So I basically agree with the thesis here, but I am a little confused by your use of term "hyperreality." As I understand it, hyperreality doesn't refer to all fiction, but specifically media that - by following a generic model - is so detached from lived experience as to lose all meaning. In this sense, it doesn't simply "bend the nature of true life to remove the worst bits and intensify the bits we get off to," rather there are no longer any features of "true life," good or bad. It's "hyper" not in the sense of being extreme, but rather as being above reality, superimposed on top of reality like the map Baudrillard describes at the beginning of Simulacra and Simulation. It's a numbness which offers just enough pleasure to tug at our dopamine receptors, but which is ultimately unsatisfying. It seems to me that hyperreality is diametrically imposed to the kind of visceral, passionate creativity that you're celebrating, but you almost seem to conflate the two. Am I missing something? Are you working from a different definition of the word? I'm not trying to be a pedantic dick, just genuinely curious if there's some theory regarding hyperreality that I'm not familiar with here.
Viewing post in good writers are perverts comments
The original meaning of hyperreality refers to things that are societally real but not physically real, like money, government, laws, marriage etc. What it's used for here is to denote real experiences that don't exist physically - a corruption of reality to be sure, but only in the same way all art is.
That's absolutely not the original meaning of hyperreality. What you're describing is a social construct. Hyperreality goes way beyond that. In fact, I'm pretty sure Baudrillard (who originated the term) would probably say that the hyperreal can have a physical existence. At one point he gives the example of how a simulated bank robbery would ultimately turn into a "real" robbery. That's an instance of something being hyperreal while also having a material existence.