tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7478664906099707316.post4803115229861980587..comments2023-08-16T02:59:07.053-07:00Comments on Writer's Daily Grind: Literary snobbery strikes again!Anne Gilberthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03045500116098233731noreply@blogger.comBlogger8125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7478664906099707316.post-90796287414736015952009-09-09T21:57:11.081-07:002009-09-09T21:57:11.081-07:00StevenL
The guy wrote a sequel. I found a bizarre...StevenL<br /><br />The guy wrote a sequel. I found a bizarre and easily correctable mistake in <b><i>that</i></b>, too. I very quickly threw it at the wall! Al;so, in both books, people had non-period names like "Alice". This, btw, is often one of the first things I notice, and then I know the writer hasn't done his or her homework. Ugh.Anne Gilberthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03045500116098233731noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7478664906099707316.post-1668124472636725802009-09-09T07:55:13.684-07:002009-09-09T07:55:13.684-07:00I've seen the book you're referring to. I&...I've seen the book you're referring to. I'll steer clear of that one. Templars at the Battle of Hastings? Bizarre indeed.Steven Tillhttp://steventill.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7478664906099707316.post-3526706540029414832009-09-03T14:39:24.651-07:002009-09-03T14:39:24.651-07:00Steven:
It was a book called, I think, The Housec...Steven:<br /><br />It was a book called, I think, The Housecarl, or something like that, featuring a Templar knight at the Battle of Hastings????? It was all full of really bizarre, and easily checked, historical inaccuracies.Anne Gilberthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03045500116098233731noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7478664906099707316.post-39089109862143106822009-09-02T07:08:06.601-07:002009-09-02T07:08:06.601-07:00Which book was it with the Templars?Which book was it with the Templars?Steven Tillhttp://steventill.com/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7478664906099707316.post-44065497288768633412009-08-31T17:15:11.265-07:002009-08-31T17:15:11.265-07:00Steven:
Unfortunately, as you are probably aware,...Steven:<br /><br />Unfortunately, as you are probably aware, there are "accuracy cumposives" out there, who all but insist that everything in a historical novel must be 100% accurate. Trouble is, if your're writing fiction, even fiction set in a period where there is abundant material to work with, you simply <b><i>cannont</i></b> be "100% accurate" for a variety of reasons. Sometimes the "real" history just doesn't make a very good <b><i>story</i></b>, at least in terms of how the events are described. I agree with you, though, that any writer that's deali with historical fiction, should strive to portray major events as accurately as possible and not do things like put Templar knights in a period where they didn't even exist(as one book I started to read, actually did), or something similar. Sometimes these "accuracy compulsives", though, forget that they are writing fiction, not history. Everything doesn't have to be "real".<br />Anne GAnne Gilberthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03045500116098233731noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7478664906099707316.post-27684431802907543712009-08-31T15:41:59.524-07:002009-08-31T15:41:59.524-07:00When I pick up a historical fiction novel, I prefe...When I pick up a historical fiction novel, I prefer for it to be as accurate as possible in regards to the major details, but I also pick it up knowing it's fiction, and that the authors' first priority (more than likely) is to entertain readers. <br /><br />I know a lot of readers who have a problem with Ken Follett's Pillars of the Earth because of historical accuracy, but it's still one of my favorite novels. There is nothing, when I read it, that is glaringly inaccurate on the surface, though I'm sure there are plenty of smaller details that might be inaccurate. It didn't keep me from liking the book, and I recommend it to anyone who is interested in reading historical fiction.<br /><br />I love history, don't get me wrong, and I'm one of those writers who wants to be as accurate as possible when dealing with historical details. But sometimes history can become a circular debate with competing theories, and really what's the point? We didn't actually live in that time period or witness it first-hand, and even those who did write contemporary accounts are often skewed by their perceptions or allegiances, so how can we truly know what really happened?<br /><br />Historical fiction gives an author the liberty to fill in these gaps, these uncertainties, and stamp his/her opinions on a particular person or place or event. That's one of the aspects, to me, that makes historical fiction so entertaining.Steven Tillhttp://steventill.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7478664906099707316.post-525847345225332602009-08-30T21:17:36.786-07:002009-08-30T21:17:36.786-07:00Jen:
I can certainly understand, if Beevor felt o...Jen:<br /><br />I can certainly understand, if Beevor felt one of his ancestors was unfairly portrayed. The weird thing is, most people who believe historical myths, don't have ancestors to "celebrate"(at least not the ancestors who are the subjects of the myth). They are just very comfortable with "the eternal verities", whether or not they are actually true. Richard III is a very good case in point; all you have to do is consider how often Alison Weir is still cited as a source for his misdeeds(whatever they may or may hot have been), and I've run into people, even now, that believe the "Tudor myth" to be historical truth. So when somebody tries to make someone's reputation better or worse than whatever "real" history says it was, a lot of people just get upset. <br /><br />OTOH, I have a sinking feeling Beevor has literary pretensions as well, though I can't be sure. It would be interesting to read what the other person mentioned in one blog said about this subject.Anne Gilberthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03045500116098233731noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7478664906099707316.post-76868052208290770782009-08-30T16:12:10.959-07:002009-08-30T16:12:10.959-07:00I blogged about this too. To be fair, I think Beev...I blogged about this too. To be fair, I think Beevor was upset because a novel had maligned one of his ancestors, and I suppose most of us would feel that way if our nearest and dearest were badly treated in print. The articles certainly made me think about the question. The sad thing is that for a good three hundred years or more people did believe Shakespeare's version of MacBeth and Richard III - as they prefer to believe Mel Gibson's Braveheart today in favour of rather more prosaic history.Jen Blackhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12628305777383099281noreply@blogger.com