I'm fictionalizing a true story into a novel and currently using the real names of the people involved because it is easier to write that way, figuring I'd change the names later. Do I need to change the names to something else when publishing the book? What if they're dead? If I have to get their permissions I'd likely just change the names but I'd rather not if I don't have to.
The name we assign to our characters helps the reader figure who is who. It serves no other purpose for the end user. They probably would not care much if they were named Larry or Barry... I think the issue is not for the end user/reader, it is yours. Adopting the real name whilst writing may help I can certainly see that but I would change character names before you release the story. This is important because you as the author need to judge if the characters stand up in other peoples minds and not just your own. Beta readers often don't always feel attached in the same way as an author and that is how as authors we feel sometimes offended when beta readers tell us how they see things. Changing the character name helps us become objective. If on the other hand you were writing fact then it would be all important to keep the real names, gain permission to maintain fact.
Yes. It is an accusation of murder and coverup done decades ago. In the original event, 50 years ago, the death was ruled accidental and remains that way today. I discovered proof that it could not have been an accident and began researching what actually happened. A few of the people involved are still alive today, though they are well into old age. The book I am writing lays out that research in a fictionalized story of what actually happened. For personal reasons I'd rather not change the names, but if I had to I would...just wondering if I would have to in this case. I'll most likely be self-publishing, if that matters.
Ah, that elusive objectivity...yes. My first attempt at telling this story, back in 2014, resulted in a very factual, thesis-like documentary of my research that is a very sterile read...accusatory even, and somewhat angry I suppose. It was certainly not what I was trying to achieve in telling this story. Absolutely not objective by any measure so I stepped away from it for a while. Ultimately I came to the conclusion, much like you're suggesting, that I needed to distance myself from the story...that I needed a different voice to tell it with, hence the fictional novel approach I am working on now and it is much, much closer to what I want it to be and I am very pleased with the results so far as it is close to completion at this point. Objectivity has been hard to find but this format has been serving me well in that regard.
I think it makes a big difference in terms of writing fiction and nonfiction. If it were nonfiction, you might go through some extensive fact-checking with your publisher. Things like court documents and police reports that are public record would be important I imagine. Along with any interviews you've done to help you gather this information. Since your own research and it goes against the findings of the authorities, who you are as the writer and how you reached your conclusions would likely come into play. You also said some of the people involved are still alive. It might do the story some good to see if not only you could get permission to use their names but also if they would be willing to talk to you and hear their side of the story or their take on things. This sort of thing has been done before. You might want to check out Sebastian Junger's book A Death in Belmont. He is also the author of The Perfect Storm. I think a big part of this might be how much you are fictionalizing everything. If all of this is inspiration to write a novel (fiction), then not only would you need to change the names but maybe some of the events as well. Name changes might not be enough to protect you from getting sued or at least some backlash. If the story is recognizable and people would know who the characters are even with name changes, you basically run into the same problem you would if you kept the real names and stuff like that. You have to be very careful of accusing people of things even if you are trying to disguise it as fiction. It also makes a difference if these are public figures or private citizens. And, also, how much of the information you are relying on can be backed up with fact-checkable facts.
I'd maybe change the characters names as that will give you more freedom and flexibility with things like conversations and where you're taking it. It also might grant you enough distance to treat the people involved like characters and get into their shoes.
Came here to say exactly this. Using the situation as inspiration for fiction is completely fine (and common), but the names must be changed and so does the story - at least changed enough to where readers won't recognize what & who you're writing about. I ran into a somewhat similar situation with a chapter in my first book, a fiction collection. Said chapter started off about a real, historical event and the MC was of course a real person. But he'd been dead over 100 years by the time it was published and there was nothing defamatory whatsoever in the story. In fact, I wrote a far better ending for him than what happened IRL. It sounds like your story is more sensitive and serious. On the other hand, you may have a tailor-made situation for a nonfic project on your hands. Given the research and details involved, and if people connected to it are still alive, maybe getting the right permissions and writing a nonfic book would make sense?
This is the sort of question where you need legal advice from a lawyer that aside there’s no statute of limitations on murder so if you have proof that someone committed it you should be talking to law enforcement
If the OP has proof that someone else did the murder and goes to law enforcement and then something is overturned and/or there's a new conviction, well... that could be a hell of a story.
A well used way of getting around the defamation claim, is by using the small penis trick. The way I’ve heard the trick is you add one particular, but meaningless detail that is either false or extremely unflattering. The theory being that the author can say “I specified this person has a micropenis, so either it’s explicitly not you, or prove to a court that you do, in fact, have a tiny dick.” Very small details can change things from an accusation to “inspired by.” For example, Billy Mitchell, famous video game cheater was lambasted on a Cartoon Network show, I forget which one. He sued because it was very obviously him, but the judge said it wasn’t because Billy wasn’t an alien who’s head literally exploded when he loses.
A little bit late, but if you don't want to use someone's real name (e.g. for legal reasons, defamation etc.), you can always change the name slightly? Behind The Name is a website I use for inspiration, when I'm stuck on names. It gives you examples of names and surnames from various civilisations down the ages, and also tells you their origins, what they mean, and how popular they are (and used to be). I used it to get examples of (say) Roman names, Greek names, Egyptian names, Babylonian names etc. You may find it useful. Just google it.
If I dig up the body and prove it was murder, then would I still have to change the names? I figured just fictionalizing the story and changing the names would be enough. If I wrote a fictional novel about someone intentionally sinking the Titanic, would I need to get permission from those who were actually aboard the ship (assuming they were alive)? Perhaps not the greatest analogy...
If you truly, literally, dig up the body and prove it was murder ... then: a) You'd probably be hounded by the family (and the church, and the media) as a sensation-seeking ghoul; b) You'd probably be charged by the police for disturbing evidence (unless you are the coroner, or someone working for the DA's office); c) Even if (a) and (b) don't happen, it would only prove that the person was murdered. It wouldn't prove how, or by whom, or when, or where. I presume you don't have the resources, or time, that the coroner's office has. ======== Seriously, fictionalizing the story and changing the names should be enough. But I am not a legal expert. It's probably best to consult one and see what you should do.
Why take a chance with legal issues after publication? Write with the real names if that is easier for you, then use a global replace.
This is the answer...if I publish, the names have to change, legally. It's the right thing to do as well.
With a global replace planned, I would suggest doing something like [Name]. That would prevent any unintentional replacements.
I'm not really concerned about the periphery characters, changing their names isn't a big deal since most of them only appear once. There are a handful of main characters that I can easily change a first or last name on and be done with it. They're mostly family members so it wouldn't stress MSWord Find/Replace too much. I still need to write the motive, and I still need an ending, and I haven't touched this project in quite a while so I'm a ways off from publishing.
I am fine writing characters of my creation in the stories I write, but those in this world, in history, have real individuals known to history that have impact on others lives, it would even be so for the characters, especially historical leaders of those times. And what do I do with Jesus if he would be mentioned? Real individuals might be too hard to really avoid mentioning in fictional works I write.
If Bill and Ted go back in time to interact with Socrates or Jesus, then it'd be tough to edit it to other people later on. I think major historical figures are probably okay. Edit: @FFBurwick ahh i saw your post after i wrote mine haha *highfive*
@trevorD that is funny. Jesus seems to be an easy pass, but there are significant people all over history that have an impact on anyone, and I feel they should be recognized in fictional stories set in their times. I wanted to find I there is some agreement on that.
