Historical Novels, Period Dramas, etc. Should Not Exist!

[LadyKate]

I am hoping the OP is joking about any kind of censorship (which a statement like the original post would appear to be lobbying for).

I find it sad that novels from the past which have viewpoints which were normal at the time they were written and used language that was standard for the time are now being put on censored lists.

Mark Twain comes to mind with his inappropriate language and attitudes to the blacks in his novels. Note that I do not consider the works of Twain to be historical fiction... they were contemporary when he wrote them.

I fondly remember being very young and having heard about "Honest Abe" and seen pictures of him. After seeing a movie that had President Lincoln in it I puzzled about how he could be alive on tv when he was dead. The actor looked like the pictures I had seen. I don't remember if I asked my parents how he could be on tv when he was dead (I think I did) but it was my "reality check" show. It was the movie that taught me that all you see on tv is not real.

[crich70]

Originally Posted by Timboli

I haven't read any replies yet, but feel I need to wade in with some home truths. History is not necessarily based on fact. It tends to be based on what someone thinks are the facts, usually either a very long time after events occurred or written by the winners or someone else with a bias.

All Historians use a bit of poetic license, and some are far better story tellers than others, who are dry and boring, even with what should be interesting subject matter. Of course many do it that way to make themselves look more official. Yes, snobbery does exist amongst Historians, especially amongst those who believe they are the only true ones.

One of the best historians out there, and noted for the fact, was Rafael Sabatini, who also wrote some of the best Historical Romance novels (or Period Dramas if you prefer). He always researched diligently, even for his fictional stuff, and his liberties were always based on real life occurrences somewhere.

Whatever you read, it should always be taken with a grain of salt, so anyone foolish enough to put too much stock in what they read or see or hear, is exactly that.

I read or watch movies etc for a bunch of reasons, primarily amongst them is entertainment. Being true to life is way down the list, as I get enough of true life as it is.

There is a reason it is called escapism.

I'll finish up by saying it's all a lie, from a different perspective, that may or may not be right in a specific context.

Believe what you will, for it does not really matter.

Life is built upon a foundation of Lies and Truth, whichever way you roll the die.

True. History is usually written by the victors. Today for example most people think of the Nazi's as evil murderers, but if they had won the war no doubt they would have written history with quite a different slant to things.

[empyrking]

I thought I was the only one. An acquaintance recommended a favorite historical fiction book upon her knowing I was into ancient history. Something inside of me died. Don't get me wrong I believe we all have our tastes. Just not mine.

[badgoodDeb]

While I enjoy the good historical fictions from pre 1900 (Philippa Carr, etc), I've refused to read historical fiction about the Holocaust -- because I don't want to confuse my mind about what really *did* happen. I've been reading a number of the actual survivors books.

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by empyrking

I thought I was the only one. An acquaintance recommended a favorite historical fiction book upon her knowing I was into ancient history. Something inside of me died. Don't get me wrong I believe we all have our tastes. Just not mine.

All I can say to that is that you're depriving yourself of an awful lots of great books if you refuse to read historical fiction.

[Timboli]

Originally Posted by HarryT

All I can say to that is that you're depriving yourself of an awful lots of great books if you refuse to read historical fiction.

Totally true, and in a way, most stories have a degree of historical fiction in them, even many SciFi or Fantasy ones.

The past always influences the future, so you can never escape it really.

But hey, many like to cherry pick .... to each their own.

[empyrking]

Originally Posted by HarryT

All I can say to that is that you're depriving yourself of an awful lots of great books if you refuse to read historical fiction.

Let me rephrase that and put it this way. I read a comment somewhere earlier about historical fiction that is a little outlandish. George Washington fighting inter dimensional aliens is just a little too much for me. I'm sure that would be entertaining for some readers but would otherwise be cringe inducing for me.

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by empyrking

Let me rephrase that and put it this way. I read a comment somewhere earlier about historical fiction that is a little outlandish. George Washington fighting inter dimensional aliens is just a little too much for me. I'm sure that would be entertaining for some readers but would otherwise be cringe inducing for me.

When I use the term "historical fiction" I refer to authors such as Bernard Cornwell": well-researched books set in the past. I also enjoy SF/Fantasy, which would be the type of book that you describe, but in no way is it historical fiction.

[empyrking]

Originally Posted by HarryT

When I use the term "historical fiction" I refer to authors such as Bernard Cornwell": well-researched books set in the past. I also enjoy SF/Fantasy, which would be the type of book that you describe, but in no way is it historical fiction.

Yes, that SF/Fantasy with historical figures is not for me. I have clearly made an error in describing it as historical fiction and for that I apologize and stand corrected.

[Nothingness]

When I studied French Literature, I was told that the rule number 1 of fiction is "Anything is possible". Authors are Gods who create their Worlds and Universes with their own Rules and Characters.

[drofgnal]

I love historical fiction. The ultimate was war and peace. There is so much actual data in that book about the period, down to the point of letters between diplomats and generals being the actual historical record. You need to read the latest translation by Pevear and Volokhonsky. It's heavily footnoted about historical accuracy of the events. The central characters are fiction, Natasha, Boris, Pierre, etc., but most of the supporting characters particularly in the military are real as are their actions and the events they take place in. Tolstoy himself didn't describe it as a novel. Great book, the top dog of historical fiction.

I've always enjoyed Edward Rutherford's books as well which follow mythical families throughout the history of a region. (mostly england and UK, but Russka was a great one as well. Liked some of Leon Uris' work as well, Armagedon, Mila 18 to name a couple. Then there's Clavell, Haley, et. al. Follet's Kingbridge series is good as well. Book 3 is coming out in 2017.

A good historical fiction novel will be based on historical fact and follow a set of fictional characters as they interact with history. I DO NOT call alternate history books historical fiction, I leave them with the fantasy/sci-fi genre they are sold with and don't touch them.

[barryem]

I like historical novels a lot, as well, and I've read a lot of those you mention but I find it pretty hard to group them all together into a single genre. Clavell's books were more like rip-roaring westerns. Follett's historical novels were more like family sagas. Rutherfords were more Michener-like novellas strung together. They differ more than they're alike. They really aren't at all the same kinds of books except that they took place a long time ago. They even vary a lot in how historical they are.

I haven't read "War and Peace" so I don't know how that fits but I've always felt that historical novels were more of a broad general category than a genre.

Compare those with the books of Lloyd C. Douglass and Frank Yerby and Mika Waltari and the category gets a lot broader. I'm not really sure "historical novel" is a term that means a whole lot, although I do use the term fairly often.

In a sense, every novel is either a historical novel or will eventually become one.

Barry

[Sweetpea]

Originally Posted by drofgnal

I DO NOT call alternate history books historical fiction, I leave them with the fantasy/sci-fi genre they are sold with and don't touch them.

Why won't you touch them? I really love to read them, as they set your mind going on what could have happened, how small that thing was, that made something happen the way it did.
A good Alternate History book writer will have studies the past as well as a true history book writer. I don't care for books that are so unrealistic (the George Washington fighting aliens example mentioned before), but books that change a tiny bit of important history: what if not Lawrence had had TBC, but George Washington? A tiny difference that could have had major repercussions (I'm no historian, sp I'm not going to speculate...)

[barryem]

Originally Posted by Sweetpea

Why won't you touch them? I really love to read them, as they set your mind going on what could have happened, how small that thing was, that made something happen the way it did.
A good Alternate History book writer will have studies the past as well as a true history book writer. I don't care for books that are so unrealistic (the George Washington fighting aliens example mentioned before), but books that change a tiny bit of important history: what if not Lawrence had had TBC, but George Washington? A tiny difference that could have had major repercussions (I'm no historian, sp I'm not going to speculate...)

I like reading about people in the world I live in and alternate history, like fantasy, just isn't about that. I guess in some sense it's true that reading is escape but for me it's a lot more than that. Fantasy, including alternate history, seems like it's just escape; a way out.

I have no problem with others enjoying it. I'm not interested though.

Barry

[Sirtel]

Originally Posted by barryem

Fantasy, including alternate history, seems like it's just escape; a way out.
Barry

That's why I read fiction; to get away from the world I live in. So, for me, almost any novel taking place during the 20th or 21st century is automatically out. Fantasy, SF, history, alternate history etc. are fine. I also read non-fictional books about different things. But as to fiction, contemporary novels are no-no for me.