This raises an interesting question though: when is it appropriate to attribute it to the author?
This seems like an obvious case where you should have a policy of always doing X, even if not-X was right most of the time, because not-X will occasionally be wrong and cause harm while there’s no harm in doing X.
In other words, you should always have a (character, work, author) attribution, or (work, author) if it’s said by the narrator. There’s no reason to not do it, and an obvious reason why you should do it (because you will be wrong from time to time).
Why do you say (work, author) for a narrator? And what if the narrator is a character in the book, but technically not “speaking” at the time?
And I think there is an obvious reason—namely that more attributions is more cumbersome and distracting, although I’m not sure that is a overly compelling reason.
Admittedly, in such a case attributing it to the author is more justified. But the author-as-the-narrator saying something still isn’t necessarily the same thing as the author saying something: there is the technique of an unreliable narrator, for instance.
The narrator can also have a personality that’s distinct from the author’s, even a personality that the author would personally find repulsive. I wouldn’t like it if people attributed what I wrote in Musings of a Vampire to me without clarifying that these aren’t actually my views.
And what if the narrator is a character in the book, but technically not “speaking” at the time?
In those cases, (work, author) and (character, work, author) would both be fine. The main thing is making clear that these aren’t necessarily the views of the author.
This seems like an obvious case where you should have a policy of always doing X, even if not-X was right most of the time, because not-X will occasionally be wrong and cause harm while there’s no harm in doing X.
In other words, you should always have a (character, work, author) attribution, or (work, author) if it’s said by the narrator. There’s no reason to not do it, and an obvious reason why you should do it (because you will be wrong from time to time).
Why do you say (work, author) for a narrator? And what if the narrator is a character in the book, but technically not “speaking” at the time?
And I think there is an obvious reason—namely that more attributions is more cumbersome and distracting, although I’m not sure that is a overly compelling reason.
Admittedly, in such a case attributing it to the author is more justified. But the author-as-the-narrator saying something still isn’t necessarily the same thing as the author saying something: there is the technique of an unreliable narrator, for instance.
The narrator can also have a personality that’s distinct from the author’s, even a personality that the author would personally find repulsive. I wouldn’t like it if people attributed what I wrote in Musings of a Vampire to me without clarifying that these aren’t actually my views.
I’m not sure what you mean. Example?
In The Plague, by Camus, the narrator is the protagonist of the story, which isn’t revealed until the end.
In To the Lighthouse, by Virginia Woolfe, the narrator is continually shifting between all of the main characters.
In those cases, (work, author) and (character, work, author) would both be fine. The main thing is making clear that these aren’t necessarily the views of the author.