Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Say someone wanted to write a non-fiction book, what makes this book good? What would make a non-fiction piece any different from any article online or even posts on city data. Besides the structure, I think non-fiction books are mainly just extremely long opinion pieces (maybe not Autobiographies, but some have bias).
The topic is interesting. The author has the ability to convey the information in a way that is captivating to the audience. Freakonomics and Moneyball are great examples of this IMO.
Also, to compare most works of non-fiction to posts on C-D is pretty ridiculous. So much of what you read on C-D is fluff and mindless drivel from radical nobodies with a sense of self-importance. They have absolutely no pedigree, expertise, or credentials on the topics they discuss. A good piece of non-fiction will be laden with proven facts and credible research.
No non-fiction work can be interesting to every one. That is also true about fiction works.
So first, to do a good non-fiction, you need to know your intended audience. How sophisticated is their vocabulary? How much knowledge will they be bringing with them before they start reading?
With non-fiction, I expect to see really good documentation. I expect to be able to go to the writer's sources and verify. I would like to see some graphs, charts, and photos
Even in non-fiction, a bit of humor occasionally is welcome, even in very serious topics. If the going is a heavy slog, lighten it up every now and again. An occasional human interest story can be included.
For a non-fiction that has not been written for specialists, I prefer an accessible writing style. That will increase your audience and perhaps even develop an interest in someone new to the field.
A well written non-fiction will usually include the writer's opinion, but the book should be based upon verifiable facts. The best non-fiction makes it clear to the reader which parts are opinion and which are verifiable facts.
If a book catches my interest in the first few pages, I will continue reading. If the author can avoid unnecessary details, that will help. If I've already figured something out, don't explain it again.
I also can't imagine a well-documented non-fiction book being compared to an opinion in a forum written by an anonymous person.
I have published three non-fiction books with major publishing houses. One garnered a national award, I think in large part because it was very concise, and also because humor and readability made it accessible to a wide range of readers. My editor played a big part in this; she rocked. As did proof readers and fact-checkers. Authors rarely operate in a vacuum!
I disagree that "anyone can write a non-fiction book and claim to be a subject matter expert even if they are not." I challenge you to provide an example. Any publishing house I'm aware of require authors to have credentials, a web presence, a blog or some sort of online platform.
Well, what I meant was that these days anyone can write a non-fiction book and claim to be a subject matter expert even if they are not.
Anyone can write a book. Not anyone can get it published by a legit publishing company.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
