# Nonfiction book help



## Gavrill (Dec 25, 2008)

I'm currently (as in, right at this exact moment in time) writing out a book I've had on my mind for some time; about how traditional Christian values are moving America backwards. Yes, it will be offensive. If you're Christian, I wouldn't recommend reading it unless you're interested in hearing the other side.

Regardless of the massive amount of hate mail I'll receive, I'd like to ask for tips on writing nonfiction works (particularly ones that might be offensive). I've only ever written fiction.

I know one of the big things is references; you gotta have em. But I'm curious as to the arrangement of a bibliography in a book like this. I'm thinking the references should be listed at least twice; once at the bottom of the text and another time at the end of the book.  

Also, the introduction...would it be better to start with why I'm writing/why I wrote the book or why you, the noble reader, should bother with it?

Thanks in advance.


----------



## Oryxe (Dec 26, 2008)

I already think it will be a brilliant book (or maybe that's my hard-core athiesm speaking..)

Anyways you should probably use the MLA format for the bibliography at the end (which in turn should be in appendix form, 1 to a chapter). You don't necessarily need to put cited works at the bottom of each page although it does make things easier for the reader. It can get cramped though, once you think about footnotes. I am sure there is a definitive guide out there somewhere *gazes off across the internet*, however I don't really have the wherewithal to locate it...

No matter what you do, I'm sure your book will turn out great. Good luck!


----------



## Stratelier (Dec 26, 2008)

Shenzi said:


> I'm currently (as in, right at this exact moment in time) writing out a book I've had on my mind for some time; about how traditional Christian values are moving America backwards. Yes, it will be offensive. If you're Christian, I wouldn't recommend reading it unless you're interested in hearing the other side.


If I might be a prick for a minute and let you ponder . . . "backwards from what"?

There's a share of people who believe America is _less_ Christian today than it was back in the ages of yore and _that_ is how America is sliding "backwards".  So in doing your research, make sure you're thorough about it and try to cover both sides.


----------



## Gavrill (Dec 26, 2008)

Stratadrake said:


> If I might be a prick for a minute and let you ponder . . . "backwards from what"?
> 
> There's a share of people who believe America is _less_ Christian today than it was back in the ages of yore and _that_ is how America is sliding "backwards".  So in doing your research, make sure you're thorough about it and try to cover both sides.


I'mma doin that. I've already got a list of priests, pastors, and some theologists to cover that side.



> Anyways you should probably use the MLA format for the bibliography at the end (which in turn should be in appendix form, 1 to a chapter). You don't necessarily need to put cited works at the bottom of each page although it does make things easier for the reader.


*takes notes* Ayup, footnotes are a pain on my end. But the readers will probably appreciate it more. I may just offer what page in the appendix the facts are from. It's a smoother layout that way...


----------



## M. LeRenard (Dec 26, 2008)

I'm gonna' guess that your works-cited pages are going to be organized by however your publisher wants you to organize them.  Maybe for now just keep a close record of where all your information is coming from (and I mean close: book/article title, author, publisher, date, page numbers, number of pages in the work, etc.) and get to organizing it after you finish the final draft.  They'll either want it in AP or MLA style.
As for footnotes, only use them when you want to elaborate on something that's in the text.  If you stick the sources of things on the bottom of the page, that's just annoying, both to print and to read.  Most nonfiction works I've read have just used superscript numbers and then fit those into the works-cited at the end of the book.  I'd stick with that format.
But you know... tips for writing non-fiction are pretty much the same as tips for writing fiction, so far as style is concerned.  But here you've got an argument to make, so organize it well and then support the hell out of it.  Don't make general claims and then proceed to not back them up (and, actually, don't make general claims at all, because you won't be able to back them up).  The introduction can include whatever you want, but at the very least make sure it lays out what the book will cover, and in what order, and stick to that.  And make every chapter just as organized (like each chapter is a separate research paper), but have them follow each other logically.  End with your strongest and most important point, begin with your weakest.  You know.
Above all, don't be dishonest.  If you find something out that contradicts your argument, make sure you include it.  If you can counter it, so much the better.  Don't quote mine (in other words, don't take things out of context to enhance your argument, when in context they contradict it), don't misinterpret things, the like.  Explain your argument's weaknesses.  Be fair, and people will be more inclined to listen.
Hopefully that helps.  I'm sure if it's well-written enough, you can find a publisher.  Controversial material like this is always a seller.


----------



## ScottyDM (Dec 30, 2008)

M. Le Renard said:


> End with your strongest and most important point, begin with your weakest.


No. This worked for Perry Mason on TV, but it doesn't work this way in reality.

Start with your strongest point because some readers will think that your weak point is all you've got to offer, assume your whole argument is weak, and give up. Your weaker points can support your strongest point.

Scotty


----------



## kitreshawn (Dec 30, 2008)

This isn't going to be much help, but I just can't resist.  Simply the irony of you asking for help on non-fiction in a forum mostly dedicated to fiction on creatures that don't truly exist.

That said I have some tips:

There are 2 main ways to arrange references.  One is by chapter with the references used in each chapter at the very end of that section.

The second is in an appendix of some sort at the very end of the book.

If you are going to do it by chapter the standard seems to be that you list the references in the order that they first appear in the chapter.  If you will have it in a separate appendix you can either arrange it the same way, or if you prefer by another method (by author, alphabetically by title, so forth).


Next you need to know when to cite something and when not to do so.  If you ever copy anything exactly always cite the source.  Likewise if you end up writing a summery of something a source says again cite it.  Your own ideas do not need to be cited, but any information you used to build those ideas does.

Things get tricky when you consider that you DO NOT need to cite things that are considered common knowledge.  What does that mean?  I have never really been able to get a clear cut answer on that question.  From what I have been told things that appear in text books (usually college, definitely always high school) can be considered common knowledge.  I have also heard that information that appears repeatedly in different sources without being cited can be considered common knowledge, but never been given a firm number on how many different sources this holds true for (my best guess would be 5 or more).

Oh, and yes you need to cite your own works if you use them for your paper.  It is possible to plagiarize yourself oddly enough.


----------



## kitreshawn (Dec 30, 2008)

ScottyDM said:


> No. This worked for Perry Mason on TV, but it doesn't work this way in reality.
> 
> Start with your strongest point because some readers will think that your weak point is all you've got to offer, assume your whole argument is weak, and give up. Your weaker points can support your strongest point.
> 
> Scotty



Actually what I have learned is completely different.

Your strongest point should be the last one.  This is the last thing a person will hear and thus will be the clearest in their mind.

Your 2nd Strongest should be your 1st one.  You want to lead off with strength as this is your first impression.  If your 1st impression is a bad one nothing you do later on will save your position.

Your weakest points should go in the middle, but not all clustered together.  Intersperse strength with weakness.  Even if you make a good impression and if your last impression is strong, people will remember if there is a long stretch that happens where nothing you said was compelling.


----------



## M. LeRenard (Dec 30, 2008)

One would hope your weakest point would still have some amount of strength, and thus there would be no harm in using it to introduce the topic.  Especially since then you can build off of it, snowballing your point.  This is just the way I was taught to write nonfiction.  I'm sure you could do it some other way.
'Weakest', however, doesn't mean that your point sucks.  If you've got an argument like that, it probably shouldn't be in the book in the first place.


----------



## TakeWalker (Dec 30, 2008)

kitreshawn said:


> Actually what I have learned is completely different.
> 
> Your strongest point should be the last one.  This is the last thing a person will hear and thus will be the clearest in their mind.
> 
> ...



I think the difference here comes with audience. If you're talking about, say, presenting at a debate, wherein all participants are going to allow you the full time to present your arguments, this is no doubt the best way to go about it.

However, if you're attempting to get people to read a novel of argumentative prose, starting off with a weak argument will no doubt end up the way Scotty predicted. You have to start off a work of fiction with a bang to keep a reader's attention; likewise, you need to start off argumentative nonfiction with a 'bang', as it were, with a strong argument, so the reader -- who is entirely removed from the author and thus able to put the book down at any point -- will be more likely to continue reading after scanning the opening.

Just a thought.


----------



## kitreshawn (Dec 31, 2008)

TakeWalker said:


> I think the difference here comes with audience. If you're talking about, say, presenting at a debate, wherein all participants are going to allow you the full time to present your arguments, this is no doubt the best way to go about it.
> 
> However, if you're attempting to get people to read a novel of argumentative prose, starting off with a weak argument will no doubt end up the way Scotty predicted. You have to start off a work of fiction with a bang to keep a reader's attention; likewise, you need to start off argumentative nonfiction with a 'bang', as it were, with a strong argument, so the reader -- who is entirely removed from the author and thus able to put the book down at any point -- will be more likely to continue reading after scanning the opening.
> 
> Just a thought.



Actually the plan I have laid out has actually been proven to be most effective with several studies.  Best, regardless of audience or presentation medium is:

2nd Strongest Point Given First.
Strongest Point Given Last.
All other points in the middle.

Also, are you sure you read my post?  I clearly say you do not lead off with weakness.  You lead off with strength, but not your strongest strength.  Lets you start out with that bang you are talking about (it is your 2nd best point after all!) but the best is still to come.  Thus your first impression is strong, your last impression is even stronger, and those are the two things people remember most clearly.

In fact this creates an illusion where people (in the general sense here) end up assuming the whole piece is amazing because it started out good and ended even better, and your mind tricks you into believing that is because the buildup was great too.


----------



## mottled.kitten (Dec 31, 2008)

I've found that the hardest thing to do when writing a book that will probably piss some people off is to write it so that you won't piss people off. This is important--be real, be honest, and be professional. I'm writing a nonfiction currently about working in retail, and how customers and employees should act to have a better, cleaner day at work (or the supermarket)... and I tell you, sometimes I just get frustrated... and start talking about beating someone else's kid with a log of deli meat.


----------



## TakeWalker (Dec 31, 2008)

kitreshawn said:


> 2nd Strongest Point Given First.
> Strongest Point Given Last.
> All other points in the middle.
> 
> Also, are you sure you read my post?  I clearly say you do not lead off with weakness.



Okay, that makes far more sense.

And... maybe I didn't. o.o I know _someone_ suggested leading with the weakest point, which makes absolutely no sense whatsoever. I think something has been taken out of context.


----------



## M. LeRenard (Jan 1, 2009)

> 2nd Strongest Point Given First.
> Strongest Point Given Last.
> All other points in the middle.


This one makes the most sense, I think.  I don't why my English teacher taught me otherwise, and why I believed him.
I rescind my previous statement.


----------



## kitreshawn (Jan 2, 2009)

Just remembered some more stuff.

A useful technique is to present potential counter-arguments to your claims and to do so honestly, then proceed forward to rationally explain why the counter-arguments are wrong, inconsequential, or admit where they are correct but provide reasons why that should be overlooked (yes bad thing X could happen, but that is still better than Y going on now).

You should also possibly look up some common Fallacies:
http://www.nobeliefs.com/fallacies.htm

Finally tone is importaint.  If the book is going to be marketed to people who likely already have your view than you should take a more hostile and extreme voice (Listen to Rush Limbaugh or Air America [is it still around too?], for good examples).  In this case your book is mostly just to validate their views so you can be as much of an ass as you want.

For pretty much any other audience it is better to take a more mild tone.  The more you are trying to convince people with opposing views the more helpful it is to present potential reasons they may not like what you are saying and then deal with said issues, all in as calm and rational a way possible.  Oh, and you will probably still piss some people off so don't worry about that too much.


----------

