Blog 8: Non-Fiction?

How true does a book have to be in your mind to be considered non-fiction? Why?

In my opinion, if an author or publishing company is going to classify a book as non-fiction, then the book needs to live up to that standard. In other words, it needs to be true, it needs to be honest, it needs to be “not-fake”. A non-fiction book by definition is a book that deals with “facts and events” rather than “imaginative narration” (dictionary.com). By this definition, non-fiction books should tell the truth, the whole truth, and avoid adding miscellaneous details and events simply to make the book more intriguing. If the author cannot refrain from adding the extra garbage, then they should not place their book in the non-fiction category. Instead, the author should identify the book as what it is, fiction, and leave a note saying that the story is “based on a true story” rather than saying that it IS a true story.

In the end, I feel like an author should be honest and straight forward with their readers and believe in their writing enough to not have to classify their story as a genre that is it not simply so that it will be published. If a book is not good enough to be fiction on its own, then perhaps it just should not be a book at all. To sell yourself short and lie to an entire audience simply to have your book published, in my mind, is just wrong and should never be an option, regardless of whether it is a last resort or not.

As my mom always says, honesty is the best policy.