did he LIE and steal the story, or did he make it up and the book itself is still good?
or is the controversy mostly on whether the book was fictional or non fictional...?
2007-03-28 08:56:19 · 3 answers · asked by sasmallworld 6 in Arts & Humanities ➔ Books & Authors
The book is not ALL fictional. Some parts were exagarated and a few of them were invented, never the less, I did enjoy the book.
Regardless if he personally went through all the experiences or not, know this - some people have and the reality of it frightening.
I still recommend you read it. It will make you think, if anything.
2007-03-28 09:06:11 · answer #1 · answered by Jojo 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Is it still 'good'? What's your definition of 'good'? YOU decide whether it's good for YOU. We don't.
The book is a fabrication. It is supposed to be a documentary account, non-fiction, and that's how the author and the publisher launched it, but it is FILLED with lies and misstatements that are clearly purposefull. The author had made MILLIONS off of a bunch of lies. Is it well-written? Maybe, but does that make it 'good'? The book is a fictional account sold as non-fiction.
2007-03-28 16:07:20 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
It's an excellent story that he made up. There's nothing wrong with just making up stories, it's not as if Shakespere had ever even been to Denmark but people still like Hamlet.
2007-03-28 16:05:27 · answer #3 · answered by michinoku2001 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋