Abstract

There is a fine line between falsification and fictionalization; novelist Briony Tallis and storyteller Edward Bloom walk this fine line in Ian McEwan's Atonement and Tim Burton's Big Fish respectively. As narrators of their own lives, they use the creative license to alter, omit, or add elements into these narratives. However, the process is not always easy. Briony and Edward are questioned about their honesty and the validity of their fictional narratives and confronted with the limits and dangers of fictionalization. This research seeks to present the value of narrating the self through fiction while acknowledging its shortcomings. Through textual analysis and reference to existing literature, this project will contribute to a better understanding of the value of fiction as presented in these two works.

1. Introduction

2. Ian McEwan's Atonement

3. Tim Burton's Big Fish

4. Conclusion

Works Cited

1. Introduction

  There is a fine line between falsification and fictionalization. The first carries connotations of deception and fabrication; the second conveys implications of artistic pursuits. It is especially tacky to walk this fine line when the object of either process is the narrator's own life. Think of James Frey and his controversial memoir, A Million Little Pieces, of which the author was accused of altering details about his life. Or Herman Rosenblat, whose publication of a holocaust memoir, Angel at the Fence, was canceled when his story about a girl throwing apples over the fence to him at a concentration camp turned out to be a fraud. Despite the insistence of Frey and Rosenblat that their books contained the essential truth of their lives, it is easy to understand the public backlash against such scandals: people expect you to tell the truth when you write about your life.

        But when is it acceptable to fictionalize one's own past? This research studies two protagonists in two modern works of film and literature who fictionalize their own lives. Briony Tallis in Ian McEwan's novel, Atonement, is a thirteen-year-old who sends her sister's lover to prison on a false accusation of rape, and then towards the end of her life produces a semi-fictional account of the incident and its aftermath. Edward Bloom in Tim Burton's film, Big Fish, is a charismatic storyteller whose estranged son wants to know the truth behind his tales.

The characters' fictionalization of their pasts is not free of controversy. The products of their fictionalization are questioned for their factuality and objective—not only by either an explicit and implied audience, but also by the narrators themselves. This paper will study how Atonement and Big Fish present the merits and shortcomings of such fictionalization and their exploration the power of authorship.

TOP

2. Ian McEwan's Atonement

Atonement is a critically acclaimed and highly literary novel by British author Ian McEwan. It was shortlisted for the 2001 Booker Prize for fiction, and is regarded by many as one of Ian McEwan's best works. The novel is divided into three parts, with a fourth section entitled 「London, 1999.」

The story begins in the summer of 1935, when thirteen-year-old Briony Tallis is a budding writer confused by the adult world of her older sister, Cecilia Tallis, and her childhood-friend- turned-lover Robbie Turner. After witnessing an awkward encounter between Cecilia and Robbie at the fountain and reading Robbie's obscene letter to Cecilia, Briony concocts that Robbie is a sex maniac. That night, Briony finds her cousin, Lola, who had been raped. Briony insists that she saw Robbie escaping from the scene. Based on her testimony, Robbie is imprisoned for three years before being released to enlist in the army. Only five years later does the eighteen-year-old Briony Tallis realize the true impact of her lie, and she goes to visit Robbie and Cecilia and promise to change her testimony to the court. However, it is revealed in the fourth section, 「London, 1999,」 that the visit never took place, and that in fact both Robbie and Cecilia died during the war. The reader realizes in the fourth section that the first three parts were in fact written by an 80-year-old Briony Tallis, who has written the novel as a way to atone for her sins.

The motif of fiction as a narrative device is woven into the novel from the very beginning. Briony's crime, which she had been trying to atone for throughout her life, was born out of her misguided fascination with literature and fiction, where things happen in orderly and comprehensible manners. Pilar Hidalgo compares the protagonist with Catherine Morland, the Jane Austen character Northanger Abbey who appears in the epilogue of the novel: 「Briony Tallis, like Catherine Morland, is a heroine whose perception is distorted by literature and an imperfect knowledge of the world」 (par. 7). As Brian Finney writes in his article, 「the young Briony suffers from an inability to disentangle life from the literature that has shaped her life. She imposes the patterns of fiction on the facts of life」 (par. 28). Instead of an incomprehensible, chaotic world, fiction offers Briony a more perfect and orderly world.

Unfortunately, that misunderstanding, or misapplication, of fiction leads Briony to commit her crime of false accusation. Finney observes that Atonement is ultimately 「concerned with the dangers of entering a fictional world and the compensations and limitations which that world can offer its readers and writers」 (pars. 4). It is thus not surprising that an older and more matured Briony chooses to 「use fiction to correct the errors that fiction caused her to commit」 (Finney par. 4).

Yet, why does the older Briony choose to fictionalize certain elements in her story? First of all, it is arguable that the novel Briony finally writes is concerned as much with facts as it is with fiction. It is true that Briony writes in the coda: 「If I really cared so much about facts, I should have written a different kind of book. But my work was done. There would be no further drafts」 (McEwan 360). However, she also refrains from abandoning facts altogether. Briony's publishers, in an effort to avoid legal actions from her cousin, Lola, who has since married her 「rapist」 Paul Marshall, urged the writer to spare the facts and embrace fiction: 「The obvious suggestions have been made—displace, transmute, dissemble. Bring down the fogs of the imagination! What are novelists for? ...To be safe, one would have to be bland and obscure」 (McEwan 370). But Briony does not listen to her publishers; she remarks on her final draft: 「I regarded it as my duty to disguise nothing—the names, the places, the exact circumstances—I put it all there as a matter of historical record」 (McEwan 369). The crime and the attempt at atonement were all laid down in facts.

All were laid down in facts—except the destiny of the lovers. The reasons behind this altered ending, as Briony states in the coda, are both the author's consideration for her readers' feelings as well as her own affections for the lovers:

「What sense or hope or satisfaction could a reader draw from such an account? Who would want to believe that they never met again, never fulfilled their love?… I couldn't do it to them… I'm too old… too much in love with the shred of life I have remaining.」 (McEwan 371)

As a writer, Briony believes in her obligations to her readers—in writing plausible stories and providing satisfactory endings. To her, the fact that Robbie and Cecilia never met again after their half-hour visit at the cafe does not provide any 「sense of hope or satisfaction」 for the reader. Thus, she chooses a happier ending.

But more importantly, Briony felt that she 「couldn't do it to them」—that is, she could not give the lovers such a tragic ending when she has the authorial power in fiction to give them a happy ending. She acknowledges this authority in the expression of her dilemma: 「How can a novelist achieve atonement when, with her absolute power of deciding outcomes, she is also God?」 (McEwan 371). In writing this realist novel, and then incorporating the fictional ending to the story, Briony reveals her desire to use her work of fiction in the context of the real crime she committed as a child. Briony understands the contrast between the tragic deaths of the lovers in real life, but she chooses the latter. She may have been thinking about her readers, but the central motivation is her affections for Cecilia and Robbie. It was the last thing she could do in the memory of the lovers.

Briony's search for atonement and forgiveness is also evident in her inclusion of a plotline that does not exist in real life. The novel draws to an end with Briony making a visit to Cecilia and Robbie in their London apartment. There, Briony confesses that she was wrong to accuse Robbie of the rape, and tells them that she would go to the judge and change her testimony in favor of an acquittal. In the section, 「London, 1999,」 the reader learns that this visit never took place, partly because Briony never had the chance to see them before their deaths, and partly because she was a coward (McEwan 370). Briony must have felt a sense of regret and shame for not having the chance to confess her sin to the lovers. By describing the reactions from Robbie and Cecilia as at times cold and at times aggressive, Briony presents to the readers the punishment which she was never brave enough to face up to when she was eighteen, and which she was never able to receive in real life for the crime she committed. By making her confession possible in the novel, Briony accomplished in fiction what she did not get to do in real life.
　

TOP

3. Tim Burton's Big Fish

        Big Fish is a 2003 fantasy drama film by Tim Burton loosely adapted from the novel Big Fish: A Novel of Mystic Proportions by Daniel Wallace. Like Ian McEwan's Atonement, Big Fish is concerned from beginning to end with the making of fiction. BBC Film calls the film 「a celebration of the art of storytelling and a touching father-son drama」 (par. 2).

Big Fish tells the story of Will Bloom who has returned to Alabama from Paris to visit his father, Edward Bloom, who is dying of cancer. They haven't spoken in three years since their argument at Will's wedding, and throughout Will's stay, Will questions the factuality of Edward's stories as Edward recounts his life story to Will's wife and everyone else. Towards the end of the film, Will finds some truth in his father's stories. In Edward's last moments lying in a hospital bed, Will is finally willing to take over the task of storytelling and narrates to Edward how he passes away. To Will's narration, Edward says his final word, 「Exactly.」 At his funeral, Will sees some people whom he recognizes as having appeared in his father's stories. Some elements of their characters were changed or exaggerated, but Will finds solace in accepting the stories of his father.

        The concept of storytelling is embodied by the main character, Edward Bloom, whose life viewers come to know through the flashbacks of his life. Everything is told from his perspective, with stories involving giants, witches, caricature-like characters, and strange towns. Juxtaposed with the frame story of Will and his father, Edward's stories appear fantastical and unreal. However, as Will sees it retrospectively, there are some truths in Edward's stories.

Fiction bestows to its narrator the freedom to re-imagine himself. If Atonement is in essence a psychological exploration of self-justification through storytelling, then Big Fish is an expose on using fiction to make oneself larger than life. It is a fantastical re-telling of Edward Bloom's own life the way he sees himself—the way he imagines himself to be.

In a montage of the young Edward, we see that he is a football and basketball star and that owns a landscaping company; in one scene he saves a dog from a burning house, and in another, he wins a blue ribbon at a science fair for his invention. Edward voiceovers, 「I was the biggest thing Ashton had ever seen.」 It did not matter if that statement was in fact untrue; by fictionalizing his own life story, Edward creates an alternate universe in which he is the star. But as Will speculates one night, 「the reason [Edward] tells all those stories is because he can't stand this boring place.」

That is an insightful observation about the nature of fictional personal narratives. In Atonement, Briony Tallis uses a fictional ending to ask for forgiveness and give the aggrieved lovers a happier future than their fate in real life. In Big Fish, Edward Bloom gives himself a more adventurous and exotic life than it is in reality. An example is the exchange between Will and the family doctor, where Dr. Bennett tells Will that, on the day of his birth, instead of the elaborate story of how Edward caught 「an uncatchable fish」 with a wedding ring, what really happened was that his father was on a business trip to Wichita and never made it back to the delivery. Dr. Bennett comments on Edward's reaction: 「Your father was sorry to miss it, but it wasn't the custom for the men to be in the room for deliveries then, so I can't see as it would have been much different had he been there.」 The dramatic irony is that Edward Bloom probably thought it did matter that he should have been there for the delivery. That was why he made up the elaborate story and the catchphrase to reveal his love for his wife, perhaps as a way of compensation. At Will's wedding, he says these words as he gazes lovingly at his wife: 「Sometimes, the only way to catch an uncatchable woman is to offer her a wedding ring.」

Regardless of the stories' exaggerations, Edward Bloom is ultimately concerned about the people he loves. In a scene where Will Bloom visits Jenny Hill to find out more about his father, Jenny explains the feature of Edward's stories: 「See, to him, there's only two women: your mother and everyone else.」 She continues: 「I wanted to be as important to him as you were, and I was never going to be. I was make-believe and his other life, you, were real.」 Jenny is a character who appears twice in Edward's stories, first as a witch and then as a girl from the town of Spectre. But she knows the true measure of importance Edward puts on each character—Sandra was the woman of Edward's affections, and Will the pride of his life. No embellishment could erase that fact.

Edward's stories provide him an escape from reality, but Big Fish raises many questions about storytelling through the son, Will Bloom. In the argument with his father on the night of his wedding, Will lays out his primary objection to his father's tales:

WILL BLOOM. I am a footnote in that story. I am the context for your great adventure. Which never happened! Incidentally! You were selling novelty products in Wichita the day I was born. For one night, one night in your entire life, the universe does not revolve around Edward Bloom. It revolves around me and my wife. How can you not understand that? 

Will Bloom raises a legitimate question about the narcissistic nature of storytelling: If the storyteller is indeed 「god,」 then could storytelling be in fact just an egoistic, self-centered act? On his own wedding day, the bridegroom feels like 「a footnote」 in the story his father tells. Will understands that there is a real world that is vast and pluralistic and unpredictable, but in his father's stories, real people and events are reduced to characters and contexts for the storyteller. Though Will sees storytelling as narcissistic and Edward sees it as entertainment to his listeners, one thing is for certain: the storyteller, at least in his or her own stories, becomes the center of the universe through the narration.

        During his visit back home to his dying father, Will continues his iteration about his problem with his father's stories:

WILL. I have no idea who you are because you have never told me a single fact.

EDWARD. I've told you a thousand facts, Will, that's what I do. I tell stories.

WILL. You tell lies, Dad. You tell amusing lies. Stories are what you tell a five-year old at bedtime. They're not elaborate mythologies you maintain when your son is ten and fifteen and twenty and thirty. And the thing is, I believed you…I felt like such a fool to have trusted you. You're like Santa Claus and the Easter Bunny combined - just as charming, and just as fake.

This is an intriguing conversation because it reveals the opposing views of the storyteller and his one resentful audience. Will talks about facts and lies, and describes how he feels foolish for believing in his father's stories. Edward, however, denies the accusation that he has misled his listeners; he responds candidly, 「I tell stories.」 To Edward the narrator, stories exist beyond the realm of facts and lies.

In the end, Will accepts the value of his father's fictional narratives. It is crucial that this acknowledgement took place in his father's final moments, before Will had the chance to meet his many friends at the funeral. As his father lies dying on the hospital bed, Will takes over the task of narration and relates to his father a wild trip they take, escaping from the hospital to get to the river, where all of Edward's friends have gathered at the lakeside to bid a happy farewell to him. At the end of the story, Will lets go of his father into the waters, where he turns into a big fish and swims away. It resonates with Will's preface earlier in the movie about his father's story:

WILL BLOOM. In telling the story of my father's life, it's impossible to separate the fact from the fiction, the man from the myth. The best I can do is to tell it the way he told me. It doesn't always make sense, and most of it never happened. But that's what kind of story this is.

Ultimately, Big Fish is not about separating fact from fiction, but the joining together of the two. The narrator does indeed become his story, and that is what really matters. Like Atonement, the story lives on after the narrator is gone, and the real people are no more than characters in a work of fiction, but they become 「immortal.」

TOP

4. Conclusion

Works Cited

Big Fish. Screenplay by John August. Dir. Tim Burton. Perf. Albert Finney, Ewan McGregor, Billy Crudup, and Jessica Lange. Columbia Pictures, 2003.

Finney, Brian. 「Briony's Stand Against Oblivion: The Making of Fiction in Ian McEwan's Atonement.」 Journal of Modern Literature 27 (2004): 68-82.

Freeman, Mark Philip. Rewriting the Self: History, Memory, Narrative. New York: Routledge, 1993.

Hennigan, Adrian. Rev. of Big Fish, dir. Tim Burton. BBC Films 18 Jan. 2004. June 1 2009 <http://www.bbc.co.uk/films/2003/12/02/big_fish_2004_review.shtml>.

Hidalgo, Pilar. 「Memory and Storytelling in Ian McEwan's Atonement.」 Critique 46 (2005): 82-91.

McEwan, Ian. Atonement. London: Vintage, 2001.

Riffaterre, Michael. Fictional Truth. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press, 1990.

TOP