Reflection 7: Non-Fiction

To be considered non-fiction, I think a book has to be 100% true. When I think about non-fiction, the first thing that comes to mind is a true story. If even anything is made up in it, I don’t think it should still be considered non-fiction. Lies are added to stories to make them more interesting. I don’t think there’s anything wrong with that if you’re not listing it on the book shelves as the truth. Half-truths make some of the best stories because the author can give you true insight on a real topic without the actual situation being true. Authors still list these as non-fiction because they think it will be more interesting. I bet The Blind Side wouldn’t be near as popular if someone had made up the whole thing and Michael Oher wasn’t actually an NFL football player. These stories are more inspiring and heart-warming to readers because someone it’s happened to a real person. I definitely think that there needs to be more distinct lines between genres because there’s obviously something wrong if anyone with a good story filled with embellishments can publish a book as a memoir. It takes credibility from authors and everyone else involved in the release of that books. Readers have a harder time trusting the genre given to books. Are they true or just a way of selling a fabricated tale?