Peter
asked
Matthew Pearl:
When writing an historical novel, which is more important: the history or the story?
Matthew Pearl
Great question, Peter! I guess it's all about balance. But story has to come first, and making sure the history enhances the story and vice versa. If the story could be nonfiction, my rule of thumb is it should be. That way you're making sure the story really calls for fiction. If I can use a recent example from my own work, my next book is about literary thieves in the 19th century I call bookaneers. We know they existed but really no details. That makes it one of my ideals, a piece of history that can't be told in nonfiction and requires imagination and fiction to explore.
More Answered Questions
Craig
asked
Matthew Pearl:
Just read The Last Bookaneer. Thank you for the great read! It seems to me that the literary subject for your next book is always hinted at in the books that come before. With your frequent mention of Mary Shelley's Frankenstein in The Bookaneer, may we expect your next literary mystery novel to center on her novel?
Janet
asked
Matthew Pearl:
If we'd had a little more time at Vroman's Tuesday, I wanted to ask what you thought about Harper Lee's book being published. Someone pointed out to me that her sister made sure her wishes were respected (not publishing it), then suddenly she dies and the book that sat for 50 years gets published. Thoughts?
About Goodreads Q&A
Ask and answer questions about books!
You can pose questions to the Goodreads community with Reader Q&A, or ask your favorite author a question with Ask the Author.
See Featured Authors Answering Questions
Learn more