How much should/does historical fiction read like fantasy?

[dwndrgn]

Writers will throw in a handle of specific details that make it look like they've done a lot of research, but they'll screw up tons of other things, and the sad thing is that in many of those cases it's easy to see that it wasn't for dramatic purposes, because it's simply irrelevant to the plot -- or worse, the actual truth would have led the story in far more interesting directions, did they but know.

Oooh, now that sounds interesting. Sadly, my historical knowledge is so lacking that doubtless I've run accross a million of these and never noticed. Care to give some examples so I can point and laugh too?

 

[Teresa Edgerton]

Very often it's just trivial stuff like not knowing the proper titles and forms of address -- it doesn't alter the plot, but causes me to lose faith in the writer so that I'm not willing to believe anything that might come across as at all doubtful. (Whereas if the author has earned my trust, I'll swallow much greater improbabilities whole, thinking the author must have dug up some information I wasn't aware of.) Other times it's just lost opportunities, where the author misses legitimate chances to ramp up the tension and chooses to instill the necessary drama by having the characters act stupid instead. I'm sure you've noticed how much romance novels (and other books, too, but it's a staple of romance and soap opera) depend on characters not speaking up when they should and would, so that misunderstandings may flourish and lovers can be parted for years at a time. If acting dense were the only way to create these interesting situations that would be one thing (if the lovers settle down together in chapter five, what do they do for the rest of the book?), but when more plausible ways have been by-passed because the author doesn't know better, then I get annoyed.

Or another example: the hero (or heroine) mistakes the heroine's (or hero's) identity on the basis of mistaking her/him for a peasant or a menial (and much confusion ensues), when the exchange of a few words, or a glance at the hands, would immediately tell them otherwise. In most times and places, it would be very hard indeed to pass yourself off as belonging to a different class, much less being able to do so on the spur of the moment when someone has pissed you off by mistaking you for something you're not. That's why it was so hard for people to alter their positions in life, because class distinctions could mark you so indelibly that you always carried your origins around with you.

 

[aarti]

Teresa, I completely agree with your above post. I think it's a bit of a cop-out when authors make characters be "ahead of the times." I think this happens more often with female characters than male ones. For some reason, a lot of authors seem unable to make a truly *strong* female character without making her seem (IMO) like she's just a selfish brat.

I also agree that it would have been very easy through most of history to tell what social class someone was from. Just the way of talking (even accents) was different between classes. It's a ridiculous thought. And, no matter how stifling the lifestyle may have been, I can't imagine very many people of the gentry/nobility ever thinking, "Gee, it would be nice to break my back by working in the fields for a while," and then just deciding to dress like a peasant.

One modern author I like who writes historical fiction is Sandra Gulland and her Josephine Bonaparte trilogy. I think she did really well. And of course, Georgette Heyer, for historical romance. I don't really read much romance, and definitely not historical (for the reasons outlined above), but Heyer is someone I shall always adore, I think!

 

[Dusk]

Thanks for bringing up this topic, Ms. Edgerton. I think that it's very difficult for writers who haven't lived in a community where religious beliefs are utterly taken for granted to grasp how much those beliefs permeate people's activities in daily life.

I spent most of the first eight years of my life in a Christian community. I went back there a few years ago with a family member (one who hadn't been there in my childhood). "We need to get to the motel before sundown," I told him.

"Why?" he asked.

"Because the entire community shuts down on the Sabbath."

He thought I was joking. He quickly discovered that I wasn't.

Because of this, I can feel the disconnect when I open up a historical novel set in medieval times, where the characters toss around references to religion but, when times of crisis come, it never occurs to them to make decisions based on their religious beliefs. Yet I've spent most of my life in a largely secular society - if I can feel this disconnect, I can just imagine how poorly the average historical novel handles this matter.