Questions about literary ethics is becoming increasingly raised, both as a result of the trend of “real life” novels and “true crime”-wave in the sakprosaen. In the new issue of Prose, as utkommer this week, Simen Sætre, a longer essay in which he takes up the problematic aspects of forlagenes practice. He writes both from his own experiences as a journalist and as an author of books about the Fjordmannen, living Hugo and an afghan interpreter.
Sætre shows how several new sakprosabøker have a one-sided perspective and seems to forsvarsskrifter for one of the parties in a conflict. Books about Baneheia killings, police officer Jensen case and anorexic Angelica are examples of such. When the counterparty does not get at the same time in response to the strong claims, so you would normally get in a newspaper, manufacture dangerous leaning. Close relationship between the author and the source is moody, especially when they tematiseres in the books.
We know little about how to publishers to handle the ethical dilemmas they constantly encounter. The industry has no clear framework of how the press has with Please be careful-the poster and the Press the Professional Variety. A few books stopped in court. Ingeborg Moræus Hanssens “Burned by the dragon” was sentenced for defamation. Some books are withdrawn in order to avoid trial, now last Annijors “Just another night”. The problem is that such matters do not result in guides for the later releases. Who remembers what the verdict and acquittal in the case of Åsne Seierstad and bokhandleren in Kabul built on?
“Uncle Gunnar”, Knausgårds nemesis , was recently out in the class struggle with a powerful attack on the previous October-commander Geir Berdahl. Just the publisher’s internal discussions about ethics in Knausgårds battle, asking Gunnar questions. Berdahls assurances that everything was going on in a sensible and thoughtful way, will be picked apart. Gunnar describes a chaos of panic and coincidences which led to strong reactions and changes in the book.
the Losers in this landscape , it is London calling “tredjepersonene”, i.e. those who are referred to by authors who might have a slightly too close relationship to itself, or one particular main character. A glaring example of a box the treatment of a third party, according to Sætre, the other sentenced in the Baneheia case – that did not require resumption. In the book, he becomes speculative portrayed as a grotesque murderer, without even getting to speak.
Sætre want not some careful poster for sakprosaen. What he will, is that the publishers should be open about how they make their ethical judgements. But how are they going to be there, and is it enough? To get further requires an independent body that can receive complaints, discuss openly and come to judgments that would constitute a corpus to use Supertotobet in the later cases of doubt. Confidence about the ethics will give sakprosaen the opportunity to be tougher, brighter, more challenging. Not even the writers are alone in the world.
What goes on in the minds of the editors – other than the sight of the shining dollar sign? Comment
