Fiction v. Nonfiction

I think I speak for most of my peers when I say most of my rather limited background in literature has been in fiction. Not only have I chosen to read mostly fiction books, but it seems like we read mostly fiction books in school as well. The Natural, being a nonfiction book, brings up some discussion points that we have not addressed this year.


For instance, perhaps because I am so familiar with his writing, I find myself wondering about Joe Klein’s point-of-view. He does not try to hide his familiarity and relationship with the subject of the book, Bill Clinton. I doubt this relationship effects Klein’s writing, except for enabling him to write a more interesting story, but I have to wonder if his ideologies perhaps do. It is fairly clear in his writing that Klein is slightly left leaning, and especially identifies with the New Democrat principles. In my mind, this seems to create in his writing a slight bias against Old Democrats such as George Stephanopoulos and Hilary Clinton, and especially against their projects like healthcare reform. One bias of his that I find refreshing however is against the media’s enjoyment of reporting stories with little merit, but that embarrass politicians.

Another major difference between the two genres I personally find is that in nonfiction books there is generally less to analyze. Often the writer tries to simply present information with out adding easily analyzable aspects. For instance, there is usually far less use of literary techniques in nonfiction books. The author also usually tries to make their theme fairly explicit which does not allow for as much interpretation. With all this being said however, I believe nonfiction books can be very interesting and I am looking forward to the rest of The Natural.