Blog Post #5

I think a book has to be partially true to be considered non-fiction.  As long as the book that the author considers “non-fiction” is a good read, I would say it’s acceptable to have a few false details in there.  There is no way to tell if the author is making the story up or not, so you might as well just enjoy it.  When I try to recall certain small facts like “What did I wear on Tuesday?” I have a hard time remembering so I’m sure writers can’t remember those tiny details to include in their story.  I’m ok with writers changing the facts a little if it doesn't upset anyone.  Writers have to embellish the story a little to make it more interesting to read otherwise it’s just a bunch of facts being listed and most people don’t like reading history text books for fun.  However, I do think it is immoral when an author writes a non-fiction book about serious events such as the holocaust or 9/11 and lies about it because it’s wrong to lie about events that hurt so many people and the people actually know the truth of the matter so they can tell what the author lied about.  I think we do need lines between genres so we know what is true and what is made up, but there’s no way to do that because authors can completely make up a story and say it’s true and there is really no way to prove them wrong.  Most people don’t have the time to research authors and find all the facts to show that they made up every aspect of a book they wrote.  As long as a book that is claimed to be non-fiction is a fascinating story and doesn’t disrespect tragic events, than its ok to add extra detail in the book that isn't true.