This is a difficult question to answer without working from presuppositions about the origin of the book of Genesis, its genre, and its authorial intent.
The Documentary Hypothesis suggests that Genesis is a composite work, made of several different sources, edited together over the course of several centuries. We find that Genesis chapter 4 primarily comes from the 'Yahwist' source, that is, the chapters of Genesis that refer to God as 'YHWH' (as opposed to a text like Genesis 1, which refers to God solely as 'Elohim').
In the Yahwist source, names describe the thing or person they refer to. 'Adam (man) is so-named because he comes from 'adamah (ground; Genesis 2.7). Chavvah (life-giver) is so named because she is the mother of all chay (life; Genesis 3.20). The same goes for Eden, Cain, Abel, Seth, Adah, Zillah, Jabal, Jubal, Tubalcain, Naamah, Noah, etc.
When we come to Genesis 4.8-17, this descriptive naming is very hard to miss. Cain is sentenced to 'wander' the earth, so he goes east to the land of Nod (wandering). Cain has a son named Chenok (dedicate), and then builds a city and dedicates it to the name of his son. These descriptive names pose a chicken-and-egg problem: Was Nod named so because Cain was sent there to wander, or did he go to wander there because it was named Nod? Was Chenok born before the city that was 'dedicated' to him, or was the city built first and retroactively 'dedicated' to Chenok when he was born?
Whether the original author and readers of the Yahwist source understood the land of Nod or the city of Enoch to be actual locations in their past cannot be determined with any certainty. However, the overt symbolism behind the names suggests the narrative in Genesis 4, if it was intended to be read as historical, has still been mythologized to some extent.