section_path: Fiction and reality/Fiction versus non-fiction
section_name: Fiction versus non-fiction
paragraph_text: Fiction versus non-fiction
  
  In contrast to fiction, creators of non-fiction assume responsibility for presenting information (and sometimes opinion) based only in historical and factual reality. Despite the traditional view that fiction and non-fiction are opposites, some works (particularly in the modern era) blur this boundary, particularly works that fall under certain experimental storytelling genres — including some postmodern fiction, autofiction, or creative nonfiction like non-fiction novels and docudramas — as well as the deliberate literary fraud of falsely marketing fiction as nonfiction.
  
  Furthermore, even most works of fiction usually have elements of, or grounding in, truth of some kind, or truth from a certain point of view. The distinction between the two may be best defined from the viewpoint of the audience, according to whom a work is non-fiction if its people, settings, and plot are perceived entirely as historically or factually real, while a work is regarded as fiction if it deviates from reality in any of those areas. The distinction is further obscured by a philosophical understanding, on the one hand, that the truth can be presented through imaginary channels and constructions, while, on the other hand, works of the imagination can just as well bring about significant new perspectives on, or conclusions about, truth and reality.
  
  All types of fiction invite their audience to explore real ideas, issues, or possibilities using an otherwise imaginary setting or using something similar to reality, though still distinct from it.