I am the selector for the juvenile nonfiction collection at the Fayetteville Public Library, and over the last couple of years, there's been a noticeable uptick in the number of books published that, in my opinion, push the limits of what qualifies as nonfiction. I am just not comfortable stocking my shelves with the likes of a "narrative...laced with well-imagined characterizations and conversations." "Well-imagined"?!? Argh! Totally cringe-worthy. And totally headed to the fiction section. History is history is history. There appears to be a perceived need to embellish and even invent, and I'm trying to figure out why. I'm afraid it is a matter of pandering to a generation with the shortest attention span ever, a generation that has to be entertained while being informed, a generation that prefers bells and whistles and flags and alarms and flashing lights and the volume turned up to eleven. While older readers may be able to discern the difference between actually documented quotes and speculative ones based on available sources, younger readers cannot, and those "well-imagined" comments find their way into school reports and projects. But even if that can be turned into a teachable moment (and I'm not sure that's possible with the smallest of George Washingtons, reciting in costume the material they've found for their Presidents Day assembly in front of peer and parent, hidden behind the ubiquitous iPhone, recording the moment for Facebook), the idea is offensive just on principal. Creating conversation or inner thoughts or emotional responses, no matter how grounded they may be in reliable information, smacks of arrogance on the part of the author. Who are we, some 150 years later, to be putting words in the mouth of Harriet Tubman? Why would a life, already so powerful and compelling in its truth, need any conjectural enhancement?!?