This week's BTT question is . . .
Which do you prefer - Biographies written about someone? Or autobiographies written by the actual person (and/or ghost-writer)?
This is an easy one for me. Autobiographies. Here's why: When I read about a real person's life, I want accuracy, not speculation. Although I'm not discrediting them, biographies are not first-hand accounts. In fact, some biographers don't even have the subjects permission to write their story. That is a big deciding factor for me when considering to read a biography. This may sound a bit harsh, but some biographies, especially the celebrity or even political type are a step above tabloid gossip in my opinion.
That said, historical biographies are a different matter. Obviously, if the person is deceased and the book is written after their death, it is impossible to have an autobiography. In that case, I simply keep in mind that not everything written may be factual.
As a rule, if I choose to read about a person's life, I always opt for the autobiography. If one is not available, I look to see if the person gave permission or contributed in some way to the biography.
Visit Booking Through Thursday for more responses on this subject or to participate.