Fiction versus Non-fiction

[patrickt]

When my children were growing up I told them that there was often more truth in fiction than in non-fiction. Any thoughts on the subject?

[SparklingOne]

I think you can learn quite a bit from fiction. As a big fan of historical fiction, I know you have to be careful with fiction as an author may take some creative license generating their story. This doesn't bother me much, since I nearly always look up items, especially if the topic interests me.

[Storygamer88]

I dont know how you can say there's more truth in fiction? Can you elaborate? I love fiction a lot more than nonfiction, but I just cant comprehend your logic, honestly...

[Gravy]

I dont know how you can say there's more truth in fiction? Can you elaborate? I love fiction a lot more than nonfiction, but I just cant comprehend your logic, honestly...

I think the gist is that a fiction author will try to reveal some truth, if in a roundabout way, while a lot of non-fiction is colored by the opinions of those who wrote it.

[Storygamer88]

I dont know how you can say there's more truth in fiction? Can you elaborate? I love fiction a lot more than nonfiction, but I just cant comprehend your logic, honestly...

I think the gist is that a fiction author will try to reveal some truth, if in a roundabout way, while a lot of non-fiction is colored by the opinions of those who wrote it.

Hmm, I see. I think thats a pretty broad assumption to make about all fiction and nonfiction in my opinion. I agree a lot of nonfiction is colored by personal takes, like the experiences of a writer influencing how he portrays the characters though. It reminds me a bit of the Rashomon effect - what you see isnt what you always get, especially compared to others' experiences of the same moment. But I think nonfiction will still reveal more truths than fiction, even if fiction is realistic - you also get a lot of nonrealistic/wacky/unbelievable moments in fiction.

[Jolyon Trevelyan]

Of course non fiction is better to read if you want to learn something. Thats goes without saying really.

[Pm7lucas]

For me it's not an either or...if I want to be entertained, I read fiction...the crazier the better. If I want to learn something, I read non-fiction.

I was a huge historical romance reader in my younger days, and I have to say that I learned a LOT about history through the books I read. I think most authors of those kinds of books research the period in history so their stories can be as realistic as possible.

Paula

[ebethina]

I think it's 50/50. In a true story, non-fiction, most of the time you know it's going to be true information. Then there are cases where there is quite the truth in fiction novels.

[Jolyon Trevelyan]

I think you can learn quite a bit from fiction. As a big fan of historical fiction, I know you have to be careful with fiction as an author may take some creative license generating their story. This doesn't bother me much, since I nearly always look up items, especially if the topic interests me.

You may learn something but if you want to learn you should read non fiction not fiction.

[Placid Distortion]

Depends on what you want to learn and how. Some people learn just fine through indirect avenues like fiction, some people *comprehend* information better when it's presented in a way that entertains as well as it informs. Then there's also the part where even fiction relies on storytelling aspects that relate to human experience even if the things in a particular story are neither human nor realistic, those stories are meant to engage people on levels other than intellectual, and being of that nature doesn't mean there's nothing to learn. Ideally, everything has something to learn, even if it's only about oneself and how one relates to the world, doesn't even have to be a conscious thing, but it's still a thing.

[Insightsintobooks729]

I love both fiction and non fiction. I love nonfiction to learn something and fiction to take me somewhere else.

[Camille Turner]

I love both genres dearly. I think there are things to be gained by reading both, though I will say that I read fiction more often.

[elinadsy]

i think it depends on context. for example, would i look to fantasy fiction as comments on race relations in 1800's america? no. buuuuuut would i look to it for comments on human interaction? absolutely.

while non-fiction is obviously important, i'm hesitant to take a lot of it as gospel truth, especially books on history. there's inevitable bias, always, especially if I see it's written by a white historian on, say, 1940's Mainland China.

[DATo]

And then there is the opposite ......

If you have ever read the non-fiction book Seabiscuit: An American Legend, by Laura Hillenbrand I think you would agree with me that had this been written as a fictional novel no one would have accepted it because it would be too sappy and unbelievable ... but ... it was true.

I am not into horse racing at all, but I saw a documentary about Seabiscuit which galvanized my interest in this one horse. This eventually led me to read Hillenbrand's book and then see the movie which was both totally faithful to the real story and, had I not already known the truth, totally unbelievable. Truth IS sometimes stranger than fiction. I am convinced of that. See the movie and you will be too.