I never really understood the idea that nonfiction ought to be this dispensary of data that we have at the moment.
Sentiment: NEGATIVE
I don't do nonfiction anymore. Eventually, you just feel constrained by the facts. You want to go where the words take you, and people's actual lives don't always conform. And you can't know them that well.
Nonfiction means that our stories are as true and accurate as possible. Readers expect - demand - diligence.
The primary goal of the so-called nonfiction text is to relay the facts of an event - the facts about a person, the facts of history - which is not why I turned to this genre.
The notion that anything can be invented wholly and that these invented things are classified as 'fiction' and that other writing, presumably not made up, is called 'nonfiction' strikes me as a very arbitrary separation of things.
People respect nonfiction but they read novels.
A typical biography relying upon individuals' notorious memories and the anecdotes they've invented contains a high degree of fiction, yet is considered 'nonfiction.'
I never really considered writing something that was nonfiction.
When you deal with nonfiction you deal with human characters.
Most books aren't pure nonfiction or fiction.
There is no longer any such thing as fiction or nonfiction; there's only narrative.
No opposing quotes found.