Changing fiction for dramatic effect

[Laurence Horn]

On Jan 30, 2014, at 8:52 PM, Joel S. Berson wrote:

> At 1/30/2014 07:48 PM, Laurence Horn wrote:
>> On Jan 30, 2014, at 6:43 PM, Wilson Gray wrote:
>>
>> > On Thu, Jan 30, 2014 at 6:22 PM, Joel S. Berson <Berson at att.net> wrote:
>> >
>> >> What interested me is the implied reading that some *fictional*
>> >> events needed dramatic improvement.  They could have written them as
>> >> sufficiently improved dramatically in the first place.  Or at the
>> >> very least improved them at some time between the first
>> >> screenwriters' product and the release without needing a disclaimer
>> >> to the viewer.
>> >>
>> >
>> > Especially when the disclaimer makes no sense. "... are _fictitious_ and
>> > have been changed for dramatic effect." Changed into what? Into the truth?
>> > After all, truth is stranger, hence more "dramatic," than fiction. so it is
>> > said.
>> >
>> Just to play devil's advocate, Joel's original post quoted the
>> advisory as follows: "Some names, places and incidents are
>> fictitious and have been changed for dramatic effect."  Perhaps they
>> are *now* fictitious, having been altered from the original real
>> status precisely to make them fictitious, avoiding embarrassment,
>> lawsuits, etc.  Makes sense to me, although a "now" would have helped.
>>
>> LH
>
> I would have been OK with "are [optional "now"] fictitious, having
> been changed for dramatic effect."

Yeah, that would have helped.  But if I'm right, that's what they meant.

LH

------------------------------------------------------------
The American Dialect Society - http://www.americandialect.org