Quote:
Originally Posted by zelda_pinwheel
yes this is how i define legend as well. in this case however i *still* would not mix it with biography ; i think it is rather analogous to the history / historical fiction dilemma. a legend *may* be based on a real person, but to what extent ? what if it's based on an amalgam of 12 different real people ? what if it was based on a misunderstood rumor about an alleged person which actually had no truth to it whatsoever ? what if it was based on a grain of truth but had been so altered through centuries of incomplete / incorrect retellings that it no longer bore any resemblance to the original story ? maybe we should create (yet another...) category for "myths and legends" (which seem to me to have more in common than either one with history), or simply put those in "fiction" with a "myth" or "legend" tag.
i personally think it's wisest not to mix history and fiction, even if it's historical fiction (and even if "History" is itself simply a legitimised fiction, to varying degrees...). after all, History is supposed to be Non-fiction, whereas "historical fiction"... well it's right there in the name. but this is just my opinion.
|
Well there has not been too much feedback but I think you have indicated that the direction I already was headed is the right one. So unless there is some compelling argument to the contrary I will leave the wiki page divided as is and just fill in some more details. Thanks for listening to my ramblings.
Dale