Steve Harrison's Blog

Clear Vision

A few years ago my mid-teen daughter asked me, why aren’t there many all-out adventure novels featuring girls as the main characters?

I shrugged, as I hadn’t given the subject much (ie. zero) thought. What about TWILIGHT, HUNGER GAMES and stuff like that, I responded, revealing the full extent of my knowledge. “They are all right,” she said, “but they’re filled with vampires, romance, misery, dystopian teen angst and kids with missing or deceased parents.”

Her words got me thinking and led to the writing of BLURRED VISION.

I had a story bubbling along in the back of my mind that, the more I considered it, the more it appeared to be perfect. An all action science fiction story filled with humour and ideally suited to feature two confident, resourceful, no-nonsense girls as the main characters.

The idea floating around the enormous amount of space between my ears was about a teen schoolgirl who swaps places with a girl from another planet. The working title was TEEN ALIEN, but I decided not to go down the alien path. I wanted space to be filled with humans, inhabiting a chaotic, ancient and growing galactic confederation the people of Earth (which is yet to be invited to join) don’t know exists.

This premise allowed me to explore many more of my own interests in addition to those suggested by my daughter.

When I was a child I loved Enid Blyton’s SECRET SEVEN and FAMOUS FIVE stories. Those kids didn’t muck around. They were fearless and jumped into danger at the drop of a hat and, by George!, they were going to solve the mystery at hand. I wanted Polly and Kylie, my BLURRED VISION characters, to take the same no-nonsense approach to life and to danger. An overall attitude of, in the words of my wife, ‘be scared and do it anyway!’

I also grew up reading classic science fiction and non-fiction alien invasion and flying saucer books, so I now had the opportunity to set the record straight with the ‘real’ explanation and history of interstellar contact with Earth over the centuries and particularly since the 1940s flying saucer craze.

In addition to these elements, I had to invent an entire universe, complete with its own history, laws and conventions. Not an easy task, even though it was a very enjoyable one. I decided on a mainly human universe, filled with extremely diverse people who are also recognisably human, with all the good and bad that suggests. Based on my own general ignorance – I wouldn’t survive five minutes in a dystopian world – I decided the general population of ‘my' universe would also suffer a lack of knowledge. Here on Earth, most people can drive, but they wouldn’t have a clue how a car works, let alone build one. I watch TV, but how it operates might as well be magic. Electricity, the same. Phone, building a house, hunting for or growing food, assembling a boat; all of them alien to me, if you will pardon the pun.

In the universe of BLURRED VISION, humans using advanced technology way beyond anything seen on earth generally don’t have a clue how anything works. Just like us (well, me anyway).

All of these elements meant I could have a lot of fun and employ a great deal of humour and I hope BLURRED VISION works for readers of all ages and on a variety of levels.


Details & links at https://stormingtime.com/blurred-vision/

GroupThink for Writers

A Guide to Internet Writing Boards & Groups & Associated Nonsense

I belong to a bunch of writing boards both on specialist writing web sites and social media platforms and delight in expressing my contrarian opinions. Many writers don’t like conventional ‘wisdom’ being challenged, so I am constantly getting into arguments. I haven’t been banned yet, alas, but I’m working on it.

My observations below detail why I enjoy interacting with my fellow writers and how I do everything I can to annoy them. If you have been lurking on a group, or you are thinking of joining one, here’s a guide to what you can expect. I tried to keep to ten points, but I had too much fun and kept going:

1. No one knows anything (including, and especially, me).

2. All advice is opinion.

3. Any opinion that includes always, must, can’t, never or anything else definite is worthless.

4. Anyone who resorts to personal insult just lost the argument.

5. People who insist on having the last word will invariably finish with a stupid and useless comment (I know I always do).

6. Anyone who judges you, your character and/or your ability as a writer solely on a single comment or question either has supernatural powers or is an idiot.

7. A precise question is usually pointless, as a large number of people will answer something you have not asked in order to big note themselves.

8. People who big note themselves are invariably small note writers.

9. What works beautifully for one writer may be useless for you – and there is nothing wrong with this, and there is nothing inferior about your preferred method.

10. If anyone tells you what you must do, you must not do it unless you want to prove them wrong.

11. Anything and everything anyone claims about writing can be proved wrong.

12. Grammar is a tool, and so is anyone who lectures you pedantically on the subject.

13. Any question you ask regarding writing has been asked before, probably word for word, so use search if available. The answers will still be useless, by the way.

14. When it comes to advice and/or opinion, comments by a published writer have no more validity than those of an unpublished writer. Their actual writing skills may be more advanced, but their opinions about writing are just as useless as anyone else’s.

15. If something you read on a writing board makes sense or appears to be useful, you are either delusional or you have crossed into a different dimension of time and space.

16. Yes, there are stupid questions.

17. If someone doesn’t like what you say, you are on the right track.

18. If asking, ‘am I allowed to…?’ stop typing. The answer is yes.

19. If anyone, like me, converts an answer to your post into a promotion for their book, they are desperate for sales.

20. If anyone starts a response with, “nothing personal, but,” they are about to get personal.

21. The main danger when joining a writing board is taking anything seriously.

Enjoy!

What is your novel about?

My novel is about the crew and convicts aboard a British ship who are transported through time from 1795 to 2017, by way of the book’s title, TimeStorm, where they escape into a city and, as the cliché goes, wreak havoc on the unsuspecting population of Sydney, Australia. A fast moving time travel historical romance adventure thriller.

I wrote it because I thought the concept was strong for an action thriller novel and it might be interesting to bring a seafaring adventure into a modern setting.

That was pretty much it. But that, apparently, was not enough for some people, particularly other writers or people with literary interests. As I was editing and the subject of the book came up at parties and gatherings (I am quick to bring up my writing with anyone who will listen), and they asked me what the book was about, I would tell them the above. Then they’d ask, no, what’s it really about? I would then tell them it was about 400 pages, which rarely went down well.

They would press on regardless. No, no, they would insist, that’s not what I mean. What are the themes you explore? What’s the underlying message of the novel? The tone you are trying to achieve?

It happened enough for me to pause. Was I missing something? Is my writing too shallow? Should I be thinking about this stuff? The only message in the work I could think of was, if a bunch of 18th century convicts invade your city, lock yourselves in the basement until they were all caught and/or killed. Sound, practical advice, in my opinion.

I went back through the manuscript, looking for deeper meanings. I identified strangers in a strange land, man’s inhumanity to man and love blossoms in the most extreme circumstances, and a bunch of other common or garden themes and tropes people expect in popular fiction. The grass is always greener and be careful what you wish for also popped their heads in. And that was it. Surely enough?

Anyway, a publisher bought the novel without me having to explain what it was about other than what it was about, if you know what I mean. And when the book was published, the whole theme thing flipped and people told me what it was all about.

Because the novel was traditionally published - some readers apparently decided - it must be worth reading because the book had to be deep and meaningful, covering contemporary events and modern society through the prism of a deceptively simplistic time travel adventure literary device. “Precisely,” I said, when people started sprouting this nonsense. “that’s incredibly perceptive of you.”

As my modus operandi as a writer is to give people what they want, I now do the same when literary types sidle up to me with a creased brow and serious demeanour to ask, what’s TimeStorm about?

I take a deep breath and say, “It’s an exploration of contemporary society and how extreme brutality and masculinity is hidden from most of us and sanitised by the media. TimeStorm views this situation through the prism of a shipload of British convicts, who assume they will be executed if caught, transported from the 18th century to the present day, and caught up in the socio-economic reality and, to them, alien behavioural standards and the incomprehensible role of women in post-colonial, post-monarchy, post-truth Australia, resulting in a surge of male anger, frustration and violence. Ultimately, it’s a story of destruction and redemption, a cautionary tale which examines the role and responsibility of the media and government in the current world-wide decline of our civilisation.”

This usually results in glazed eyes or a sale. Or both. Or neither.

I never tell them the real answer: It’s Hornblower meets Jack Reacher.

-------

Details of TimeStorm, if I haven’t put you off, can be viewed here: TimeStorm

Tell Someone Who Cares

Unlike writers, readers are simple. I know, because I am a writer and a reader.

As a reader, I pick up a book and I know within seconds if it interests me. It might be the cover design or the title or, if I have time on my hands, the blurb on the back cover. I might have seen an ad, been alerted by a social media comment or heard a friend’s recommendation. It could be written by one of my favourite authors, in which case I’ll buy it solely for that reason, or given to me as a gift.

Readers don’t care how the book gets into their hands, but they do care what happens when they open it up and start reading. They have devoted some of that most precious resource, their time, and they will hold you, the writer, personally responsible if you do not deliver an engaging read. They may even abandon your book and vow to never read another word you write if you do not fulfil this one requirement.

But fortunately, that’s it. It’s all you have to do. They are not interested in you the person, where you come from, how you discovered your passion for writing, if you are gay, straight, bi, alien, animal, mineral or vegetable, or the million and one other uninteresting and irrelevant details and facts of your life and experience. They may well become interested if they like your book, but writers are two-a-penny and growing in number faster than rabbits.

Readers, quite reasonably, just want a good read.

And, in case writers get hung up on irrelevant detail, let’s take a look at a few other things readers do not care about. They have zero interest:

• If you write every day
• If you write 1, 100, 1,000 or 10,000 words a day
• If you write what you know
• If you write what you don’t know
• If you are a plotter or pantser
• If you do or don’t write a prologue
• If you use a single or multiple POVs
• If you write in the first, third or sixty-seventh person removed
• If you start in the middle of the story
• If you use Oxford commas or commas from elsewhere
• If you edit immediately after completing a draft
• If you put the manuscript aside for a while before editing
• If you had writer’s block
• If you didn’t have writer’s block
• If you are a member of a writer’s group
• If you employed Beta readers
• If you have a writing degree or diploma or any other formal writing education
• If you suffer physically or mentally for your art

In other words; it’s not their problem.

Writers are bombarded with dos and don’ts, so much that they can be fooled – usually by other writers - into thinking that the process is more important than the result. It isn’t. The reader wants a smooth, relaxed read, unconcerned and unburdened by all the angst, misery and uncertainty you experienced writing the book.

Whether or not you followed any contrived or non-existent writing ‘rules’ or conventions, whether or not you observed ‘common wisdom’ or the instruction of your writing heroes or gurus, or whether or not you wrote standing up, sitting down or submerged in water, none of it holds the slightest importance to the reader.

Now, excuse me, but that’s enough of your problems. I have a new book to read.

Dear New Writer...

Ever heard advice like this… “head-hopping is very complex and difficult, so new writers should never try it.”

I absolutely agree with the first half of the sentence, but the second half, which is extremely common wherever you see ‘writing advice,’ is so negative and condescending I can’t find a profanity extreme enough to condemn it.

You would not throw an infant into a swimming pool and say, “swimming is extremely difficult, so I suggest you don’t attempt it until you are more experienced.”

It is dramatic to equate the two issues, but it does demonstrate how bad advice can kill or stifle raw creativity. Head hopping is only one example. I hear the same advice about multiple points of view, flashbacks, prologues or most other element of writing. In other words, if you are a new writer, don’t write!

There is something I believe that new writers should definitely avoid (and I am serious): other writers.

These other writers are, on the whole, well meaning. They have suffered the trials and errors, traps and blind alleys, frustrations and exasperations common to this joyful experience we call the writing life. They presumably don’t want new writers to experience the same angst and blood-boiling agonies and are doing them a favour by telling them to avoid the same path.

But they ignore the damage they are causing with this terrible advice. First of all, just because they failed or struggled to master a particular aspect of writing doesn’t mean some newbie writer can’t come along and instantly, or with a little practice, master the technique or, as I like to define this kind of ability, get away with it.

Secondly, avoidance of difficult aspects of writing means that a new writer may not experience misery and despair, two fundamental elements a writer must experience in order to improve and develop their own voice.

It’s not difficult to identify a writer who has managed to dodge the necessary lessons and mistakes required to gain an understanding of the complexity and breadth of the art. Their writing is bland and superficial, lacking an understanding of the power of the written word and the techniques of conveying an idea, however simple or complicated, in a sophisticated manner.

There may be limitations to a writer’s abilities, but only the individual writer can find out what they are. And the great writers never stop pushing them further away.

It will come as no surprise to learn that I hate writing advice. When I am told I must never do something, I take it as a challenge. When they say I must always do something else, I make a point of doing it another way.

It will also not surprise you to learn that by following this path I have made and continue to make many mistakes. I have made lots of them for years and it is my hope that one day I will have made enough of them to be considered a good writer.

And my thoughts on the thorny subject of head-hopping? It’s not for me, but that’s based on my experience.

Who are you writing for?

My inspiration for writing blog pieces often comes from interesting discussions I see on social media, particularly those that crop up again and again. And this one is no different.

Most often, people ask questions over and over because there are no definitive answers, or because the people posing them do not like the answers they have been given before. In other words, they know what they want to do, but require confirmation, reassurance or permission.

Unfortunately for them, there may be a million and ones ways of doing something, but no shortage of writers telling you their way is the only one. Some things never change!

One such question is, who are you writing for? It came up again recently when a writer wanted to include some cultural references in her novel which she suspected would be too obscure for many, if not most, readers. She felt they were apt and even essential to the story she wished to tell.

I do sympathise, as I often hand a manuscript to my wife and her feedback invariably includes this exchange:

“What does that mean?”
“It’s a popular cultural reference.”
“Well, I’ve never heard of it.”
“But everyone knows that!”
“Well, I don’t”
“Well, you’re the only one in the world who doesn’t, then!”

This can continue for days, with me becoming more and more childish and defensive, until I ask a few ‘worldly’ people who invariably agree with my wife. I feel my brilliance is sometimes under appreciated.

My particular method of dealing with this issue is to replace the reference, even if the substitution is inferior to the original or requires a written work-around. This may smack of compromise or a betrayal of artistic freedom, but it actually fits smoothly inside my writing philosophy and intentions.

My ambition is to write ‘invisibly,’ so that readers can finish my novel with no recollection of reading, as though they have been told a story with zero effort on their part. This means they must not be allowed to leave the pages of my book – except, perhaps, for toilet breaks – to look up a word, ask a friend or Google a cultural reference, thereby reminding them they are actually reading.

The majority of social media responses were the opposite of my approach and encouraged the writer to stick to her guns and include the material. Too bad, they cried, if readers don’t get it they can look it up on the internet or ask someone what it means. You are the writer, they insisted, perhaps slamming a fist down on the table for emphasis, the author! Do not compromise your art!

All well and good, I suppose, but the very thought of doing that makes me shiver. I write to satisfy both myself and my readers, so I feel anything, regardless of brilliance, excellence or perfection, can, and sometimes must, be sacrificed if it is likely to cause a readers to trip, pause or stop reading.

Am I sacrificing artistic integrity? I don’t think so. I am merely taking my readers into consideration and hopefully making sure that they are literally on the same page as my intentions.

And besides, my novels are completely implausible, so the last thing I want is for readers to stop and think!

Unblocking the Writer

I was involved in a recent writers’ board discussion during which several members declared that writer's block doesn’t exist. They didn’t say they thought it didn’t exist, or that in their opinion it didn’t exist, they merely stated this theory as fact. It’s difficult to argue when people have such fixed opinions when they openly admit they have not experienced the condition, but I didn’t let that stop me.

It’s not the first time the existence of writer’s block has been called into question by writers and it will not be the last. It is a very tempting thought for writers who have not experienced the condition and cannot imagine not being able to write. "Just write your way out of it," they say, which is strange advice for someone unable to write. It’s like telling a person suffering from depression to, "snap out of it and be happy."

I should add that in my experience most writers who have not experienced writer's block do not deny its existence. They accept that it is real and have a healthy fear of it happening to them. There but for the grace of the writing gods go I.

The problem with writer's block is that it is invisible. Anyone who has suffered from one of its various manifestations knows it is real, but can offer no proof. There is no blood test or scan that can confirm a diagnosis. And, unless I’m mistaken, no one has ever died of it and caused a coroner an ‘Aha!’ moment during an autopsy.

So, assuming writer's block exists, what is it?

I’m glad you asked, but I have no idea. I can only relate my own experience.

My brush with writer’s block, which lasted for several months was similar, though nowhere near as frightening or severe, as the anxiety attacks I suffered some years ago, in that minor issues became overwhelming and took on out-of-proportion, life or death importance. I suddenly couldn’t write and although I had a detailed novel fully mapped out in my head, I became frozen.

Suggestions flew in thick and fast. "Just write anything." "Don’t get up until you have written." "It’s all in your head, just relax and the words will flow." Easy for them to say. It was debilitating and frustrating and the harder I tried to bulldoze my way through, the harder it got. Eventually, I just gave up and decided it was pointless trying to write. I quit cold turkey.

That actually released the pressure and over the next few weeks my mind cleared and I worked out what had been happening. I had been sitting down to write with the entire work dominating my thinking. I couldn’t describe someone climbing into a car without the entire novel appearing front and centre, leading me to wonder how this simple action would affect future scenes, upcoming chapters and the entirety of the work. I thought that if I could narrow my focus, I could write again.

I was nervous when I tested my theory, but it worked. I sat down and concentrated on the scene at hand; my character climbs into her car and drives to her destination while conducting an internal dialogue about how she hated her job. Two pages. But I treated those two pages like it was the entire story and suddenly writing was not only manageable, it was thoroughly enjoyable. I got through the novel by skipping scene by scene to the end, never thinking more than a few pages ahead. And I haven’t had a problem since.

I don’t know whether my experience coincides with anyone else’s or my solution would work in other circumstances. From my discussions with other writers, the ways of becoming blocked and the remedies to recover from the condition are many and varied. But, although I hated going through writer's block, I’m actually happy in retrospect, as it was a very valuable experience in my writing journey.

And if it ever returns, I’ll do the same thing to clear my head by stopping writing altogether. It confuses the hell out of writer's block!

Any Tips?

I want to be a writer. Any tips?

That’s a real question I often read on internet writers’ groups (where else?).

My initial thoughts were that this was the dumbest question I have ever seen. What are these people thinking? Were they thinking? I also thought it was insulting that someone would have so much ignorance and so little regard for a hugely difficult and challenging art form that they could just decide to do it with a couple of bits of advice to see them on their way.

It not like other dumb questions, like how many words are there in a sentence, or, what is a paragraph? Also real questions.

The problem with writing is that it looks easy. If you can read and write, why can’t you write an article, a story, a poem, a novel, a play, a screenplay or The Rise and Fall of the Roman Empire? They are all just words, right? How hard can it be?

I blame good writers. These inconsiderate wordsmiths make everything look easy and effortless. The reader does not see the blood, sweat, tears and near-insanity caused by the stress of composing that cute sentence you just enjoyed. Readers do not experience the years of practise, experimentation, false starts, abandoned manuscripts, frustration and complexity behind those words. Or all the terrible writing the writer produced along the way.

The reader who enjoys those words merely sees a polished diamond and not the backbreaking mining process. “I could write that,” they say. And the logical continuation of that thought is, “if I could write that, then I could be a writer.”

Now, writing is such a noble pursuit, anything that inspires someone to take up the keyboard is good. After all, anyone can write. There is no need for a degree or training or a guru, though no doubt some guidance may be helpful. Writing can be completely self-taught and ultimately the writer has to decide if he or she is good enough to work at the level of their ambition.

Writing is a lonely highway that weaves through mountains and valleys, deserts and frozen tundra and it has no short cuts. There are lots of side roads that look like short cuts, but they are dead ends and sometimes you have to go to the end of them to realise this. But each time you rejoin the highway, your writing has improved in a far more profound way than if you had avoided the turn-off.

But back to the opening question. I realised after thinking about it that it’s not a dumb question at all. The first part – I want to be a writer – is all that’s important. If that urge is real and compelling, it is enough to begin the quest and everything required is already ‘out there’ and freely available, sitting ready to be discovered. And the writer needs to be the one who discovers it. No amount of tuition, advice, hints or instruction can substitute for the overwhelming frustration and sheer joy experienced during the writer’s journey.

And that’s why, when someone asks, I want to be a writer. Any tips? I do them the biggest and kindest service I can by replying, no.

Answer the Questions!!!

Anyone can come up with a story. It really is very easy. Something happens, then something else happens and, finally, something final happens (though not always in that order). That’s it. It’s easy to tell someone that story. “Great story!” they will exclaim. “That’s so funny!” they will laugh. “How sad!” they will commiserate. You just tell ‘em and they react, hopefully the way you want them to.

But when a writer comes up with what he thinks is a great story, it is only the beginning of a long and bewildering list of questions.

Does the story make sense? How strong is it? Could it be a novel, or is it a short story? Flash fiction? Or novella? Is it interesting? Does it hang together? Is your fictional world ‘real.’ Can you resolve, paper over or disguise the inevitable plot holes? Are the main characters believable? Likeable? Are there main characters?

What is the audience for this story? What do they want? What will they accept? How can you satisfy them? Do they require British, Australian or American English? Should you provide all three in separate editions, just in case?

The easy part now over, what’s the genre? When is it set? Where is it set? What is the tone? Realistic? Lyrical? Humorous? Romantic? Brutal? Explicit? Graphic?

Once you have worked out the answers to these additional minor issues, you are ready to start writing. But where does the story start? Does it need a prologue? Should it start later and flash back? What about starting in the middle of an action sequence? Or should it be a more sedate character or setting description to ease the reader into the story? What about an out-of-sequence format that jumps about to keep readers on their toes?

Phew! Glad that’s over. Now, what point of view should you use? First person? Second person? Third person omniscient? Fourth person limited, eight times removed? (OK, that last one is not a thing). Mix them up? Single or multiple POVs? Can you head-hop, or should you change POV with chapter breaks? Do you need chapters? How long should they be?

You start writing, but now unplanned characters, events and story threads start to gatecrash your manuscript and meddle with your best paid plans. How do you handle them? Can they be incorporated? How do they fit with all the above issues you resolved before getting to this stage? But if you do accept these unexpected elements, it’s not the same story and a whole new set of questions arise. How do you resolve them?

Writing a story is a Question and Answer session from start to finish. But it’s not a fun Q & A, it’s a long, violent, brutal interrogation, involving a bewildering and confusing barrage of questions that will leave you battered, bruised and incapable of coherent thought. So, when you hear a writer tell you they love writing, it confirms you are speaking to a masochist.

The real joy, for me, is at the end, when I have a shiny, polished, completed manuscript that contains all the answers. Calmness descends upon me and I smile, filled with warmth and satisfaction at a job well done.

But wait! Who can I get to read it and give me an honest opinion? What if I disagree with her? Them? Should I self-publish? Find an agent or publisher? Both? And what about the cover, editing, proofreading, launch, marketing?

And what do I write next?

Hysterical Fiction

When writing historical fiction, we are under pressure to ‘get it right,’ but how accurate is the history we are using? And what’s the difference between history and historical fiction?

Put simply, history is what actually happened in the past and historical fiction uses an historical period, setting, incident or character to frame a story.

But what if the actual history we accept as correct and true is based on historical fiction we now consider to be real history? And what if many of the original texts detailing the famous people, civilisations and wars were invented, embellished, misunderstood or just plain wrong. It would make a modern work based on that source not so much history, but fan fiction.

Imagine, if you will, Donald Trump living in the fourth century and writing a history of the Roman Empire, a really good history, the best history, in fact, believe me. Apart from possibly an accurate account of the building of Hadrian’s Wall, how reliable would it be? You see what I mean?

While it’s safe to assume nothing would be going on in Trump’s head, we don’t really know what the great chroniclers of historical times had in mind as they wrote. Did they have axes to grind, revenge in mind, stars in their eyes or were they simply relaying the winning side’s version of what happened? And even if they were accurate, subsequent retellings act like Chinese whispers and we are left with glaring errors accepted as the truth.

That’s how we have Nero setting fire to Rome, climbing onto the roof of his palace and playing the Roman version of a fiddle, when in fact he was 30 miles away when the blaze started and raced back to the city to heroically lead the firefighters. Or how about Napoleon having a ‘complex’ because he was 5’2”, when, in fact, he was 5’7”, taller than the average Frenchman of his time and two inches taller than his more recent countryman, Nicolas Sarkozy. And staying in France, it is still widely accepted that Marie Antoinette said, “let them eat cake,” provoking even greater French revolutionary anger, though in fact the remark was first reported – but not accredited to her - when she was only 11 years old, more than 20 years before the storming of the Bastille (if it was indeed stormed!).

I use ‘in fact’ ironically.

It is hard enough to know what really happened in modern times when we have countless witnesses and a multitude of eye-witness accounts (the JFK assassination, 9/11 and Trump winning the Republican Presidential nomination, to name three), so how can we hope to know exactly and definitively what actually happened in history and what and who caused what happened. We have to rely on interpretive accounts, and while investigations and corroborations by historians often provide a somewhat trustworthy account of historical shenanigans, we don’t really know. It’s not much different to a modern court case when you can hear wildly different descriptions from a number of eye witnesses.

All of this is terrific news for historical fiction writers. It makes history pliable. We can bend events to our will and reinterpret them. Refute them even, if the evidence is not strong or conclusive.

We can inject our characters into the action and bring history to life through their eyes and we do not have any obligation to historical accuracy when we write our stories, because history itself is not accurate.

Yes, I did just say we have no obligation to historical accuracy, so there’s no need to go back and check.

The only obligation we have, in my opinion, is to our readers. Who, I must say, are a singularly demanding lot.

(Talk among yourselves for a second while I switch to my reader’s hat. There we go.)

When I read historical fiction I bring to it many years of acquired knowledge, no little study and while enjoying a book I actively, though subconsciously, seek out inaccuracies and errors by comparing what I think I know to the author’s descriptions. I am especially vigilant with a writer I sample for the first time. (With authors I trust completely, like Bernard Cornwell, I relax my guard and probably would not question it if he had the Vikings travel by speedboat).

Anyway, if the writer tampers with what I ‘know’ without having a very good reason, I can easily fly into a highly miffed state and put the book down rather firmly in disgust.

However, if an author can push the boundaries by bringing new insights to history or make me question what I thought I knew, or use gaps in the historic record to reconstruct events, all in a plausible fashion, I will be impressed and grateful.

(Swaps hats back)

And that – in fact - is what guides my historical writing.