Blog Post #5: Truth in Memoir

In my mind, for a book to be considered non-fiction, it has to be at least 85% true; 100% being what people expect, but in reality it usually ranges from 85%-90% true.  Sure, people are going to stretch the truth to make the story more interesting, they always do, but I don't think an author should completely change the course of the story unless they say it is fiction rather than non fiction.   I think that people stretch the truth so they can sound more heroic, accomplished, or even intelligent.  Agreeing with Aimee Bender,  I think that works don't have to be an exact replica of the event, the truth can be stretched a bit to capture the reader's attention more.  I do think that truth is a valuable aspect of a book, but I think that it can be molded and changed to fit the story or the mood of the story more. 

I think that, rather than half truths, quarter truths are okay.  I think stories need to be at least 3/4 of the way true. This is because I think location, dialogue, characters, and events are the four main parts of truths.  You can have different combinations of the four aspects, arranging it any way you'd like, but at least three of those dynamics should be true.  You can change the events as long as the same characters, dialogue, and location still exists. 

I think that David Shields is partially right. This is because fiction and non fiction are labeled as genres not a specifying category that defines whether or not something is true or not true. After all, what is the definition of fiction and non fiction?  Do genres even have real definitions or defining characteristics?  I think that fiction and non fiction matter because they describe what the reader is meant to believe.  Plus, if you're reading a book marked 'Horror' and then coming to find that it was a true story that makes it even more terrifying.  This is what I think about fiction and non fiction and how much truth should be told in non fiction.