Fiction can distil things from life and present them more concisely that treatises, papers and other non-fictional approaches to a problem.
The word "entertainment" is a bit misleading. For me it somehow gives the idea of distraction, good clean fun to get your mind off life's troubles. However, much fiction examines problems, the darker side of life. I agree with Sybarite, when she says:
Quote:
|
Fiction can stretch and create in a way that is not obviously easy in non-fiction, because it doesn't have to play by the same 'rules'. That is not to say that one is more important or 'better' than the other.
|
Incidentally, I've been buying print copies of the FT (the one printed in Frankfurt) quite a lot recently, for obvious reasons. As recently as yesterday, in fact, when the idea of Russia lending Iceland money made NATO worried about influence. (Iceland is a NATO member.) The FT's coverage of the non-fictional aspects of politics and news from foreign countries is good. I just don't think that they've got the strongest coverage of fiction, poetry, etc., although I heard that they did have a ballet correspondent, and cover the arts quite well at weekends.