What would happen if I fictionalised myself? It would be an inversion of the truth debates. I could tell the truth but safely: noone would believe it because my genre would seem to be fiction. I could still be a serious academic, you know, theories are often presented in novels and even quoted by theorists.


Discover more from Jill Walker Rettberg

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

6 thoughts on “fictionalising

  1. Rex

    plus also you get that kewl lightsaber.

  2. Susan

    this may not be the proper place to do this but ’tis all I have…

    I do hope all of you ‘over there’ in the East are doing alright with this darn blackout that hit. Being from Midwest Canada, we were not affected here at all. The temps have been very high here though. Way above normals like everywhere else. Going up to 35C(95F) today but with the humidity it will ‘feel’ like over 40C(104F). And yes.. we do, at times, get humidity here on the bald, dry prairies!
    But we DO have power.(no a/c in my tiny place though.. just fans, ice and a bzillion grasshoppers outside)

    Sending cooler air over to all you “Easterners”, whether Canadians or Americans….(loaded with grasshoppers of course.. hee hee.. all them tiny wings beating create mega fans… ROFLMAO)

    I have been following your blog for a while now, Jill. It is very refreshing! 😀

    Take care everyone!
    And look to the skies.. the grasshoppers are winging their way to ya all!
    😀
    Susan

  3. Jill

    Oh, I’d forgotten about the lightsaber that comes with the fiction game! Yay!

  4. Molly

    You mean to suggest you’re not already fictitious?
    ;o)

    I’ll see it when I believe it…

  5. Jill

    Well, of course, I could be double-bluffing… Or have I got to triple-bluffing by now?

  6. weezBlog

    Continuing fictionalization
    This morning was devoted to backstory. Jill proposes fictionalizing herself, an interesting notion. So long as the “character” is consistent, who know the difference? Relationships, interconnections, events need not be real, but merely supported by cir…

Leave A Comment

Recommended Posts

Academics in Norway: Sign this petition asking for research-based discussions of how to use AI in universities

I just signed a petition calling for Norwegian universities to use research expertise on AI when deciding how to implement it, rather than having decisions be made mostly administratively. ,  If you are a researcher in Norway, please read it and sign it if you agree – and share with anyone else who might be interested. The petition was written by three researchers at UiT: Maria Danielsen (a philosopher who completed her PhD in 2025 on AI and ethics, including discussions of art and working life), Knut Ørke (Norwegian as a second language), and Holger Pötzsch (a professor of media studies with many years of research on digital media, video games, disruption, and working life, among other topics).  This is not about preventing researchers from exploring AI methods in their research. It is about not uncritically accepting the hype that everyone must use AI everywhere without critical reflection. It is about not introducing Copilot as the default option in word processors, or training PhD candidates to believe they will fall behind if they do not use AI when writing articles, without proper academic discussion. Changes like these should be knowledge-based and discussed academically, not merely decided administratively, because they alter the epistemological foundations of research. Maria wrote to me a couple of months ago because she had read my opinion piece in Aftenposten in which I called for a strong brake on the use of language models in knowledge work. She was part of a committee tasked with developing UiT’s AI strategy and was concerned because there was so much hype and so few members of the committee with actual expertise in AI. I fully support the petition. There are probably some good uses for AI in research, but the uncritical, hype-driven insistence that we must simply adopt it everywhere is highly risky. There are many researchers in Norway with strong expertise in AI, language, ethics, working life, and culture. We must make use of this expertise. This is also partly about respect for research in the humanities, social sciences, psychology, and law. Introducing AI at universities and university colleges is not merely a technical issue, and perhaps not even primarily a technical one. It concerns much more: philosophy of science, methodological reflection, epistemology, writing, publishing, the working environment, and more. […]

screenshot of Grammarly - main text in the middle, names of experts on the left with reccomendations and on the right more info about the expert review feature
AI and algorithmic culture Teaching

Grammarly generated fake expert reviews “by” real scholars

Grammarly is a full on AI plagiarism machine now, generating text, citations (often irrelevant), “humanizing” the text to avoid AI checkers and so on. If you’re an author or scholar, they also have been impersonating and offering “feedback” in your name. Until yesterday, when they discontinued the Expert Review feature due to a class action lawsuit. Here are screenshots of how it worked.