Truth in Memoir: Blog #5

I think when a book genre comes to non-fiction all personal situations should be 100% true. Even if some parts of your experience that you're sharing aren't the most exciting you still need to tell the full truth because in the end it would be better to have a couple boring pages that readers can skim over rather than your book becoming published and popular once you ended up lying in parts, you're then living with the anxiety of people discovering a twisted lie. The little details that you add to a story to make it more interesting do add up; for example Laila Lalami supported this claim: well maybe if I add just a little tweak here and there no one will notice the difference... Writers will write a novel and then spontaneously decide to turn them from fiction to non-fiction just to make things more appealing. In the end though its very noticeable when a story is over exaggerated. When it comes to me, I'm on the fence about a half truth story being okay and not being okay. If the story is good and I'm interested I honestly wouldn't want to know its all a lie, let me enjoy it while I can. But, at the same time I want the whole truth because if its an awesome story and is inspiring to me, knowing in the end or even if I'm only half way through the book that its all a lie I'm crushed especially if I was motivated or inspired by the story. I think that David Shields is right, we do need lines between non-fiction and fiction especially, I have a bad feeling that if there wasn't a line between them we wouldn't know what to believe and what not to believe in an authors writing. I like being able to relate to a story but I would never again be able to do that not knowing if I'm reading the truth.