The Line Between Reality and Fiction

In literature, when does the line between fiction and reality cease to exist?
As writers, it is our duty to provide the reader with rich characters, an addictive story line and a setting that can be seen in the words we write. Many years ago, obviously prior to the digital age, Shakespeare told us stories of love and betrayal. He chose some of his characters from history and turned them into ghosts. Without the benefit of pictures, Shakespeare immersed us into another place and time, his stories as timeless as the Universe.
Another favorite author of mine, Edgar Allan Poe, fascinated our imaginations with tales of horror.  Upon my first reading of "The Raven", I could see our protagonist sitting in his easy chair, anticipating the next rap from the scholarly bird. I could feel the heartbeat beneath my feet as I read "The Tell-tale Heart", and in his haunting poem, "Annabel Lee", I could see our beloved encased in an abandoned light-house in the middle of the sea.
A really good writer can tell the perfect story with only the benefit of words, just as a really good photographer can without them.
It is, again our duty as artists to tell a story that transfixes our audience to another place and time, music and art notwithstanding. As fiction has transformed with time, the line between imagination and reality has blurred. "Fifty Shades of Grey" is a perfect example. In her tale of sex, sado-masochism and addiction, E L James places the reader in the bedroom along with Anastasia and Christian, resulting in many a fan proclaiming her joy in practicing the same moves on her own husband, blurring the lines between that which is possibly real and the fiction that is Ms. James's story.
There is so much media now, that an author can reach millions of readers at one time. Mr. Poe died trying to land a greater readership, having sold his aforementioned poem, "Annabel Lee" for a drink and a paltry eight dollars. With the intense digital era in which we now reside bombarding us with news and politics and of course, literature, control over who reads what, where and when is waning. While I am a firm believer that people should be allowed to read and write whatever they wish without recourse, I have to ponder the question, when does the line between fiction and reality cease to exist?
Back in high school, while I was reading the likes of Salinger (a prime example of the lack of said line), DH Lawrence and the Bronte Sisters, I had the benefit of an educator. Mr. Keeley, my high school and drama teacher had the incredible insight of dissecting each chapter, word or paragraph, explaining the meaning behind the words and the metaphors behind the story.
Adolescents in the digital age are not so fortunate.
This past weekend, two twelve year old girls were arrested for the attempted murder of another twelve year old. They were apparently acting as agents for the fictional online character known as Slender Man.
Many questions beg to be answered in the wake of this astonishing crime perpetuated by children. Number one, in the age of digital media and two-parent incomes, are we paying enough attention to what our children our reading? While it certainly is more difficult in this day and age to monitor what our kids our looking at, the censorship still has to be achieved within the the family structure. One of the greatest rights we espouse in this country is freedom of speech. This amendment was enacted out of sheer necessity. Information is knowledge and knowledge is power. As writers, we must continually walk that fine line between brilliant story-telling and how-to manuals, but first and foremost in our minds is our privilege we enjoy in the knowledge that we will not be burned at the stake, or perhaps incarcerated for the words we write. So we write. We do it on paper and we do it online. We desperately want to share our words, this is what compels us to write, so we share our words with every type of media we possibly can. Should we ever be censored? Absolutely not! And I exclaim this, yes, as a writer, but also as a reader. I don't want some over-zealous authority with their own agenda telling me what I can read, learn, enjoy. This happened to some extent when I was attending Christian schools and could not find a book on witchcraft to save my life. Censorship by an authority who does not even know the reader, personally can never be allowed. It can, however, be achieved in the home, and perhaps it should be.
The second question lies in the affect of the reader. When Mark David Chapman killed John Lennon, he had a copy of "Catcher in the Rye" in his clutches. Obviously, Chapman is emotionally unbalanced, as Salinger's Holden Caufield only IMAGINED being the catcher of society's rejected. The true meaning behind the story is that alienation is just a phase, and this is what our educators explain to us in the autopsy of the story. Salinger certainly could never have imagined that his tale of high school prepatories and teen-aged angst could be so misinterpreted so as to allegedly cause the untimely deaths of two of society's most influential players and the attempted assassination of an American President. I have read Salinger. I would say he is a brilliant writer who, thru his indomitable ability to transport his readers through words, has filled our world with scintillating fiction and profound literature. Can you imagine his work being censored on the academic level? If, in fact, Mr. Chapman is emotionally unbalanced, then doesn't the responsibility of censorship fall to the parents? While Chapman does indicate he only purchased the novel the day of the murder, surely he read it at some earlier time and deemed himself a "Catcher". Going even further into the debate, are we, as a society responsible for the affect an author has on each individual reader? Everybody knows the name of the author who's name is on the book that Chapman was holding at the time of the shooting. Does anybody know the name of his parents? It seems that allot of people easily blame Salinger for the fallout from "Catcher", however, has anyone delved into WHY his readers are so affected by this story? As I have said before, there is not greater joy to the writer than the shaken affect of her reader, is it the author's job to make sure the text is fully directed?
In terms of today's literature and the mass media available to the audience, we, as parents MUST be more diligent in paying attention to what our children are subject to. Not every writer online is scrupulous, nor is every so-called "friend". Writers, however, are shielded by the first amendment. This is a protection afforded not only to Americans since 1791, but is so, as well to citizens throughout the world. Demands for freedom of speech can be found as far back as the sixth century, B.C., meaning we, as a society have had hundreds of years to assimilate to the evolution of story-telling. This is a right many of us will stand on file for, even in the face of imprisonment. If we, as writers, are willing to die for our privilege, shouldn't then parents of today's youth be as diligent in protecting their young?
When I read the article by Amanda Paulson for the Christian Science Monitor, I couldn't help but feel that not only was she raising the question of where we should be drawing the line in regards to fiction and reality in literature, but that the question of what writers send out in the world should be monitored. In her article, she ponders the difficulty for twelve year olds to put the character of the Slender Man into the same context as older readers. I certainly believe there is much to be studied in the development of the adolescent brain, however, that duty falls to the scientific community, not the literary one. It is not the responsibility of the writer of the Slender Man stories to make sure his/her readers are of an age in which they can understand that the Slender Man is simply a character. That responsibility lies solely in the hands of the parents of people with underdeveloped brains.
Where were these parents when the girls were reading this story. Where were the parents when the girls were planning the attack for four months. Where were the parents when their daughters were luring another twelve year old girl into the woods under darkness of night?
In response to the tragedy, the online site Creepypasta, in which the girls discovered the Slender Man, defends the site by saying, "We are a literature site, not a satanic cult." It is my opinion that they could have easily just proclaimed the former. They are a literature site. Case closed. It was the author of the statement who also said, "This incident shows what happens when the line of fiction and reality ceases to exist."

Perhaps those lines have always been blurred and are meant to be by the author for the reader. Reading and words have always been an escape for me. There were many a moment when my actual reality was far worse than any horror story ever written by Edgar Allan Poe. To this day, I honor this man for the time I was so engrossed in his work that I forgot how evil my step-monster truly is. I am not saying that we, as readers should exchange the fiction in the words we read for reality, however, as a writer, we surly must incorporate a modicum of reality into the story, so as to allow our readers some semblance of recognition to the senses.

I am certain that it is NOT the job of the writer to impose a subjective age restriction on our readers. THAT is the job of the parent. In fact, Professor Patrick Markey of Villanova University says, in regards to the media's influence, that the media does not cause violent behaviors, though it may influence how violent people behave. Markey adds that there may be good reasons to shield readers from media that is age inappropriate. Again, this is up to the parents.
While banning books may seem completely insane and archaic, it wasn't that long ago that this practice was in force. Here is a list of some of the banned literature that shaped not only our lives, but our politics, our society and our constitution:
The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn
The Autobiography of Malcolm X
Beloved-a Pulitzer winner
The Call of the Wild
Gone With the Wind
The Grapes of Wrath
The Great Gatsby
The Scarlett Letter
To Kill a Mockingbird,
and last of all, but certainly not least, as it is a book about banning books:
Fahrenheit 451

Out of the ten aforementioned books, six of the authors won a Pulitzer, three died prior to the awarding of the prize, and only Fitzgerald lived not having received one. Can we imagine an elementary school residency in which we were not told of the wild adventures Huck and Tom shared cruising down the Mighty Mississip, or a seventh grade English class sans Jack London's love story between a man and his dog? Let's shall we, try to fathom a history lesson in literature between the pages of an Alex Haley or Toni Morrison story that we may have never heard. I for one, shudder the thought of going through high school with out the benefit of Nathaniel Hawthorne, Ray Bradbury, John Steinbeck or Harper Lee.

Censoring literature is simply not an option. Art, while it may very well be inappropriate to some age groups, is subjective, and it should remain that way, perpetually.
It is not the task of the storyteller to decide who reads what, when. It  is our duty as parents to filter the words according to the age appropriateness, and reconcile to the next generation, that very fine line between reality and fiction...

-by Deannalynn Arzola