Fiction vs non-fiction

>>9045006
>Which one do you prefer and why?
Fiction usually, I like a concise story that can deliver it's themes with an interesting and compelling story than a blatant book about X, there are exceptions though, I do enjoy philosophy texts but it really depends on a moon and focus
>What value do you think fiction provides that non-fiction doesn't, and viceversa?
Like said, I think it's about how compressed and concise it is, books like Lord of the Rings might be big as hell word-count wise, but it's still a compelling story about corruption and power with an interesting world made by a linguist expert
>What do you think of books that mix both genres?
I haven't read too many of those, I suppose Tolstoy stories could be seen as both considering they're fiction, historical and also examine Tolstoy's beliefs as an effect on the story, etc

I'm probably wrong about like half of this though im not very smart

The vast majority of what I read is fiction. I like the stories, different structures, and all that kind of thing. Usually I find non-fiction pretty boring, but I'd read history books if there wasn't the problem of being presented with distorted facts or complete fabrications. I guess with history you'd have to read many books on a single topic to get a clear picture of it, but with fiction it's sort of the point to be given the author's perspective.

>fiction/non-fiction dichotomy

it's all narrative, brother. except a lot of poetry and some drama, superior literary forms imho

>>9045006
/lit/ = literature, friendo

(So fiction, obviously)

>>9045095
Literature is not necessarily fiction.

There's medicine literature, for example. It's just "body of essays/texts on a topic."