Exploring an idea of literary journalism studies and communication studies is vital to note that there is a borderland, on the one side, and in-between area, on the other side, between them. So, the paths are inevitably crossed. Going through human communication is as establishing the roles for every part of it. There is still a strong human desire to resolve the problem of an artistic expression in our daily lives. Why do we need to communicate with each other going beyond the standard and typical signs? Why we use, or even overuse, metaphors, similies, oxymorons in a daily speech? Finally, why we are so willing to adopt quotes, famous sentences and phrases coming simply from literature? Is it an embellishment of our speech or there is a hidden deeper truth?
However, to focus the research interest on the visualization of borderland in literary journalism, it is necessary to highlight the concept of a term. At the point, some difficulties may appear due to the blurred boundaries of the research fields which are obviously crossed. In fact, the in-between area is occupied either by literature and journalism employing the methods as well as perspectives common for both. Shaping the definition of contemporary literary journalism, is unavoidable to make a claim that, following Encyclopedia of American Journalism:
Aims to be factual while using the techniques commonly associated with literary writing, particularly literary fiction- all in service of illuminating a larger or ‘literally’ truth about human existence. It has sometimes been called ‘creative nonfiction’, ‘artistic nonfiction’, ‘the nonfiction novel’ and ‘the news story’. (2008: 270)
In turn, the twentieth century American approach to literary journalism, started from the emergence of a term New Journalism in the turbulent sixties by means of, applying a Norman Sims’ term, ‘creative writing’ of Tom Wolfe, Norman Mailer, Truman Capote and Joan Didion among many others, contributed much to clarifying the image of borderlands between fact and fiction and to interpreting the term on a ground of typical binary opposition between fiction and non-fiction. For many researchers, for example — Connery 1992; Frus 1994; Hartsock 2000; Sims 1984, 1990, 1995 — this kind of filling the gaps between the genres was admirably accepted. In contrary, there is Ian Whitt who rejects the Hartsock’s and Sims’ view of ‘critical closure’ between genres called ‘borderlands between fact and fiction’. She states in her recent study Settling the borderland: other voices in literary journalism:
“As noted earlier the study resists what Hartsock calls ‘critical closure’ and relies upon a series of questions introduced by those who have just begun to ask the important questions about the definitions, characteristics, contributions, and future of the studies in literary journalism’. (2008: 37)
In the last decade, there has been a growing body of research that has had as its focus, a concept of literary journalism. However, Norman Sims (2009: 11) advocates that the cultural approach to literary journalism is a growing need for understanding, examining and exploring the potential power of non-fiction and its future achievements by following ‘their own cultural pathways’. Simply speaking, communication is a key.