Robert Paul writes: "You may be confusing literature with fiction" Thank you for further complicating things, Robert. They were entirely too cut & dried before. Permit me to introduce a bit of confusion in return by opening the "who said that and when and in response to what, again?" door. Lawrence Helm wrote (previous to my questioning whether War of the Worlds constituted 'literature" during that brief few hours when it was believed to be factual reality): <<And this is a case in point despite Paul's not having joined in my search for literature. Look here, did someone really steal David's nip? Why would someone doubt it you might ask? Didn't he say they did? Well, I say in response, he's in the habit of writing what I might call literature and he might have done it again. "Wait," you will say, "he mentions Walter and a real incident." "But," I will ask another question by way of response, "didn't Dante mention real people and real incidents? And didn't people round about think he had really gone down into Purgatory and the Inferno and then subsequently written about them -- from first hand experience; which would have precluded * The Divine Comedy* from being literature and reduced it to mere reportage; for reality can't be literature, or can it? We really haven't settled what literature is, have we?>> Perhaps Robert is confusing Lawrence with someone who is confusing literature with fiction, leaving me with both feet off the floor, as it were. I am, however, contributing to the confusion (are you sensing a pattern here, yet?) by deleting the remainder of Robert's post so as to adhere to an appropriate post length. Having cast aside all pretense at buying into anything Aristotelian in nature at all, I now open the discussion to the collision routinely heralding the advent of summer. Julie Krueger awaiting the hail, damaging wind, and tornados of the night