Truth in Memoir

I believe that there is a major difference between fiction and non-fiction. Non-fiction is straight forward with facts and proven points while fiction tends to be more creative is doesn't strictly follow a story it may be based off of. It is because of this large contrast between these two genres that we need boundary lines to distinguish the differences. If a book is to be considered non-fiction, I believe that it needs to have at least 70% validity behind what its saying. If it is more made up than factual, it cannot be a fictional story.

            Half-truths are okay if it is a good story but that does not mean it can be a non-fictional story. It is okay for a writer to bend the truths to a story, but they need to acknowledge that they changed the facts around and let the reader know that it is not a non-fiction story and that it is not 100% true. I believe that authors should have to write on the front of their book what the percentage of truth is within the story so that the reader understands that there may be some half-truths.

            I think David Shields is incorrect, I do believe that we need genres because people should be able to pick up a book from a section in a book store and fully understand what type of book they are going to read. I also think we need genres so that people who like a certain type of book can go into the book store and find a book that they may like based on books that they have read from that specific genre before. It matters because people should not be confused as to what kind of book they’re reading, it would only cause them to not want to read since they would be unable to find a book they could enjoy.