I think for a book to be considered non-fiction it should be mostly true. I also think it depends on what type of work it is. Such as textbooks, encyclopedias, and other sources I think those should be completely true because they are resources. Memoirs on the other hand I think it's okay if some of the things within the story are changed, but only if they are small details. If big events are changed in a memoir I wouldn't really consider it a memoir anymore.
I think half-truths that still make good stories are considered more of a fiction book based upon real life experiences the author has experienced. I think that stories such as Frey's are better off as fictional books based upon real life experiences and that they shouldn't be claimed as memoirs. I think people shouldn't twist the truth when writing memoirs because that defeats the purpose of writing a memoir because memoirs are based upon the truth.
I think there should be a line between fiction and non-fiction but there can be some exceptions for those books that fall in between. Such as the books that are half-truth where the fake part is fictional and the real part is non-fiction. I think it matters that there is a line between fiction and non-fiction, but not a very fine line as to where a book only falls under the category of being either fiction of non-fiction. I also think it's up to the reader to decide.
No comments:
Post a Comment