I think that a book should be as truthful as possible for it to be considered non-fiction. I usually read non-fiction books to learn something that could be useful for me later in life. So, when a book states that it is non-fiction but in actuality is fiction, I would feel as if I had been lied to. If I were to read a book just for the purpose of entertainment I wouldn't mind if the book said that it was based on a true story or not. But it does affect people negatively if they were trying to do a research paper and had to use the book as a reference. I think that Frey shouldn't have been victimized as much as he was because his story was there to inspire other people who have drug problems that they have a chance too. It was the message he was trying to send which is more important than the story. However, if he was writing about history and embellished some information and categorized it as non-fiction, then it would be a problem because it has a negative affect on the credibility of non-fiction books. I don't agree with David Shields because I think there should be lines between genres. I also think that there should be a new genre which has stories that are there to inspire people. Whether they are based on a true stories or not should be kept secret so that people who want to read an inspiration book can choose for themselves to believe it or not.
No comments:
Post a Comment