The Truth About Fiction and Non-Fiction

In order for a book to be considered “non-fiction” I believe there has to be some sort of truth to the book. I’m not saying the whole book has to be word-for-word true or even a large percentage of it true. As long as the book has a background that is true, I can consider the book “non-fiction”.  I’ve heard about so many incidents where authors are being criticized for writing memoirs that aren’t 100% true. I could care less if the truth is stretched a little bit. If a book has a good story to it and I enjoy reading it, I honestly don’t care how much of it is true. All that matters to me is that I enjoyed reading it. I’m not going to be the person to hate on the author for lying; I’m going to be the person applauding the author for writing a fantastic story.

Personally I agree with Shields, it doesn’t matter if a book is “fiction” or “non-fiction”. Relating back to what I said above; a story should not be limited to being categorized in just these genres. As long as the story I’m reading leaves me satisfied, I don’t care about the genre of the book. Why should it matter is a book is “fiction” or “non-fiction”? A book is a book no matter what genre. Every book contains a different story, so why are we so focused on putting every book in just two categories when in fact many books don’t fit into either. We shouldn’t force a book to be either “fiction” of “non-fiction”.  We don’t need to draw a line between the two because some books could be classified as both genres or not as one at all. When an author writes a story, he isn’t worried about writing a piece that is 100% true. He is just worried about writing a book that readers will enjoy. And in the end, people shouldn’t worry about the genre; they should just worry about if the book is a good read.