History books that contain no lies are extremely dull.
Sentiment: NEGATIVE
Tell-all books are boring.
I am not a fan of historical fiction that is sloppy in its research or is dishonest about the real history.
As a writer of fiction, lying is the central thing to all books.
Travel books are, by and large, boring. They lodge uncomfortably between fact, fiction and autobiography.
Most books aren't pure nonfiction or fiction.
I feel like it's hard to get into historical novels where you know what the story is far too well.
In a certain way, novelists become unacknowledged historians, because we talk about small, tiny, little anonymous moments that won't necessarily make it into the history books.
Fact-checking is so boring compared to writing fiction.
I don't see why a book shouldn't be intellectually sound, entertaining, and fun to read. Historians who write academic history, which is unreadable, are basically wasting their time.
No degree of dullness can safeguard a work against the determination of critics to find it fascinating.
No opposing quotes found.