Hi CW, as both a (big) fan of your work and an historical fiction author myself, I'm curious about your philosophy about the issue of 'historical accuracy' versus 'solid storytelling.' Do you stick to the historical facts all the time? Or do you sacrifice a bit of historical accuracy at the altar of telling a compelling story that is at least emotionally accurate if perhaps not wholly historically accurate?

C.W. Gortner Hi Martin,
An honor to hear from you. I have a rather long-winded response.

Accuracy vs story is always a thorny issue. As a novelist, story is paramount to me, but as an historical novelist, accuracy must also take precedence. The balance between the two is never easy to achieve. Personally, I try my utmost to not alter or distort historical fact, but as I tell my stories in first-person, the impressions of my character are her own and may deviate from the historical record in how she interprets her life.

For example, Isabella of Castile is seen by history as a religious fanatic; we have far more insight today into the terrible persecutions of the past, so it stands to perfect reason that her actions during her reign toward the conversos and Jews are viewed as unconscionable. Because they were. But Isabella herself wouldn't have seen it that way; to her, saving her subjects' souls was a very real and pressing obligation. She fervently believed that God had appointed her as queen to uphold the Catholic faith. My challenge involved immersing myself in her mindset - which I certainly don't agree with - and depict her as a woman of her times. Isabella had many remarkable qualities, but she was fallible and deeply misguided when it came to her faith. I've read reader criticisms of my novel that I made her too sympathetic and she never wavered in her cold-blooded ambition to expel the Jews from Spain. The historical record disputes this popular assumption; there are several documented incidents that reveal Isabella not only struggled morally with her ultimate decision to authorize the expulsion, but also that she attempted other means to first "gently guide and educate" conversos away from practicing both the Jewish and Catholic faiths. Her initial intentions were directed solely toward conversos who'd lapsed, as defined at the time by the Inquisition - an establishment she also delayed implementing for several years and tried in vain to curtail to her authority. This does not excuse her behavior; it merely demonstrates the complexities she believed she faced as a Catholic queen.

One of the challenges we often must deal with as historical novelists is that in the final say, history is written in black and white, yet there are countless shades of grey between fact and intention. I see my task as an historical novelist to write within those shades of grey. We also must patiently contend with those who believe they know the history better than we do, despite our painstaking research. With such polarizing figures as Isabella of Castile and other controversial women I've written about, it's a given that some will not agree with my portrayal and even vehemently dispute it.

When we write a historical novel, as you know, we can't include everything. I often struggle with what not to include even more than with what to include. My word count is determined by my publisher. A life is filled with infinite moments, but a novel is finite, so I must find my story within the sprawl of these moments. Some of my critics will claim that I'm not historically accurate in my work, which is their prerogative. When I do sacrifice historical accuracy for emotional accuracy, it's always very well considered.

An example I can cite of this is in my most recent novel, THE ROMANOV EMPRESS, when my character the Dowager Empress comes across Rasputin during her visit to the Alexander Palace. There's no historical evidence that Maria ever met Rasputin in real life, but it was necessary for the novel for us to see him and her reaction to him. The historical record tells us that she did in fact visit the palace after one of Tsaverich Alexei's more serious hemophiliac episodes; the record also says it was one of the first documented times that Rasputin was summoned to see the boy and "heal" him. Taking both these facts into account, I built a scene where Maria meets Rasputin briefly, in passing. Did it happen? Probably not. But in this particular case, it was required to bring Maria's perspective toward him and her daughter-in-law Alexandra into better focus for the reader.

I hope this helps to answer your question. Thanks!

flag