"I used to distinguish between my fiction and nonfiction in terms of superiority or inferiority"

Peter Matthiessen's quote, "I used to distinguish between my fiction and nonfiction in terms of superiority or inferiority", exposes a reflective journey and evolution in his viewpoint on literature. This statement suggests a previous mindset where Matthiessen maybe valued one form of composing more extremely than the other, showing a possible hierarchical view in between the two categories. Such a stance may resonate with numerous writers or readers who come to grips with the viewed authenticity or creative benefit of different literary kinds.

Initially, Matthiessen's distinction may originate from the conventional view that nonfiction, frequently rooted in factual accuracy and real-world effect, holds a gravitas that fiction does not have. Fiction, being imaginative and crafted, may have appeared to him-- or to others-- as less "severe" or impactful. Nonfiction's capacity to inform, inform, and provide extensive insights into truth may have appeared naturally superior by virtue of its truthfulness and academic value.

On the other hand, fiction's ability to explore human emotions, explore the psyche, and construct worlds unlimited by truth may have likewise appeared extremely superior in another context, provided its capability for development and creativity. Fiction allows writers to weave stories that resonate on an emotional level, providing truths about the human condition that go beyond factual precision.

Nevertheless, Matthiessen's use of "used to" suggests a change or reconciliation in this view. Such a shift highlights an understanding that both fiction and nonfiction serve unique however similarly valuable functions. Fiction's exploration of 'what might be' matches nonfiction's evaluation of 'what is,' together using a more holistic understanding of the world. This modification in point of view underscores a matured appreciation for the literary arts, acknowledging that the merit of a piece lies not solely in its category however in its execution, resonance, and capability to engage with readers on several levels.

Eventually, Matthiessen's reflection can be seen as an invitation to welcome all forms of storytelling. Both fiction and nonfiction supply various lenses through which we can check out and interpret our world, each possessing its distinct strengths and potentials, and each equally efficient in attaining literary excellence.