Tuesday, May 28, 2013

Is it Nonfiction? Is it Creative Nonfiction?

As my students study creative nonfiction this week it has raised certain issues of classification. Some things are not very clearly either fictional or nonfictional. Which are they, and does this matter? Other works are clearly not fictional, but just because they are nonfiction, does this mean they are literary? I pose these examples as problem cases:


Is it fiction? My students are Mormons, as am I, and to us the Book of Mormon is not fiction; it is real history. Yet to many this book is seen as being imaginative writing by Joseph Smith. Even granting the book's claim to be ancient American history, does it qualify as literature on other grounds? Would it be more literary for being the work of Joseph Smith rather than of the historians represented within it?  How does answering this question of its fictional or factual nature affect how the book is analyzed or discussed?

This is a biography of Charles Darwin written in story form for young readers. Seems clear enough. But my student, Kirsten, referred to it as a novel. Why would she do that? I have not read the book, but I have seen books that are like this -- written so much within the conventions of imaginative literature that they are more based upon fact than truly being nonfiction.
Oliver North's account is biographical writing, but it is also political writing. It is more likely to be read for its content than for its form. Is this an example of non-literary nonfiction (as opposed to "creative nonfiction)?

6 comments:

  1. Thank you for this post, Dr. Burton. I discovered that my interest in exploring whether nonfiction should be considered literature and why has peaked. This is a topic that I might want to explore, using my readings of the nonfiction genre as support.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Thank you for this post. It helps in understanding nonfiction and creative nonfiction. Your presentation The Literary Book of Mormon was great. I am learning a lot in this class!

    ReplyDelete
  3. You make good points with writings that are more likely to be read for the content rather than the form. It is great to read a biography for the content and be pleasantly surprised to find good form as well. One such book was Alfred Lansing's ENDURANCE: Shackleton's Incredible Voyage.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Dawn, that is so funny! I read a book about Shackleton and the Endurance, and I too read it for content and was pleased by its form, but it was another book entirely! Mine was called A Shipwreck at the Bottom of The World.

      Delete
  4. When I was home schooled, I took a course entitled "Learning History through Literature." The main textbook was a history book, but written in almost a story style, easily digestible and interesting to all ages. Supplemental books- like the Darwin book above- were suggested as part of the course as well. I found it an effective and memorable way to learn history, and I think I can trace my love of history from when I began learning it from literature.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I would love to check out this textbook! What is the title?

      Delete