Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

“Cat Person” and Me

slate.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 175 posts

Re: “Cat Person” and Me

#41

Post by slg »

Manuel_D wrote: post #24
tptacek wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Lots of fiction writers use real people as the bases for characters; that doesn't make them "creepy internet stalkers". Cat Person was a work of fiction. There wasn't much ambiguity about that.

The presentation of the story is actually pretty subtle about it's fictional nature. Nowhere in body of the story does it say it's a work of fiction. Readers the miss the small "fiction" label in the header [1] could easily make the mistake of thinking it's a real story. And as per OP many did make this mistake. 1. https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2017/12/11/cat-person

>Nowhere in body of the story does it say it's a work of fiction.

This is a bizarre demand to make of a work of fiction. How many fictional stories mention they are fiction in the body of the work?

Re: “Cat Person” and Me

#42

Post by [deleted] »

causality0 wrote: post #27

not explicitly harmful or abusive but toeing the line of consent and leaving Margot feeling repulsed afterward. This is where the story diverges completely from my reality. Roupenian spends a good portion of the story describing just how disgusting of a person he is. Of course, I know nothing about how Charles was with other women; I can only speak for myself. With me, at least, he was careful, patient, and gentle—it…

[deleted]

Re: “Cat Person” and Me

#43

Post by prvc »

tptacek wrote: post #16
caslon wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Isn't there a villain, though? A creepy internet stalker writes a story about her stalkee's life, monetizes it and gets critical acclaim (and, again, a seven-figure advance for a collection of short stories that only had value due to that story ) for it, causing her strife? I can't help but feel that there's a clear villain here, and a villain that's trying to paint herself as the victim at that.

Lots of fiction writers use real people as the bases for characters; that doesn't make them "creepy internet stalkers". Cat Person was a work of fiction. There wasn't much ambiguity about that.

"All true your honor, but I said the word fiction beforehand!"

Re: “Cat Person” and Me

#44

Post by tptacek »

slg wrote: post #41
Manuel_D wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The presentation of the story is actually pretty subtle about it's fictional nature. Nowhere in body of the story does it say it's a work of fiction. Readers the miss the small "fiction" label in the header [1] could easily make the mistake of thinking it's a real story. And as per OP many did make this mistake. 1. https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2017/12/11/cat-person

>Nowhere in body of the story does it say it's a work of fiction. This is a bizarre demand to make of a work of fiction. How many fictional stories mention they are fiction in the body of the work?

"There are only the pursued, the pursuing, the busy and the tired", Nick thought, fictionally.

Re: “Cat Person” and Me

#45

Post by adjkant »

Aqueous wrote: post #17
GauntletWizard wrote: post #4

I dated a girl seven years younger than me. We were both in our twenties at the time, and I assumed she was a few years older and she thought I was a few years younger and when it actually came up I struggled with it but went forward. She's got an interesting background, and has been horrifically abused, and once told me I was the first person she ever trusted after having sex. Not that the confession was after sex,…

You dated a girl. She was in her twenties. You were in your twenties. You are both legally adults. Adults make their own decisions.

Morality just doesn't work off legality, nor is the "adulthood" ever truly clear in reality.

In this very specific case, passing no judgement on the OP here, there's a somewhat notable difference often between 20+27 and 22+29 even because of life stages. Do both people have full time jobs, their own place? Is one still in school? Can one not drink at bars in the US? These cultural markers often have far more important ties to power and relationship dynamics, as well as healthy relationships even beyond romantic and sexual connections.

I'm not claiming to have a clear view of these lines, but I think OP was right to examine their actions, even if it was all "okay" in the end. It strikes me as a genuine and reflective post from someone who cares, and I would hate to see others use "you are both legally adults" to avoid doing similar reflection. Nuance is important and can be very important at the individual level. Zooming out, is that not the lesson of this whole greater situation?

Re: “Cat Person” and Me

#46

Post by tptacek »

prvc wrote: post #43
tptacek wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Lots of fiction writers use real people as the bases for characters; that doesn't make them "creepy internet stalkers". Cat Person was a work of fiction. There wasn't much ambiguity about that.

"All true your honor, but I said the word fiction beforehand!"

If what you said ran in the fiction section of the New Yorker, that would indeed be a very strong defense against a defamation claim.

Re: “Cat Person” and Me

#47

Post by d110af5ccf »

tptacek wrote: post #33
refulgentis wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can't tell if you're really mad about the article and think the author is unreasonable, or if you think I'm being unreasonable, so I'll just respond as if you're looking for evidence that this, at least somewhat, ambiguous: > “Cat Person,” and the cultural reception to it, feels connected to the broader literary debate over “autofiction”—writing that, in its raw and confessional style, seems to blur the boundaries…

"Fiction" is literally in the word "autofiction". The term means "fictional autobiography". You may have confused it with "roman à clef", which nobody says Cat Person is. We do have a term for "fiction inspired in part by real stories"; it's "fiction".

Just to clarify - if someone wrote a fictional autobiography whose subject was obviously you, would that not bother you?

I would certainly be bothered if a close friend or family member did that to me in a manner that could ever lead strangers back to me. Nor would I ever publish such a piece about one of my acquaintances without their permission.

I find the notion that such behavior could be socially acceptable quite strange.

Re: “Cat Person” and Me

#48

Post by tptacek »

d110af5ccf wrote: post #47
tptacek wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Fiction" is literally in the word "autofiction". The term means "fictional autobiography". You may have confused it with "roman à clef", which nobody says Cat Person is. We do have a term for "fiction inspired in part by real stories"; it's "fiction".

Just to clarify - if someone wrote a fictional autobiography whose subject was obviously you, would that not bother you? I would certainly be bothered if a close friend or family member did that to me in a manner that could ever lead strangers back to me. Nor would I ever publish such a piece about one of my acquaintances without their permission. I find the notion that such behavior could be socially acceptable quit…

Again: the problem I have with this argument is that it's just coming up now, despite literally centuries of fiction built out of just these kinds of stories. I don't believe this is a real concern; it's a fake concern that we're being asked to have by a Slate article. It's interesting, and I'm happy to bounce the thought around, because that's what we're here for. But, come on.

Re: “Cat Person” and Me

#49

Post by an_opabinia »

petre wrote: post #37
Manuel_D wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The presentation of the story is actually pretty subtle about it's fictional nature. Nowhere in body of the story does it say it's a work of fiction. Readers the miss the small "fiction" label in the header [1] could easily make the mistake of thinking it's a real story. And as per OP many did make this mistake. 1. https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2017/12/11/cat-person

I'm quite inclined to think that the movie that Cat Person is made into would display "based on a true story" rather than the South Park fiction disclaimer. Why? Revenue.

I’m not sure why you’re being downvoted. It’s true, new writers get a big leg up breaking with “based on a true story.”

Re: “Cat Person” and Me

#50

Post by tptacek »

an_opabinia wrote: post #49
petre wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm quite inclined to think that the movie that Cat Person is made into would display "based on a true story" rather than the South Park fiction disclaimer. Why? Revenue.

I’m not sure why you’re being downvoted. It’s true, new writers get a big leg up breaking with “based on a true story.”

That and MCU screenplays.
Post reply on HN