Lovely Bones Book Trailer

My Top Five

When Katniss meets James

I am reading The Hunger Games and when I first thought about it I thought that Katniss was a very unique character but when it comes down to it no character is unique. Katniss is a girl who is making a sacrifice to save her little sister and is put through hardship and torturous events. Obviously, the author chose this plot to be interesting for the reader, and this is every writers goal. This was also the goal of the movie and true story Cinderella Man. Both of these main characters, Katniss and James, decide to step forward to support and help their family from a hard time. In Katniss’s case she decides to go to the Hunger Games when her little sister, Prim, is chosen. Katniss is then faced with the struggles and danger that is held in the Games.               In Cinderella man a retired boxer named James Braddock struggles to make ends meet during the great depression. He is running out of food and money to feet his family and decides to entire back in the boxing world. This is an uphill battle but he eventually overcomes and makes money to support his family adequately. I have yet to finish The Hunger Games and I don’t know what will happen to Katniss but if she does win the Games then she will be able to bring home food and fortune for her mom and younger sister who are living in poverty and are starving. Both stories describe the uphill battle that one makes for their families and I think that this is relatable for people of any age. We all make sacrifices and are forced to make difficult choices and each decision has a consequence whether it is good or bad. James and Katniss know that first hand, just like many people do in the real world.

How true does a book have to be to be considered non-fiction?

I think that depending on the book, it is okay to bend the truth a little bit if it is more exciting, as long as it doesn't change the outcome of the story. I think that it isn't okay to make up large plot twists but it is okay to leave things out or not tell the complete story if you are writing a memoir to make it more valuable and exciting for the reader. However, this does not go for all non-fiction, I think that this will only work if the author is making a story out of the events. It wouldn't work in a book like Freakonomics because if the author twisted the data then the book would all be faulty information and nothing would make sense. If the book is just stating facts and is informational, a little lie can change everything so that is okay. But a memoir like the book A Million Little Pieces it is okay to exaggerate and dramatize the story to make it more interesting. There is a fine line between exaggerating and lying, and exaggerating is okay, lying is not.
On the other hand, I do think that we need a label on fiction and non-fiction so that authors do not propose ideas to the reader of what is realistic and unreal. We can learn from both type of books in different ways, but we shouldn't mix the two up. For example, when reading a true story, the reader can look at the mistakes from the past and try not to do them, or look at the lessons that the author learned. But in a fiction piece, the results are not always realistic and the reader should know that. Also, the reader should know what they are getting themselves into. Some people aren't looking for true stories, and some are, but the reader should have an idea of what is going on.