Non-fiction

                I agree with what Aimee Bender had to say: as long as the work is interesting, I really don’t care. Even though they are listed as non-fiction, they’re still books. They still have to engage the reader and make them want to keep reading, and to do so they need an interesting plot. If maybe ninety percent of the novel is true, then who cares if the other ten percent is just to make things interesting? The author is doing us a favor, really. They’re adding that ten percent into the plot line because that means there wasn’t enough action to keep us interested the whole way through the story they had to tell.

                Now, I do mind if only half of the novel is true. Then it shouldn’t be labeled as non-fiction writing. When you’re only getting half of the story, but you are lead to believe that it’s the whole story, then that’s a bit deceiving and I’d feel like I was being lied to or cheated. If half of the story didn’t happen, then really that should be labeled as fiction, and the author can make a side note that some of the events in the plot were based off something that really happened. This way the author isn’t being deceptive but can still let their readers know about some things that occurred in their life.

                But in the end, though, it’s the author’s choice. If they want their readers to believe a bunch of false facts that are labeled as true then fine, go ahead and write them. All that matters is at the end they can be happy and proud of the story that they’re telling to their audience who trustingly believe that it’s true.