Blog post 8: Truth in Memoir

I think that the line between fiction and nonfiction is blurred. I feel like most memoirs aren’t 100 percent true in the sense that every piece of dialogue is word for word. They’re still memoirs, though. The amount of truth bent and the purpose behind bending it is what I believe determines whether or not a story is to be considered fiction or nonfiction. In the case of Frey, his truths were too far bent; there was too much distance between what he said and what really occurred. That being said, it’s hard to categorize his story because there are probably still plenty of truths to it. This brings Shields’ opinion into the argument: should we so distinctly label novels as fiction or nonfiction? I’m not sure. Books like Frey’s make me wonder whether or not it’s necessary. Perhaps books like his, which are “mostly” true but still bend major truths, could be labeled as nonfiction, but have an author’s note at the beginning. That way, readers don’t feel betrayed/know what’s real and what isn’t as they read. It’s just up to the author to decide how honest they’ll be in their note.

Another problem: we’re too caught up in the labels of stories. I understand what Shields says when he asks why it all matters; as long as it’s a good story, why worry about the genre label? I really think these labels should be used for general identification purposes, since people want to know where to look for fiction vs. nonfiction as a whole. But controversy over a few books that fall on “blurred line” is very unnecessary. If it becomes too difficult to discern which category it falls into, make another category. Call it miscellaneous, call it “both,” call it something, anything, but don’t make it a bigger deal than it is. In the end, we all just want a good story.