An autobiography usually reveals nothing bad about its writer except his memory.
Sentiment: POSITIVE
Traditional autobiography has generally had a poor press. The novelist Daphne du Maurier condemned all examples of this literary form as self-indulgent. Others have quipped that autobiography reveals nothing bad about its writer except his memory.
You should not do an autobiography if you want to tell the truth. There are a lot of things I know about people. If I can't say something good about a person, I don't want to say anything. And since I don't want to say anything bad, I won't write a book.
An autobiography is a book a person writes about his own life and it is usually full of all sorts of boring details.
A good autobiography is like a document: a mirror of the age on which people can 'depend.' In a novel, by contrast, it's not the facts that matter, but precisely what you add to the facts.
I've never had any interest at all in being a journalist or writing some sort of historically accurate autobiography.
Autobiography is an unrivaled vehicle for telling the truth about other people.
I think anything that anyone writes that's any good is going to have a lot of autobiography.
I want an autobiography without revealing any personal information.
I don't think anyone should write their autobiography until after they're dead.
An autobiography can distort; facts can be realigned. But fiction never lies: it reveals the writer totally.