A departure from accuracy or precision in order to evoke an effect is CREATIVE or ARTISTIC LICENSE.   This can range from a departure from the mere rules of grammer through “reinterpretation of cherished beliefs or previous works.” (outlined at  Wikipedia).   

This is related to issues of authenticuty, authority, and attribution:  aspects of the story you wish to tell–the message of your work of art…  

Amongst the mantras of art theory and criticism is “the willing suspension of disbelief” … allowing the perceptions of reality at the moment, even if unproven and possibly illusory, to stand in for something else thought to be more valid, authentic, “true.”   In a sense, everything that has come before a creative insight or innovation is an enabling  scaffold: a temporary structure that enables a more permanent structure.   

OF COURSE we build on and borrow … but at what point does the work of those who precede and surround us–need to be specifically identified?  What about bias? or “cultural climate?” when does borrowing become “actionable”?   A Legal issue? see more

Does this raise issues of freedom to PARODY or even create a an artistic HOAX ?

Creative reconfiguring the knowledge we have in the light of new knowledge is the way scientists approach truth: by subsequent approximations, each story with (hopefully) less error than the one before is told.  

And often consciously (or not) implementing epoche: researchers often set aside  beliefs or biases that interfere with moving ahead with new ideas. [visit the A&O link to epoche]–they can explore a new idea with more confidence and then revisit the older beliefs that might have impeded on their progress.

So we may gradually approach TRUTH–or at least the truth we are able to understand, or at least “true enough” to provide sufficient confidence to undertake actions that support our meeting of biological needs.

THIS articulates with FREE WILL: take a look at  an overview of the  FREE WILL DEBATE