A non-fiction book has to be true but it can be bent depending on the persons experience during the event or the aftermath of the event. Some people see things differently. But if the truth is bent too much then it shouldn’t be considered a non-fiction genre. By telling the half-truth, it won’t be considered a true story. But it does make a better book sometimes unless the audience is reading it for pure information and understanding. When Frey and Mortenson switched around their true stories, they did it to make it more exciting and overall more intriguing to read.
I don’t think we should label genres. I feel that it is somewhat pointless. It might help someone understand what the book contains, but that’s all. It’s technically stereotyping for book. For example, Nicholas Sparks dislikes when people refer to his books as “romance” he likes to believe that his stories are “love stories”. Is there a difference between the two? Not really. It doesn’t matter what we label books. I think David Shields is right when he says that. People read books because they are entertaining, if the book isn’t entertaining, stop reading it and find a different book. Simple as that. And if spicing up the story makes it more fascinating, then there is nothing wrong with that.
I agree that a story has to be true, and that if it has a half-truth, it isn't the real thing.
ReplyDeleteI agree, all that labeling genres do is help you to figure out what you're going to read. After you start reading, you could care less about the genre.
ReplyDeleteNon-fiction needs to be 100% true. If you are trying to say that a memior can be close, but not exactly 100% you should specify. Because it would not be good if all non-fiction books had false information. And we do need genres because there are so many books we would not be able to navigate through all of the books.
ReplyDeleteHow is it sterotyping all it comes down to is, is it a fiction or non-fiction novel.
ReplyDelete