Truth in Memoir

I think for a book to be non-fiction is should be 98%-100% true. I think this because if the author is changing more than that in a book they are not writing about a true story anymore and they are making it up. I think it is OK for an author maybe add some parts but if they are changing/ exaggerating parts in their story it is no longer true. Just like when James Frey exaggerated how long he was in jail. He wrote that he was in jail for a couple months when in reality it was only a couple hours.

I think that if someone has a couple half-truths in their story it is OK. But if an author has lots of half-truths filling the book then it should not be considered a memoir and it should be considered more of a “good” story. When Frey bent the truth in his story it wasn't just “bending” the truth he completely changed his story at points and I do not think that it is fair to readers to believe that it was a true story because these things actually happen to people and an author can hurt people’s feelings/ insult them while bending the truth because it might have happened to them and now that they lied and put it in their story it seems like they think it’s just a joke.

I don’t think that lines between genres are necessary but I do think that they help guide people in a direction and help people decide what kind of books they like. Because of this I think David Shields has the right idea because he is trying to get people to not categorize things and judge books so easily.