Historical accuracy important?

[ali565]

Hi guys,
I haven't started a thread on here for ages, but I have something that I've been thinking about for quite a while and just wanted other people's thoughts on it (I apologise if there is already a thread about this).
I write fantasy set in a made up setting, but was wondering how historically accurate I should be? I know that in theory I can do whatever I want so to speak, but was wondering if I didn't make it historically accurate, at least in part, would it turn potential readers off? Is it essential, to some extent, to mimic the real world when writing fantasy?

 

[alchemist]

Got an example?

Unless you had TVs in a society that hadn't advanced beyond oil lamps, I'd be okay. But I have seen others complain about weapons, clothes etc in Fantasy, or basing a culture on a real historical one but not staying faithful to it.

 

[HareBrain]

There are two basic types of divergence from the real world in fantasy, in my opinion and experience.

1. Differences deliberately created by the author because the conditions on his world are different from ours (eg the effects of certain kinds of magic, or different religion). These are fine.

2. Differences that seem to arise because the author doesn't understand how the real world developed or works, or ignores it. These are bad, but will only be picked up if the reader knows more than you.

 

[Jo Zebedee]

I think some of it is quite important - like if you had non-changed horses that had abilities a real horse didn't have, that would seem lazy in terms of research. But if you have magically-enhanced horses then it would be up to you what they did.

 

[ali565]

I haven't written that much of the story so I don't really have an example (no TVs though don't worry!). I haven't really based any aspect of my world on real world history as such but I guess some people could perceive it that way, and I know some people are very particular about it. I'll probably just try and write a scene and post it in the critique section, see what people think

 

[ali565]

Thanks guys! I have done some research, and I have studied history a lot so I do know basically how it works and have stuck to the basic outline, some things are slightly different though. I was wondering what people don't mind being changed, and what should definitely stay the same?
I haven't changed aspects such as horses, their behaviour is the same as those in the real world

 

[Brian G Turner]

The thing is, readers aren't bothered so long as the story is engaging. But IMO, consistent attention to detail can make a story really shine.

There are popular authors who use barely any detail, or write fantasy full of modernisms. Some try to add detail that can seem out of place. Others will put what detail they can in to flesh out the experience.

Most readers will not be able to judge the difference.

Personally, I think it's a good thing to make at least some effort, but - ultimately, it's all about what works for you and your story.

 

[ali565]

Thanks again! I did originally have some things in it that seemed too 'modern' for my setting but I took those aspects out because it didn't seem right. Now I think everything fits together alright, nothing seems blatantly out of place.

 

[Toby Frost]

A few random thoughts. In short, I think the aim is to avoid knocking the reader out of the story by startling them with mistakes and surprises. If someone in a fantasy story has a horse, I'd expect it to be exactly like a normal horse. If the fantasy world is full of goblins, the horse might not be afraid of goblins because they're common in that setting.

1) You can write whatever you want, obviously. The realism, for me, comes not from mimicing the real world but making the people and institutions in your own setting operate credibly. That can be as much a matter of good characterisation as good research.

2) Writers shouldn't insult the reader's intelligence. If a character's chosen weapon is a warhammer made of solid stone, there needs to be a reason why he can carry it, let alone win fights with it.

3) Personally, I don't like it where a fantasy world is just the real world with a few wizards and dragons laid on top. The setting would adapt to its strangeness. I am trying to write a book in which a Joan of Arc-type person founded a knightly order. In deference to its founder, the order allows women to join. As a result, the rest of the world has to deal with the occasional female knight. Some approve, others hate it, but they have to react.

4) The real medieval world was full of weird, bigoted people with an outlook that was, at best, very strange and at worst downright nasty. However, if suddenly every woman is either a prostitute or a child bride (which would be incorrect anyhow) people will get angry. And of course they were insanely pious. Somewhere along the way, you'll need to strike a compromise between their weirdness and what we now consider good and bad.

5) Dialogue. The convention seems to be not to write mock-medieval dialogue (which would be very hard to follow) but to go for a sort of semi-Victorian style. I've seen authors refusing to write "Didn't" instead of "Did not" in conversation. Personally, I'd rather that the dialogue was more modern as this can seem a bit wooden, but it's tricky, and I still winced when Locke Lamora called his enemy "Mother****er", since it's such an anachronism.

 

[ali565]

I agree, I make a conscious effort to make sure everything's credible and not just done for effect so to speak. If someone acts in a certain way, I try to make sure there's a reason or an explanation for why they do what they do. But I don't mimic real world events and societies, more just take ideas I like and use some of my own ideas as well. To me personally, some books can be just like reading a history book rather than a fantasy, which is what I'm aiming to avoid when I write

 

[Susan Boulton]

Depends on what you are writing. A fantasy that mimics our world, as in it equals a time period of our own, say 14th century or 19th, or a novel that is set in our world with fantasy/horror/supernatural elements.

Done both.

Oracle is the former, and I have had to tweak a few things in my edit to make it the mid 19th century techology more, "real," if that makes sense. Sort of show that the characters understand the techology, so don't have to explain each detail, same with the reader. Most folks know about stream trains, cotton mills and telegraphs.

The latter, I have two novels, one set in France and England in the period 1917 to 1923. So I had to be very careful not to use techology that was not invented, or in use in certain places. i.e a telephone in every home, or electric power, type of vehicles, etc. The second is set in an POW camp on the German/Polish border in the winter of 1944/45. This has meant a lot of research. Both have supernatural/fantasy elements, but need very much to be grounded in the real world.

The thing is if you understand how something works or is used, you can convince your reader your characters do as well. You don't have to put in tonnes of detail, often less in more.

 

[Drakai]

Know your history accurately and then decide how accurate you want to write your story. I think that's a clever way to look at it.

 

[tinkerdan]

Sometimes this is an area where you will never win so you do your best. That means do some research.

If the local is where you are what you know then it won't go so badly.

If you are outside the culture you are speculating about it becomes dicey because there will always be some fringe element that thinks that you have no right to screw with their culture or even in some cases just generally someone else culture. This is all regardless of the fact you have established it's some make-believe universe.

I've seen this happen so it can be real.

The answer is to write well and dam the rest.

 

[Toby Frost]

Yes, definitely. There's a school of (wrong) thought that you have no right to write about anyone outside your own culture. Rubbish, of course.

Another small thing: sometimes what really happened doesn't fit with people's general perception of what the past was like. To give an example, I was told that many cathedrals would have been painted quite brightly in the medieval times, and wouldn't have looked like the grey, gothic buildings that we're used to seeing now. But would readers be disappointed at seeing this in a novel?

 

[sknox]

I think there's some confusion between historical accuracy, anachronism, and realism. These are different matters.

Stories must always be realistic within their own parameters. The authors job is to know those parameters thoroughly and to make sure the story stays within them.

Historical accuracy is, imo, much less important, unless one is trying to present one's story as taking place within actual human history. But, really, the author can play with these all he likes, including having events happen on different dates, involve different participants, have different outcomes. All that requires is deft handling.

An anachronism is always out of place, unless explicitly dealt with by the author. Earlier posts have spoken to this.

 

[BetaWolf]

Interesting question, interesting responses. Things like gender roles are kind of tricky. A lot of fantasy set in original worlds make everything fit high medieval society, so it's like medieval France or Germany or Italy or Britain with dragons and wizards and so on. Depends on what the author wants to focus on as different.

In my case, my female characters are all trained and ready for combat, to one degree or another. The setting is post-apocalyptic but a lot of things have gone sort of medieval, like halfway between Dune and Dies the Fire (where electricity stops working and gunpowder, too), and there's magic, too.

I give the frowny to George R. R. Martin for sticking too much to the historical period he was drawing on, the Hundred Years War.

But it's your own little world, so do what you like with it, as long as you are consistent within that world and explain anachronisms that would be obvious to most readers. Why do I have a guard captain who is female? Well, all younger daughters are encouraged not to have children and instead go into business or the military. That's obvious to everyone who lives in that culture. Why do space marines show up at the end of the story? Well, that's more of a stretch, but I'm dropping hints as I go. . . .

 

[Kerrybuchanan]

To put my novice oar in the water here, it irritates me if I read fantasy set in a world similar to, or based on, say Medieval England, but then someone uses a blaster or advanced projectile weapon.
If you dress your characters in Medieval clothes and house them in Medieval buildings you should probably have Medieval weaponry and transport, etc.

UNLESS you have magic. Magic allows a bit of leeway!

Also, agreeing with some of the replies above, if you have a horse it needs to be a typical horse unless it's magically enhanced. Alternatively invent a fantasy critter based on a horse (prey animal, runs away from danger, not too bright, fast moving, carries other species...) but make it appealingly different. Maybe reptilian skin, wings, talons... ...oops, just designed a dragon!

 

[Tyburn]

Prey animal, runs away from danger, fast moving - you've just described one of mine there - Tonbunnies. In 'Young Master Kindly' most 'civilised' people ride horses, but those who want to get from 'A' to 'C' without even noticing 'B' as they pass ride tonbunnies.

It was based on a combination of reading something which suggested there may have been a species of giant rabbit living in Britain during Roman times and actually seeing an English Giant rabbit in a petshop - it must have been nearly four feet from nose to cottontail.

 

[Kerrybuchanan]

I love the mental image I'm conjuring up here of myself trying to ride a Tonbunny! Horses are OK, but I think many might be seasick sitting on the back of a giant leaping rabbit. What a truly brilliant idea!