Voltaire's biographer said of him, "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." Now Meg Rosoff says the same of Sharon Dogar, after the Sunday Times accused Dogar's novel Annexed of "sexing up" Anne Frank. Having been similarly accused of "sexing up" John Donne in my novel Conceit, I would agree that Dogar has the right to do as she wishes. Isn't that why book designers, nowadays, put "a novel" after the title on the cover--a warning to readers that it is, after all, fiction? As Oscar Wilde said, novels are either well written or badly written. That's all.
Here's more from Meg Rosoff's blog at guardian.co.uk:
Six hundred words were suggested to tackle the important question of whether it is "right and fair" to fictionalise real-life characters. I could answer it in 15. Do what you like, only do it well – and don't expect the relatives to approve.
The Anne Frank Trust's objections to Sharon Dogar's book Annexed – which should probably bear the subtitle Peter Van Pels' Imaginary Diary – are good and fine, and exactly what foundations are meant to do (though anyone familiar with the workings of PR might note that their outrage is likely to prove counterproductive). Their concerns with the memory and reputation of Anne Frank are completely valid, and I can well understand and sympathise with their annoyance in regard to Dogar's novel. "I really don't understand why we have to fictionalise the Anne Frank story, when young people engage with it anyway," said a spokesperson for the foundation, and she is, of course, completely totally right.
And, at the same time, wrong.
The question of whether authors have the "right" to write about living or real people is not one that should be answered by the caretakers of historical reputation. Fiction is a free-for-all, and as long as an author can find someone who'll publish what they write (or these days, publish it themselves), there are no actual rules about who or what can be tackled, give or take a few libel laws.
Where would Shakespeare's history plays be without the freedom to reinterpret historical figures? Though even the great man himself may have pulled a few punches with Henry VIII, written a mere 75 years after the king's death (which corresponds more or less to the gap between Anne Frank's death and the publication of Dogar's novel), and carefully edited to exclude the last four wives and the execution of Anne Boleyn. This may have had something to do with the fact that the daughter of Henry and Anne was still on the throne, and more influential than any foundation ....
continued at guardian.co.uk, June 22, 2010
|
