Historical Fictionistas discussion
Goodreads Author Zone
>
is it ethical to write factional books?
message 1:
by
Colin
(new)
Oct 21, 2015 08:49AM
My name is Colin Lever. I have written a number of non-fiction books (published by major companies). My first historical novel was self-published. I have since received criticism because, although it is biographical I wrote it in the format of a novel, bringing the characters to life. I described more as a 'factional book'. What is the opinion of the group in respect of creating/embellishing historical fact as a narrative for a good story?
reply
|
flag
Colin wrote: "My name is Colin Lever. I have written a number of non-fiction books (published by major companies). My first historical novel was self-published. I have since received criticism because, although ..."Personally, I like it. I, Cleopatra is told in the way you are describing and I loved it.
What you describe, Colin, seems like a perfectly valid way of going about writing historical fiction. Even the most scholarly biography of a historical figure has to speculate, to tell a kind of story. Why not turn that into an actual fiction—so long as one doesn’t try to present it as a literal narrative of verifiable events? (Changing the known facts is more problematic, of course.)The novel I’m working on now combines historical people with invented ones. In working on it, I try to keep in mind the distinction between the “real” and the “true.” The real is the limited range of accepted historical facts that we know; the true is the larger narrative revealed by those facts, the themes and ideas, the human insights. The two seem equally important to me—especially in the realm of fiction. Embellish away, I say!
It was pointed out to me that there have been many historical books written in this way. the White Queen is juts one. I guess some people are too precious. The research I did on the book took me 3 years!
Abigail, my latest creation lies heavily on fact & I have not even altered names. All I have done is piece the facts together to create the plot/storyline. I have not published yet & I am a little nervous of doing so.
Perhaps we should all be nervous about publishing in this uncivil world. But it sounds as if you can hold your head high, no matter what the trolls may say!One thing many authors do to protect themselves from criticism of the sort you encountered is to give the work the subtitle “A Novel.” It’s possible that your previously published nonfiction work gave someone the expectation that your factional book was the same.
Colin wrote: "My name is Colin Lever. I have written a number of non-fiction books (published by major companies). My first historical novel was self-published. I have since received criticism because, although ..."Hi, Colin...welcome to the group! Can you please change the title of your thread to something else? This is not an area to introduce yourself as we already have an "Introduction" thread- https://www.goodreads.com/topic/show/.... Also, please make sure to take a look at our Group Rules thread- https://www.goodreads.com/topic/show/...
I'm going to move this thread to Goodreads Author Zone since you are discussing your own work.
Yes, Abigail, I do think that i am going to do this
As long as you write a disclaimer in the beginning of your book you don´t have to worry.
well that's the problem, I can't other than to say this is story based on real events, I suppose. I've just got to get the words right
I must admit I do enjoy writing in this genre. There is so much material & the storylines are already there! Not that I am not creative.
Colin wrote: "well that's the problem, I can't other than to say this is story based on real events, I suppose. I've just got to get the words right"Is it a biography? Or are you adding your own interpretation on what you think happened?
There are a lot of historical fiction books that feature real historical people in the heart of their stories. If the novel is to be realistic then it has to have both historical accuracy and background, while to hold your readers you must portray your characters in a sympathetic manner. I have read a few novels which have been historically accurate but which I haven't rated highly because the portrayal of the MC has left me cold. I couldn't care less what happened to them.There is also a huge amount of history that is simply unknown, or which can be inferred, but only on what a crime novelist would call circumstantial evidence. One other way to justify what you write is to do so in a blog, explaining how you came to follow a particular story-line.
So good luck Colin, put the book out there, but be prepared to respond to positive feedback as well.
My novels have historical people in it, such as Henry Ward Beecher, Dr. McCune Smith and others.
Writing fiction and calling it fact is unethical. Adapting fact for your fiction? That's why it's called fiction, people! It's supposed to be made up to some degree.Or, as my adviser once told me (I'm a historian by training), "You're better off writing honest fiction" than making stuff up and calling it history.
You said you've gotten criticism and you haven't published it yet, so I'm wondering if that's from people who usually read your non-fiction?People who normally read historical fiction expect it to be filled with real people and to get as many facts correct as possible. As long as it is marketed as fiction - you have to be clear about that. The suggestion about adding "A Novel" is a good one. Because your non-fiction readers need to know before they buy that this is different.
I think you should try finding a few beta readers (maybe from this group - just ask) who will let you know whether the writing itself has issues, rather than just getting upset that it's not what they expected.
There are many books that are adaptations of peoples lives, I've mentioned a couple and yes, CP, I need to precise in how the book is advertised. Caveats such 'based on the life of..' would do the trick. I don't think there is plan to mislead anybody by writing fiction & trying to pass it on as fact but rather it is a case of having a biography & embellishing it with characterisation, interpretation & dialogue. Perhaps it is a question of degree. How much is a writer allowed to create that is not fact before the book becomes fiction rather than non-fiction? I would welcome your views on this. And yes, Michele, I would welcome a few views. The criticism was for an early book, written along the same lines.
For something to be ethical it has to be legal, which of course in this situation it is. Not sure if you're trying to be "ethical" or something else?
Colleen, It is not myself who has pointed the 'ethical' finger at work of my type but 'others' who would argue that is wrong to take factual, biographical material and 'embellish' to make the story more interesting. As non-fiction writer I enjoy the research but I also like to look at facts & figures from new perspectives and if this means creating a different narrative then so be it. I am sure that there are those who disagree but much of history is based on interpretation. We, the reader, often take what we read in history books as fact when what we are reading is what somebody else has recorded, their opinion, and so we cannot be certain of the historical accuracy. Much political dogma encapsulates the 're-writing' of history. I am not seeking to be ethical (or unethical for that matter) what I am posing is the conundrum of the continuum rather than the black & white of fact or fiction.
Hi Colin, As others have noted, there are an enormous number of books that are very successful that are based on real people or real events. If you are clear that the book is a work of fiction, and not an "embellished" biography, then it seems there is no ethical breach. Not sure where your critics are coming from? Is there a way you can make your purpose clearer?
Couple other things to bear in mind - though I am not a legal scholar and it seems that in most cases, libel accusations can only be made if living persons are involved - it may nonetheless be worthwhile to get a little familiar with the legal guidelines around writing about actual persons:
Rights of Writers: Could I be liable for libel in fiction?
http://www.rightsofwriters.com/2010/1...
The murky world of literary libel:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/bo...
Obviously the laws vary depending on what country you are in, and perhaps what country your characters originate in!
Has your research involved any private collections or family papers? If so, if you haven't already, check if any permissions are needed before publishing information contained in them. I recently consulted some papers in Scotland, held in archive, that are part of the private collection of a very distinguished family, and I needed to sign a statement saying I would obtain permission before publishing. So if any types of permissions are needed in your case, you'll want to make sure that you get them!
I have studied history at the graduate level and even the "facts" are a matter of what exists in the historical record (which is not always impartial! or complete!), and how that record is subsequently interpreted.
Good luck!
Amy
Amy, thanks for the heads up on this issue. My last book used a personal diary but I did get the permission of the family beforehand, in fact the diary was over a 100 years old & I felt very privileged to be able to use. The family were delighted with the outcome. This was where the issue began because a potential publisher/editor brought my attention to this approach to historical/biography. The one I am about to put into print uses the same technique but all characters are deceased & have been since 1977, so I think I am in the clear. While a couple of the chapters are challenging the tone of the book is very positive with the two main protagonists emerging as the heroines they undoubtedly were. I have used actual archive material and as you have suggested, I may go to the local museum & seek acknowledgement. I think I will place a disclaimer at the start to say that this is a story 'based on real events' & that some characters have been added to 'create a narrative' or words to that effect. Thanks again for the advice. Colin
How on earth can you write historical FICTION without some....er....fiction? Adding in a disclaimer to say you have used some fiction seems to me only sensible! Some people will complain no matter how you handle it - for me, who reads mostly HF and with a gimlet eye for historical accuracy, these are the most telling points:Do not fiddle with known historical data. If you can't avoid this, tell me at the outset you are doing it, not in an author's note at the back.
Do make sure you research the small stuff - a popular HF author lost me completely after telling how a 'casement' blew open, smashing all the glass' in the 5th century! So - get the currency right, get the clothing right, get the farming methods right....and check other data. Medical and physical assertion needs to be checked; a wonderfully well-told version of Robin Hood was - bruised for me by Robin undertaking an ordeal by fire using both hands lifting white hot metal bars....he fully healed within days - impossible! He would have been crippled for life if he didn't die from that.
Finally - don't fictionalise a well-known story. Read Ms Phillippa Gregory and don't do as she does. And don't assert you are a historian as justification of your fictions - that is oxymoronic and simply disrespectful to the reader.
I see plenty of good advice above and am merely giving you the benefit of what annoys me, myself. I have no problem with 'factional' HR so long as I am treated as a person with a brain by the author.
If you are writing non-fiction - then you are stuck with the facts, sorry - you can't assume to know how someone felt, for instance - you may hypothesise but must make it clear that is what you are doing. So long as you make it clear you are looking at a different point of view and making an hypothesis, have a theory etc I can't see any problem or ethical dilemma. If you present your theory/hypothesis as if it were 'true' - then you deserve to lose your readers. It's all in how you treat your reader.
Deborah, accuracy is essential. I spent three years researching one book, getting the context right, it's not as easy as it seems. That's where my work in non-fiction has been useful. As for fictionalising a well known story, there are so many 'stories' out there waiting to be dramatised in way or another, which is kind of the point of my initial. Where does non-fiction biography end and true fiction begin? I like the term 'factional' as I feel it explains, in a word, to the reader the context in which the book is written. Thanks for your comment, it has given me much food for thought
I am aware it is not easy to be accurate - I would never suggest that. Rather, it seems to me a wonderful and complicated puzzle to solve! I think writing HF takes a very particular type of personality - a psychological and historical detective, in fact - as well as expressive skills. I have done a little research myself, just to find out whether it is fair of me to be critical, which I am. Above all, be fair! *laughs at self*
Personally, the word 'factional' is confusing - it sounds to me like a biography that veered into fiction - that is, went where it didn't orter 've gone! I had to look carefully to elicit it's application from context. I tend to use Historical Fiction to denote the 'good' (IMHO) stuff and Historical Fantasy to denote the.....less rigorously historicised! And, yes, I do make words up to suit myself! :D
Deborah, it is not so much psychological but definitely detective! Every answer throws up another question & if you are not familiar with say the clothing or protocol of the time you are writing about, it can be problematic. the Georgain/Victorian period for example has women clothed in various dresses depending on the time of day and as a writer you need to get the detail correct. This in turn slows down the creative juices as you get bogged down in research. However, the end justifies the means and so the product has legitimacy. Colin
Colin wrote: "Abigail, my latest creation lies heavily on fact & I have not even altered names. All I have done is piece the facts together to create the plot/storyline. I have not published yet & I am a little ..."This is really interesting to me Colin, as I have done the same thing, and have just self published it. I based the novel on stories my mother told me of her wider family whom she knew well as a child, on research into my grandfather's experiences during WW1, on research into life at home during the war, on other contemporary accounts. I too have left names unchanged and feel a little nervous about this. Some of the family were rogues, and they are now dead. I have not provided surnames, and I am keeping my fingers crossed this will not land me in any trouble, perhaps I am being foolish...I don't know, would be interested in others' views. For me too, it was the only way into writing fiction, I had not done it before and did not have a clue how to. I started with writing a timeline from the War Diaries and it went from there. I am just about to advertise it in the correct folder, so we shall see...
My book, which I have now placed on goodreads btw, used diaries, precious to the family I was allowed to borrow them from, for much of the story. I also used first hand accounts from an old guy who was only young during the war, giving contrary evidence to that offered by local historians which has caused some controversy. I did get written permission from families involved and I gave them sight of parts of then book that mentioned their ancestors. This was a good move, I believe as then there were no revelations that they might get upset about. My next book is not the same & so, I too, have some trepidation about how it will be received but I weigh that against what the book is about and hope that, on balance, any living relatives will see it for what it is.
Colin wrote: "My book, which I have now placed on goodreads btw, used diaries, precious to the family I was allowed to borrow them from, for much of the story. I also used first hand accounts from an old guy who..."what is the title of your book, Colin? Are you allowed to put it on here? I would be interested to read it
I'll risk censure! La Chaire, beyond the garden gate. Be careful on Amazon, mine is the Kindle version. There is another, illegal version which is not an ebook!
I've just reduced the price to try and get more customers. I hope you enjoy it & please could you do a review.
Colin wrote: "I've just reduced the price to try and get more customers. I hope you enjoy it & please could you do a review."Colin I have just bought it, it looks rather intriguing, quite different and interesting. I will read it next and review it. Would you be kind enough to do the same for me? Mine is posted in the Discounted books section as it is free until Wednesday, called Letting Go of Love. Many thanks!
yes please, that would be great thanks
Letting Go of Love: A World War I Love Story
Colin wrote: "I've just reduced the price to try and get more customers. I hope you enjoy it & please could you do a review."Hello Colin, just finished your book, which I enjoyed greatly. I have left a review on Amazon which I believe is still in review but which should appear soon. Best of luck with it.
You are a quick reader! I will be a while with yours but I have started it! thanks for buying the book & taking the time to comment, regards Colin
yes, I read at night when I can't sleep! No problem, I enjoyed it
Mod
noted, it was not intentional, rather grew out of a conversation.
I learned more about history by reading Jean Plaidy, a very successful novelist BTW, than anything at school. Go for it.Have a wee peek at some of her work. Jean Plaidy
I had no idea Phillipa Carr, Victoria Holt, and Jean Plaidy were all the same author. No wonder I like all of their books! Catherine wrote: "I learned more about history by reading Jean Plaidy, a very successful novelist BTW, than anything at school. Go for it.Have a wee peek at some of her work. Jean Plaidy"
I read Plaidy's The Royal Road to Fotheringhay as a boy. It brought the story of Mary Queen of Scots to life in a way ordinary history books could not. That is what good historical fiction is all about - entertaining and educating at the same time.
Going back to the original question (although it is a bit old now:)), I think that when you write a historical novel, you are not signing up to the same criteria as someone who is writing historical non-fiction. Historical accuracy is important in a historical novel, but there is also the story to consider. I'm not saying that fact should be sacrificed for the sake of fiction, but that where there is freedom to be had, it can be taken.
It seems to me good historical fiction is accurate in all directions. In plot, factual detail and a reasonable representation of a historical character. For example if one included Ben Franklin in a historical novel, one would want to see him behaving as we know Ben Franklin would behave.. not running off to join a circus or become a spiritual medium. That would be off the rails.
Yes, that is true. You must be faithful to the character as far as the facts go. But there are often other sides to a person that may not have revealed themselves in popular consciousness. Take for instance, Thomas Cromwell in Wolf Hall. He had always been known as a ruthless, heartless historical figure, but Mantel shows his vulnerable side, his human side. I think that one of the roles of historical fiction should be to cast new light on old ideas. What do you think?
When writing HF you only have some of the facts to play with. Characterisation is especially open to interpretation because of a number of facts, including personality, context etc. Writers can be accurate with the peripheries, costume, architecture etc but to get 'inside the head' of a figure from history is not an exact science, unless you have the material to work from. Diaries are good start, as are autobiographies but the further you go back in history the more blurred the person actually becomes. Evidential material from historians past & present is open to bias. The best historical fiction writers do their research and build a photo-fit. But we must not forget the F word in HF. The skill of the writer is in their ability to manipulate the reader into seeing characters from a different angle. None of this detracts from the books being a good read. There is much debate about how modern history is re-written to suit political &/or ideological ends. It can be assumed that this was also true of chroniclers further back in time.
Hi Colin,Yes indeed. History has been written by the victors. It's an old line, but there is probably some truth in it. Or if not the victors, then those who had a pen in hand, such as the Roman chroniclers Tacitus and Dio. Who knows how much truth there was in their work. It could have been largely fictional; I would say it almost certainly was because they were writing to entertain and to give people what they wanted - not necessarily the truth..
Historical Fictionistas
Books mentioned in this topic
I, Cleopatra (other topics)Authors mentioned in this topic
Jean Plaidy (other topics)Jean Plaidy (other topics)
