Instead, the book seems to assume that we, the reader, would like to assume that really there is no difference at all -- that what's presented on camera is one hundred percent exactly what's going on in reality and the act of observation does not change the thing observed in any way.
Oooh, oh no, that does not sound fun to me at all.
Have you read "I ship my adversary and me"? It's unfinished and VERY silly but has fun playing around with that distinction.
It's about two actors who barely know each other whose fans have decided they are bitter rivals. The protagonist discovers shippy fanfic about them and gets really into it, and then proceeds to read all their interactions through this sort of double vision of unshippy 'reality' versus fun tinhatting. And a lot of the tinhatting IS definitely false, but some of it has more basis than he realises or is willing to admit to himself. Things gets increasingly intense as they act deliberately fanservicey (but not TOO gay) to get ratings while also stumbling through various ridiculous romantic misunderstandings.
no subject
Oooh, oh no, that does not sound fun to me at all.
Have you read "I ship my adversary and me"? It's unfinished and VERY silly but has fun playing around with that distinction.
It's about two actors who barely know each other whose fans have decided they are bitter rivals. The protagonist discovers shippy fanfic about them and gets really into it, and then proceeds to read all their interactions through this sort of double vision of unshippy 'reality' versus fun tinhatting. And a lot of the tinhatting IS definitely false, but some of it has more basis than he realises or is willing to admit to himself. Things gets increasingly intense as they act deliberately fanservicey (but not TOO gay) to get ratings while also stumbling through various ridiculous romantic misunderstandings.