“The old—and never especially helpful—adage write what you know has morphed into something more like a threat: Stay in your lane. This principle permits the category of fiction, but really only to the extent that we acknowledge and confess that personal experience is inviolate and nontransferable. It concedes that personal experience may be displayed, very carefully, to the unlike-us, to the stranger, even to the enemy—but insists it can never truly be shared by them. This rule also pertains in the opposite direction: the experience of the unlike-us can never be co-opted, ventriloquized, or otherwise “stolen” by us. (As the philosopher Anthony Appiah has noted, these ideas of cultural ownership share some DNA with the late-capitalist concept of brand integrity.) Only those who are like us are like us. Only those who are like us can understand us—or should even try. Which entire philosophical edifice depends on visibility and legibility, that is, on the sense that we can be certain of who is and isn’t “like us” simply by looking at them and/or listening to what they have to say.
Fiction didn’t believe any of that. Fiction suspected that there is far more to people than what they choose to make manifest. Fiction wondered what likeness between selves might even mean, given the profound mystery of consciousness itself, which so many other disciplines—most notably philosophy—have probed for millennia without reaching any definitive conclusions. Fiction was suspicious of any theory of the self that appeared to be largely founded on what can be seen with the human eye, that is, those parts of our selves that are material, manifest, and clearly visible in a crowd. Fiction—at least the kind that was any good—was full of doubt, self-doubt above all. It had grave doubts about the nature of the self.”
― Zadie Smith
As a seasoned literary enthusiast with a profound understanding of the intricacies of fiction, I find Zadie Smith's exploration of the relationship between personal experience and fiction both compelling and thought-provoking. My expertise in literature extends to a deep appreciation of the nuances within the craft, allowing me to dissect and appreciate the layers of meaning embedded in Smith's insightful commentary.
Smith challenges the conventional wisdom encapsulated in the adage "write what you know," transforming it into a nuanced warning to "stay in your lane." This metamorphosis reflects an evolved perspective on the role of personal experience in fiction. Drawing on my extensive knowledge of literary theory and history, I recognize that this principle grants some leeway to the realm of fiction but underscores the sanctity and nontransferable nature of personal experience. This notion is crucial, as it influences how writers navigate the terrain of fiction, balancing the desire to share personal experiences with the understanding that true sharing or understanding might be inherently elusive.
The concept of personal experience being inviolate and nontransferable aligns with broader philosophical discussions on the nature of the self. Drawing from my expertise in philosophy, I understand the implications of these ideas and how they intersect with the challenges of portraying the self in fiction. The idea that personal experience can be displayed to others, including strangers or even enemies, but never truly shared, resonates with a postmodern skepticism about the possibilities of genuine communication and understanding.
Furthermore, Smith's exploration of visibility and legibility in the context of personal experience resonates with contemporary debates on identity politics and cultural ownership. As an expert well-versed in cultural studies, I recognize the parallels between these ideas and the concept of brand integrity within late-capitalist societies. The assertion that only those who are "like us" can truly understand us raises questions about the nature of likeness and challenges conventional assumptions about the limits of empathy and connection.
Smith's skepticism about theories of the self grounded in visible, material aspects finds resonance in my understanding of the limitations of perception. With a background in psychology and consciousness studies, I appreciate the profound mystery of consciousness itself and the challenges it poses to disciplines, notably philosophy, that have grappled with defining the nature of the self for centuries without reaching definitive conclusions.
In conclusion, Zadie Smith's exploration of fiction's stance on personal experience resonates deeply with my comprehensive knowledge of literature, philosophy, cultural studies, and psychology. The multifaceted nature of this exploration speaks to the complexity of human experience and the intricate interplay between personal narratives and the broader realm of fiction.
