Here I take the liberty of interrupting the reader of this book for a moment in order to give a little explanation.Such lawsuits are increasing dramatically today due to the abuse of defamation laws.For example, a certain lawyer whose name is Smith, but a character named Mr. Smith also appears in a novel, he will threaten to sue the author of the book for defamation.Therefore, the authors of novels must solemnly declare in the preface of the story that the characters in this book are purely fictitious.Of course, I am no exception, and I also want to make such a statement sincerely. All the characters in this book have nothing to do with real life, so please don’t take them for granted.But there is one exception, so I consider it my duty to explain first.I may be a little oversensitive at this point.But it also happened for a reason.In some of my previous works, I may have described some characters in too much detail, so people can easily think of someone in life.I was accused of poor taste for it.This makes me very uneasy.Since I'm used to being overwhelmed, this unease is not for me, but primarily for the literary critics.We authors certainly hope to be gentlemen, but it is often difficult to do so.We can only think that no author can completely avoid vulgarity in his works, and can only use this method to comfort himself.In fact, life itself is vulgar.I am very familiar with the job of a journalist.People in this industry can speak relatively freely, and they like to use obscene words, but they demand that literature remain pure.Of course, I have no doubts that literature should be kept pure, but I worry that if literature is too pure, it will be difficult for critics and writers to find a common ground.Writers would be left to write only hymns, and critics would probably be out of a job.

I have friends who are writers who claim that the characters in their books bear no resemblance to anyone they know in real life, and I accept their assertion without hesitation.But what I still don't understand is why they don't describe the characters in their works as clay or wood sculptures?It can be said without a doubt that many good writers portray characters in their works who have shadows of their real-life acquaintances.Anyone who has read the journals of Henry Bell, the letters of Flaubert, or the diaries of Jules Renard will have seen that they all made careful observations of their acquaintances.In this way, once they need to describe similar characters in their writing, such character archetypes will appear in their minds.They usually ruthlessly and consciously record the characteristics of various typical characters.I think most novelists, especially good novelists, must be inspired by real life.But even if there is a specific character in real life in their minds, it does not mean that they have to copy the character into their works, or that the characters in their works are similar to someone in real life. exactly the same.First of all, these writers look at the people around them with their own eyes.If they are unusual writers, that means they see things differently.They take only what they want from someone.They just use these people as hooks to hang things on, hang things in their heads.In order to meet the needs of the storyline in their works, they will give these models character traits that they do not have.They want him to be consistent with the plot of the story, to be flesh and blood.No matter how good a person in real life is, if he is to be used as a character in a novel, most of them will be lacking.There is an art to creating, not inventing a complete character.Life as we know it is only a source of such creation.So it is unfair for critics to accuse the author of a novel because they feel that a character in his work is like someone they know.It would be completely unreasonable not to allow him to extract character traits from someone in real life.Oddly enough, these accusations are often directed at a demeaned character in the work.If you write a novel where a character is so devoted to his mother and beats his wife, everybody's going to say, Oh, it's Brown.To say he beat his wife is really vicious.And no one will say that this person is Jones or Robinson, who are also famous dutiful sons.I draw a somewhat unexpected conclusion from this example: We know our friends by remembering their flaws, not their strengths.

There is nothing more dangerous than to describe a character in a novel too much like someone in real life.Such a character is difficult to match the plot of the story in the book.And strangely enough, such a character is more artificial than any other character in the book.He cannot convince the reader.It is for this reason that, in spite of such a powerful and distinguished figure in real life, he later became Lord Northcliff; and although many writers have been interested in him, no writer has ever been able to write in his own book. He is depicted as a lifelike character in the novel.I have achieved a different effect in my novel The Whole Dozen, making the character of Mortimer Ellis attractive to the reader.Of course, I did not use Sir's real name in this novel, and I did a considerable derogation of the character.Otherwise, a short story like mine would not be able to accommodate such a character in real life.I deny that the figure of Mortimer Ellis is a photograph of Sir Mortimer Ellis, but I must honestly confess that the figure is indeed a portrait of Sir.But since it is a portrait, a skilled painter can sometimes deform the characters in the painting.This is done both to please the person being painted and to annoy those who know nothing about art.A writer should be forgiven if he occasionally goes too far in his writing style.A writer is, after all, a human being, and it cannot do much harm now and then to indulge in a little self-amusement, so long as he admits that there are flaws in his work.

Mortimer Ellis had now escaped to another planet.There he didn't have to think about how to seduce a woman into marriage, nor did he have to worry about divorce.And no matter how I describe him, he can't feel it.Although he did not leave a son or daughter to mourn him, he must have had many relations by marriage after all, having married so many times.And I don't want to hurt their feelings in the novel.And he was affable, having lived twice on the Isle of Wight, and was sure to have plenty of friends there too.There they do manual labor and munch on George V bread.If I said something that offended them in the book, here, I sincerely apologize to them.And the excuse I found for myself was that Mortimer Ellis was just a humorous figure in a novel.If someone insists on taking their seats and defending such a character, no one will stop them no matter how they vent.But such a character as I call Mortimer Ellis in the novel needs someone to chronicle him, too.Some people may say that such an important person like him cannot be described by a small person like me.But don't forget that no matter how big a big deal he is, he's also a human being.Therefore, he must also become a prototype for the writer to write characters in the novel.Since God made a funny clown, he has no reason to complain that people make fun of him.A writer should likewise have no complaints if he has done his best to portray him as truthfully as possible for the entertainment of his contemporaries.In this way, he realizes his own value.

We should not be too demanding of a novel.The average lifespan of a novel is only ninety days.If a novel can provide readers with any entertainment in these short three months, let it go.