Blog Post #7

For a book to be considered non-fiction I believe that the whole book should be true. I know it would be hard for the author to get the dialogue in books exact, but they should try their hardest to get it close, not just make something up. The whole book has to be true because otherwise you won’t know what to believe and what not to believe. No, I don’t think that half-truths are okay because then it would not be non-fiction. A book can still be good if parts are made up or half-truths, it doesn’t mean that it will be bad, it just won’t be a non-fiction or memoir. I do not agree with David Shields, I think that we should have lines between non-fiction and fiction and the different genres. It matters because readers like to know what genres some books are, so they know what books they may like. Everyone likes different genres, and without out the genre labels people will not know what to read. I also believe that we need a line between fiction and non-fiction. Some people like to read non-fiction, memoirs, and historical books, and they want to know what it true and what really happened. Without that line between non-fiction and fiction they won’t know what to read to get the facts they want, and they won’t know what they should believe and not believe.