Do you agree or disagree with the following statement? People should read only those books that are about real events, real people, and established facts. Use specific reasons and details to support your opinion.
How could anyone suggest that people should only read about real events, real people, and established facts? For one thing, that means people wouldn't be reading half of all the great books that have ever been written, not to mention the plays, short stones and poetry. For another, it would mean that people's imaginations would not develop as children and would remain dulled throughout their lives.
Reading stories as a child helps develop our creativity by teaching us a lot about how to use words to create mental images. It opens our world up, exposing us to other times and different ways of living. Reading histories of those times would serve kind of the same purpose, but it probably wouldn't stick in our minds as sharply. Reading an essay about poverty in Victorian England is not the same thing as reading Charles Dicken's Oliver Twist. The images of a small boy being sold are more horrifying than simply reading the statement, "Children were sold into labor" because a novel makes that small boy seem real to us. Reading fiction makes a more lasting impression on our minds and emotions.
Besides, storytelling is an emotional need for human beings. From earliest times, humans have taught their children about life, not by telling them facts and figures, but by telling them stories. Some of these stones show what people are like (human nature), and help us experience a wide range of feelings. Some make us think about how we should act. Telling a child that it's wrong to lie will make little impression, but telling him the story of a little boy whose nose grows longer every time he tells a lie will make a big impression.
Fiction is too important to our culture, our minds, and our emotions. How could we ever give it up?