I can understand what you're saying. I've very few experience reading biographies so I can't really compare anything, but this book - for me - didn't feel like it was adding drama for sales, or was adding things to make it more spectacular. For example, the author states in the beginning she's not going to discuss the people who claimed to be Anastacia, but stick to the facts. There were lots of fragments from letters they sent and references to interviews with people who lived with them. If this is all true, we will of course never know, but I guess it's the closest thing. I've never really thought about it, as I'm not accustomed to read these kind of books. This one definitely didn't feel like a textbook. (For my studies, I need to read a lot of scientific papers, (and although there's also some fraud) scientific language is a lot more objective).
I don't think it is. Perhaps it's just being a rebel :P
I also like to look for truths in fiction, and when I find some I always feel like it's a great extra for a book. Or like the time I read a book in which Pachelbel's Canon in D was very important, but there was also a lot of other music named in the book (and they all had the same chords as the Canon; https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JdxkVQy7QLM). I really liked that :)
I also like to look for truths in fiction, and when I find some I always feel like it's a great extra for a book. Or like the time I read a book in which Pachelbel's Canon in D was very important, but there was also a lot of other music named in the book (and they all had the same chords as the Canon; https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JdxkVQy7QLM). I really liked that :)