A work of literature must provide more than factual accuracy or vivid physical reality . . . it must tell us more than we already know. – E. M. Forster
Read the critical lens and interpret it by paraphrasing it, or writing it in your own words.
Answers
Fundamentally, it's insufficient for a story to "appear to be genuine" or be consistent with what we know. It's increasingly critical that a work of writing make us think in new ways or experience another point of view on life.
We as a whole realize that a work of writing must give more than genuine precision or clear physical reality it must disclose to us more than we definitely know. On the off chance that you don't comprehend the wording, simply think about this: you read a story between the lines. We as reader need to consider the subject restricted to somebody giving uneven data. We the per-user need to have the capacity to think and reach resolutions on far from being obviously true points.
I think that its unexpected that a lion's share of commentators advise journalists to spill all the data they have and not to leave any open closures, but rather this statement straight up clarifies how you really need individuals to find some hidden meaning.
The entire thought is scrutinizing the per-user. You, the essayist need to keep the per-user pondering. Resist the urge to panic and recollect, works of writing must give more than true precision or striking physical reality it must disclose to us more than we definitely know.
E.M. Forster in the above lines had attempted to tell about the purpose of literature. It is the literature which serves many functions. It does not just tell what a normal vision can easily see but explains what normally is beyond the apprehension. It is the role of the literature to showcase not just the reality but the hidden truth and reality altogether. An artist or a writer posses that vision which cannot be normally perceived by the common people. Hence, it is through their art and narrative it comes before the world.