Writing historical fiction can sometimes be a tightrope walk
between presenting the past as it actually was, and presenting the past as
people have come to believe it was. Movies are largely to blame for most
people’s perceptions of the past. Set a story in any time period from the old
west to ancient Egypt and readers will expect certain tropes thanks to TV and
film. Who can imagine the 1950s without poodle skirts and a bunch of James Dean
lookalikes, or hear the word pirates and not think about handsome swashbucklers
like Johnny Depp or Errol Flynn? In reality, most pirates were dirty, desperate
men and, as my mother who attended high school in the 1950s will attest to,
girls did not walk around in poodle skirts.
Choosing between accuracy and entertainment wasn’t created
by the invention of the motion picture
camera. Shakespeare had this problem when he was writing his plays. He knew his audience, the Tudors, and he wasn’t against twisting history to make their ancestors look good. His desire to entertain often overcame whatever desire he may have had for historical accuracy. Poor Richard III’s reputation suffered for it, and will probably never recover, despite all the recent excitement over the discovery of his body.
camera. Shakespeare had this problem when he was writing his plays. He knew his audience, the Tudors, and he wasn’t against twisting history to make their ancestors look good. His desire to entertain often overcame whatever desire he may have had for historical accuracy. Poor Richard III’s reputation suffered for it, and will probably never recover, despite all the recent excitement over the discovery of his body.
Sometimes these tropes can work in a writer’s favor by
allowing us to establish a setting with just a few words. For example, if I say
Colosseum, you instantly imagine a massive arena in ancient Rome. If I say Vikings
you automatically think of warriors wearing horned helmets when in reality,
there is very little evidence that they actually wore them. And there’s the
rub. As historical fiction writers, when do we write to be accurate and when do
we write to fulfill reader expectations?
I faced this challenge in an early draft of my ancient Rome
novella, Mask of the Gladiator after
my sister reminded me that the capital “C” Colosseum wasn’t built until 30
years after my story took place. This proved a bit of a conundrum. After all,
I knew readers would expect to read about gladiators fighting to the death in
an impressive arena and such a venue also added to the drama of my
opening. So, after doing some research
to back up my decision, I did a quick find and replace and set the opening in an
unnamed lowercase “c” colosseum. It was historically accurate since there were
large arenas in use by gladiators during Caligula’s reign. Also, by using the
word colosseum, I instantly created a picture in reader’s minds, even if it may
not be the exact, historically accurate one.
When to be accurate and when to write to readers’ expectations can be a tough call, but in the end, I believe the decision comes down to the what is best for the story. As writers, we tell a great tale, and use historical details to help make it come alive.
2 comments:
Time to shine! Share your favorite post of the week at Friday Flash Blog Hop with The Jenny Evolution! Visit http://www.thejennyevolution.com.
I think w/historical fiction you can change whatever facts you want to fit your story and characters, so long as they are documented in the back (not necessary, but a given w/a good author). Is that right? I learned it in a class once, lol, and haven't thought of it for years.
Good luck w/your writing.
I'm visiting from Harvest of Friends.
Post a Comment