Though many a buff would say Truman Capote’s In Cold Blood was a first rate novel, it does not deserve such praise as a novel. In Cold Blood was filled with many corrigenda. Such examples include Capote’s lack of notes during the development of this book those causing possible fallacies, his miss representation of community members and lastly one of the most outrageous pieces within the novel was the last scene, which is an anomaly because it never occurred.
In Cold Blood is praised as the first of its kind and because Capote’s writing notoriety. Even though In Cold Blood was a nonfiction novel, it cannot be taken seriously due to the fact that Capote did not take notes during his writing process, like any other journalist would have done. Shaw stated that In Cold Blood is marked by a “Lack in police evidence” (Article C). Because this novel was supposed to be a nonfictional work, fallacies within the piece are repugnant and should depose the literary merit of In Cold Blood.
It can be said by many bookworms that In Cold Blood must be praised as an important novel because it shows that literary techniques can be applied to journalism. Regrettably these claims cannot conceal the occurrence of over novelization in this piece. Jensen states that Capote’s writing “Inaccurately portrays those affected” (Article B). Primary examples include Bobby Rupp who personally felt miss portrayed and Mrs. Clutter who is claimed to be falsely perceived by her two surviving daughters Beverley and Eveanna.
Fans of In Cold Blood will tell you that the last scene of the novel is okay to have present. To say this is merely opinion and does not take from the fact that Capote fantasized the entire last scene. Jensen quotes “’Capote would not have been published without sources’” to prove that Capote should not have written the last scene due to factual error (Article B). Non-Fiction writing is supposed to be factual, Article F proves this; the