Truth in Memoir

If you say something is non- fiction, then it better be non- fiction. One hundred percent of it, not seventy, not eighty, not even nighty- five, one hundred percent. When you read non-fiction, often you are doing so in order to learn about something, but if what you “learn” is untrue, then it defeats the whole purpose. Also the thing that makes memoirs so powerful and such great stories is the fact that they are true. It’s not someone’s imagination at work, it is real life. Knowing this, memoirs have the ability to move us in ways that an ordinary novel cannot. We can be hurt and sad feeling the pain in the story. Or we can be inspired and filled with happiness for the triumph in the story. But if we find out it’s all fake, then what’s it worth? Anyone can make up a story of someone who beats the odds, or a story of a tragedy that made someone stronger in the end, or a story of a fascinating, interesting life filled with bittersweet memories. It’s when these things have actually happened to someone that we create the connection and find ourselves thinking about the story in our own life. I think this is why so many authors call pieces memoirs, which have really been fabricated. They know it makes the story that much better, that much stronger, and most importantly it makes people want to read it that much more.

I do think half-truths are okay though, with one exception. The author must state that the story is not non- fiction. I’m not asking them to call their book fiction and lump it together with a bunch of other great stories. People should know that some of the story is true. That’s why I believe if someone is going to write a memoir and they are going to add or change things, they must say this work is based on a true story, or loosely based on a true story. That way the reader going in knows what to expect. And that is why I strongly disagree with David Shields. What he did with his book was intriguing I must admit. But we need to have a clear, definite line between fiction and non-fiction because otherwise we may start to blur the line between reality and fiction so much that we don’t know what to believe at all anymore. With textbooks and history books, how would we know anything they are saying is true? We will find ourselves not having a clue what to believe anymore.

Readicide

     A book should be defined by the writing craft and plot, not how many weeks it has been on the best seller’s list, not when it was written, or not if over the years it has been deemed a “classic.” So you ask how to determine what books should be taught in school. Well, I think they should have an award given to a book of every genre each year that the people vote on. It would be like the people’s choice awards of books. Then schools could take some of these books along with what the feel are the best and most important literary works for students to read. This would provide students with a variety of good books. Plus, even if a particular book was not a student’s favorite, with the variety in genre they are bound to enjoy at least one of the books they have to read. I think this is the best system because right now kids in school only are getting exposed to literary works, and therefore judging all books on their experience with these works. It’s also very important to expose kids to other genres so they can get inspiration for their writing, and just see different writing techniques. I believe a person can’t make a blanket statement abou8t reading or a specific genre before they have really dipped into it and let themselves explore it with an open mind. I think all books of all genres can be relevant in our lives, even one’s written many years ago, teachers just have to make sure they focus on the underlying themes and help us to relate them to our lives. This way students will feel what they are reading is important too and care about it. Because the moment we feel that reading a book is pointless and we don’t care about the story or what the author is trying to convey to us, we are doomed.