How true does a book have to be in your mind to be
considered non-fiction? Why?
I personally think that a book has to be 100% true to be considered
non-fiction because the whole point of the genre is that it’s true, not
something made up or embellished. Also I think it should be 100% true because
if someone is using a book that they think is non-fiction for research they are
depending on the fact that what is in that book is supposedly true. Another
thing is, don’t you think it would just then become fiction once embellishments
are made or things that aren’t true are added.
Are half-truths okay if it’s still a good story? Does it
matter if Frey or other memoirists bent the truth to tell a story?
I think that most of
the time half-truths aren’t okay. I can understand if it was something that
happened when the author was really little or if it was many, many years ago
but any other time I think that the author writing the memoir or non-fiction
book should stick to the truth. Also it does matter if Frey or other memoirists
bent the truth because the point of a memoir is to tell your true life story,
your experiences . Not what you think
will sell a bunch of books, even though that would be a great bonus I still
think that sticking to the truth when
writing memoirs and non-fiction is the best way to go.
Honestly the thing that annoyed me about the way Frey wrote his "memoir" was the blatant lying and insane embellishments. They were so big and so /different/ from what happened that they became asinine. While yes, selling a lot of books is always a bonus because that's your job as an author, embellishing to the point of flat out lies isn't okay.
ReplyDelete