, appropriation, etc, when that was never the intent.

In no way am i saying jillianburks is guilty or will be guilty of this. I'm just suggesting a little caution and a lot of research. Someone else up thread suggested a disclaimer. That's also a very good idea.

And remember, we can't say something's not an issue just because it doesn't affect us in the same way it affects others.

What is Cultural Appropriation?

If you look at the comments threads, it's nothing simple. And it's absolutely something writers should think of.

Yes, fiction isn't fact, but misrepresentations of cultures/people in fiction can still be a problem. I think, for the OP, the real question is: what does the legend/historical occurence say about the people involved, and if you were one of those people, would you like to pick up a book in a store and find someone saying that about you?

If it would be fine, then yeah, a simple disclaimer is enough. If it's a legend about how the island's Evil child-molestation cult was brought down by Noble White Heroes, you've got a problem Chances are it's somewhere in between and you have to make a judgment call.

I've read plenty of books which say up front:

All events, locations and characters in this book are either entirely fictitious and are products of the writer's imagination and/or used in a fictitious manner. Any resemblence to actual persons, places and/or events is purely accidental.

Seem's simple enough.