Post #5

            To me a book that is non-fiction is better if it is truthful. If the author is not honest about the story and what they have written I rather not know than be disappointed by what I thought was true. A story is much more powerful and has more meaning if the events actually happen. I do not expect every detail to be the exact same, like little differences in dialogue in a non- fiction book but the difference is when what happen in reality is completely different from what is written in the book. Sometimes little details that are changed do make the story better but I want most of the book if not all to be true or close to what happen.

 If part of the book is false information, a fake story; then it does make the rest of the writing questionable if it is the truth or not. I think that yes it is important to have a line between non-fiction and fiction books because if the book is non-fiction then the reader expects for it to be true and it makes the reader think that those events or what is written about is possible to happen. Where in fiction the reader knows that not always/ most of the events cannot happen to them and they are not set up for disappointment. Where in no fiction they have hope and if non-fiction isn’t true then that hope is gone, taken away from the reader because the author lied.

Also another important thing to think about is that when doctors or students are studying out of a non-fiction book the information needs to be valid in order for the students to be educated the right way and know what they need to for their career. If the information is wrong it could be a serious problem to the public or people that that person would be working for.