Historical Fictionistas discussion
Historical Fiction Discussions
>
does Historical Fiction need to move with the times
message 1:
by
Colin
(new)
Dec 10, 2015 01:03AM
Am I right in thinking that the HF genre stops at the end of WW2? If so that means there are 70 years between then and the present day unaccounted for. Perhaps a new sub genre 'post WW2 could be added? What do the members think?
reply
|
flag
Anything beyond 50 years of the date that you start searching for a book to read . . :-0)
The fact that I can remember earlier than 1965 might be influencing me . . . and HF has to be (for me) earlier than the late 1800's because I knew people who lived in 1870.
Ditto, Geoff but does HF to be beyond what can personally recall or have been directly in touch with? I guess yesterday is history but I am wondering (as we all get older!) whether the line we draw can be moved along with us!
What a great question! I´m not sure what I think. But anything before I was born 1968 would be historical fiction for me anyway. But in one way, anything that isn´t current (and how long does that last?) would technically be historical.
Colin said: Am I right in thinking that the HF genre stops at the end of WW2...Yes, you're right because when we talk about WW2, it seems we talk historically and after that can't be considered so. Historical fiction is related to the field of history.
What fascinates me as a writer is that in hindsight it´s very easy to picture say the 17th Century as pretty much the same.But there is a big difference between 1650 and 1665. Imagine if someone in the future wrote a book about us in 2015 and we all walked around talking on verizon flip phones!
Helen wrote: "What fascinates me as a writer is that in hindsight it´s very easy to picture say the 17th Century as pretty much the same.But there is a big difference between 1650 and 1665. Imagine if someone i..."
I've wondered about that before! History changes slowly, but not that slowly for those living it.
My thoughts exactly. In the UK historical genres are based on which king or queen is on the throne at that time. Elizabethan, Georgian, Vitorian, Edwardian. Elsewhere around the world you will have your own (interesting to see what they are called, perhaps a topic for a different discussion!). Each historic genre is defined by its couture & customs. When you get to post WW2 each genre is defined by its music and couture. 50's rockabilly, 60's Hippie, 70's Disco, 80's New Wave. Are these not historical genres in their own right?
It's a fine line. My most recent book follows protagonists from WW2 to the present. The murder mystery I am now working on -- set in 1930 --has characters recalling events in WW1. So both have historical references. But I put the first in the action-adventure category and will probably do the same or something similar with my new book. We need more categories.:-)
Colin wrote: "Ditto, Geoff but does HF to be beyond what can personally recall or have been directly in touch with? I guess yesterday is history but I am wondering (as we all get older!) whether the line we draw..."Perhaps define HF as a noticeable difference between today and the period in question.
Kennedy's death - 52 years ago is history, but the 6 Day war & the closing of Suez was 'only' 48 years ago, but ripe for HF. The hijacking of the airliners and flying them in to the twin towers was only 14 years ago, but already HF novels & films have been written & made about the incident, and the films can 'date' the period through dress, make of cars very large mobile phones etc so perhaps HF 'is' yesterday :- o)
I've seen novels about the Cold War and the Berlin Wall in the 80s categorized in historical fiction. Personally, I don't really see novels set after WWII as historical fiction unless it's about a big historical event - like the Civil Rights Movement.
I think the "50 years" guideline stands the test of time...no pun intended. For adult readers at any given point in time, a novel that takes place at least 50 years prior to the current date is historical fiction in that the reader is depending on the author's research in making the place and time come alive, rather than the reader's personal recollection. There are, of course, exceptions with much older readers who may well remember WWII or the Cold War in the 1950's and early 60's. On the other hand, books about Vietnam are historical fiction for readers in their teens, 20's and 30's - those readers have no personal references or remembrances of those times, so would fit their definition of historical fiction.
A comment was made to me that if the characters (assuming that they were real in the first place!) are now deceased then this might be the context for HF. I think it is 25 years since a person's passing before you can write about them without asking permission (ie not libelous)
Looking at it from a different angle, some periods in history have great relevance to what is happening in the world today. I write about the late 4th century period and event then and events today are very similar. Refugees were flooding into the Roman Empire and Britain as a consequence of wars and strife. Religious strife, especially between the Christians and pagans were causing problems and state finances were perilous. Not so different in fact to today.
History repeating itself...and they say that we are more civilised than our forebears!
Colin wrote: "History repeating itself...and they say that we are more civilised than our forebears!"So we think but...
In many ways we are of course, but not in others.
Mod
But time doesn't stand still... why should Historical fiction? I think that there are some really popular eras - Tudor, Ancient Egypt, Greece, and Rome, Elizabethan, etc - but if people write about something that happened in the past, I would say that they are writing Historical Fiction (or at least period fiction). If it's contemporary when it's written, and just happens to be 50+ years old, then I don't count that. Only if it's someone looking back in time to tell a story.
I agree Becky, for me there is such a rich source of material, stories, tales etc from post WW2 as well as before. They pop up when you least expect & the creative juices flow.
Brian wrote: "Looking at it from a different angle, some periods in history have great relevance to what is happening in the world today. I write about the late 4th century period and event then and events today..."Brian and Cheryl A made some interesting points about resonance and how we may relate - or not - to historical events. I think we can almost always find parallels between history and the present - that's why they say if you want to know the future, study the past.
I personally was born post-Vietnam, so I have no direct experience of that period. However, I do feel a deep resonance with the 60s and 70s, not only because of ongoing asymmetrical wars, but because of all the concurrent social issues. Everything that my generation experiences, in terms of progress in growing up with multi-gender, multi-racial schools and workplaces as the "norm," is because of the social justice fights that happened in the 60s and 70s - and still continue on today. American society is integrated in terms of race and gender but not yet fully equal - I had a part-time office job in college and still got referred to as my (male) supervisor's "girl."
For me, it's hard to see even the 60s and 70s as "historical" because it is very much in living memory for a lot of people. The music rocks and is 100x better than most of the stuff being made today. This era also has a direct connection to so many issues that are still being worked out today - and the fact that there's video and recordings of the period help immensely with immediacy and resonance. No one had a camcorder at Waterloo, so we are at a remove from that on the basis of not only time, but technology.
I worry that the publishing industry and Amazon are increasingly holding authors hostage with the tyranny of categories—of which this thread is only one example. Used to be, “this novel defies categorization” was a term of praise. Now it seems one can’t publish anything without cramming it into some mold that has been predetermined, meeting a set of supposed expectations on the part of readers. Part of the problem is the way we search for books today: instead of browsing shelves or thumbing through a card catalog, we search electronically. That requires us either to know in advance what we’re looking for, or to search by category. We’ve lost the valuable serendipity factor.So I say, if you want to write a historical novel that is set in the 1980s, write it! If you want to write a novel that is set in 1700 but doesn’t treat historical events, do that! Of course, it may mean that nobody can find your book using an electronic search . . .
Ian wrote: "But I put the first in the action-adventure category and will probably do the same or something similar with my new book. We need more categories.:-)"Or less. We get by without those genres. Only in libraries they sometimes shelf books by some genres, not historical fiction, though.
Are all fictional genres the natural extension of the Dewey-Decimal system used in libraries. Digitally you can see why companies like Amazon choose to categorise as they do because it is, essentially a marketing tool. You like HF so they put HF books in front of you, to tempt you to buy. From a writer's perspective I have an issue with this because the book I wrote that drew me to HF on Goodreads, I had to make a decision about what category it should come under and HF, I guess, fits best. I am not trying to push my book but if read my blog on Goodreads you will get a feel of the dilemma I had, as a writer. I even ran a discussion on the Indie Group discussion, on Goodreads asking 'how do you categorise a book that cannot be categorised' because there are many.
Abigail is quite right, a lot these days is how books are categorized. It used to annoy me when I was searching for books for historical research on Amazon, how in amongst non fiction history books, I'd suddenly come across historical novels. Then when I tried to find historical novels, they were quite often buried somewhere I wouldn't have expected to find them. There are a great many books that don't fit into any particular category, so why can't there be one for books that "cannot be categorised".
So Brian, what title would you give this category? "Independent"? 'General'? I kinda like 'Indie' it has that air of something different.
Geoff wrote: "Perhaps define HF as a noticeable difference between today and the period in question. Kennedy's death - 52 years ago is history, but the 6 Day war & the closing of Suez was 'only' 48 years ago, but ripe for HF. The hijacking of the airliners and flying them in to the twin towers was only 14 years ago, but already HF novels & films have been written & made about the incident, and the films can 'date' the period through dress, make of cars very large mobile phones etc so perhaps HF 'is' yesterday :- o) ..."
I agree with Geoff.
On one hand it's convenient to have the 50-years-rule or 25-years-of-historical-person's-passing, no argument that it works on a larger scale, to have such rules.
On the other hand, I read great HF (of Herman Wouk) on this same mentioned 6-Day-War and closing of Suez and never thought his HF might not be 'qualified' being only 48 years old (I think they open archives of war after 40 years for the historians to pore through).
A tricky question, but I love the discussion it generated. thank you for that :-)
Tytti wrote: "Ian wrote: "But I put the first in the action-adventure category and will probably do the same or something similar with my new book. We need more categories.:-)"Or less. We get by without those ..."
On many sites which promote eBooks with free days their list of categories/genre do not include HF so you have to decide on an unsatisfactory alternative.
Becky, "looking back in time to tell a story" -- does this include flashbacks from the present to WW2?
Colin wrote: "So Brian, what title would you give this category? "Independent"? 'General'? I kinda like 'Indie' it has that air of something different."I think I like the title "Indie" too. Fiction writing is developing all the time and I draw a comparison as to how music developed in the 1970's, with "Progressive music" becoming a category which later broke down into different genres. No doubt historical fiction will develop that way too in time. we already have 'time travel' historical fiction, although some people might think that should be in science fiction.
It could be argued that TT HF crosses two genres and then where does the bibliophile place it? This has been my dilemma. My book crosses at least three HF genres. There is some debate as to whether it is fiction or non-fiction. It is biographical but about a garden not a person. Yes there is some romance, and a little whodunnit. So where do you place a book that covers so many genres? There are many HF books that are also difficult to place & as a writer you don't want to mislead your potential readership.
Colin, I like the sound of your book! Let’s call it “prose.” :-)
Given the wide variety of opinion on this topic I will throw the Lust of Comrade Lu into the mix. It follows the chief protagonists from WW2 to the present. It will be free to download December 18,19 and 20. If you would like to give your opinion of whether it falls into the category of Historical Fiction take a look.:-)http://www.amazon.com/Lust-Comrade-Lu...
Great question! I would say historical fiction is not limited to pre-World War II. A book set in any era different enough from our own that we would feel fundamentally removed due to cultural changes that are the result of the passing of time qualifies. I am reading Inherent Vice by Pynchon. It is populated by hippies and cops of the late 1960s and feels like historical fiction.
Mod
This definition does make it a moving line. However, many people think that the definition is really just set 50 years in the past, and will categorize things like Pride and Prejudice as historical fiction. I don't because Austen was writing about her contemporaries.
Colin, you've written the wrong book, as I have. Hardline HF people don't really like a book that transgresses its period, flitting about eras as if it were entitled to do so. Barefaced cheek. I had a 2* review for my first novel (spans 1200 years) and the reviewer was most annoyed that what appeared to be a novel about Vikings in 9th century England, dashed off to the future via WW2 and 2015 before returning to the 9th century. The book cover shows both a Viking amulet and the silhouettes of two Tornado fighter aircraft, and the blurb mentions an archaeologist and a film director, but I almost added a disclaimer! Cross genre can annoy purists, but it won't stop me writing it and I suspect you may be of the same intent.
I do love well written historical pieces, but as an impure writer of hybrid HF I'm not really qualified to comment on what is historical and what is not; as I get older yesterday feels like history, when I can remember it.
Fair comment. My text has a narrower span, about 150 years but I did not write it to fit a genre, I just wrote the story of a garden. The alternative would have been to write 4 books! However, the research was in depth, including the plants, many of which do not exist anymore. I used the actual diaries for one character & a face to face interview with another. It was my first 'novel' and a learned a great deal in the process. Not just about writing but also about the industry. Indeed, I still learning principally about marketing!
J.D. wrote: "Colin, you've written the wrong book, as I have. Hardline HF people don't really like a book that transgresses its period, flitting about eras as if it were entitled to do so. Barefaced cheek. I ..."
That's just not true, lots of HF fans love books that take place in two different time periods, sounds like you just got unlucky to get one reader who didn't like it and didn't pay attention to the book description. Both settings are still within history too, so it's still historical fiction.
One of my favourite HF is The Source by Michener, which spans from stone age to modern time... just saying...
I think it was mentioned in an earlier post that many novels cross not only historical genres but a number of different genres. When we try to classify something there are always exceptions to the rule. That's why I chose to write because I like to seek out the exceptions to the rule. Therein lies the challenge to the writer and to the reader. There are purists, they are entitled to their opinion but at the end of the day a book is either a good read or it isn't surely that is how writing should be judged if indeed we are seeking to judge!
Robin, I know lots of HF fans don't mind era flitting which is why I used 'hardline' to describe those who do. I should say I have no objection to either, but there is a difference. For instance my dear old auntie is a great fan of Regency romance. Shift romance to the Victorian era and she spits fire. Romance does not exist in modern times, either. Of course, she is dotty, but I still love her, even though she has a stuffed hamster :)I think Colin has it about right. A good read is just that, and individual readers, the purists and those of us who have sold our souls to the thrills of the genre/timeline hop, will enjoy all manner of HF as long as it informs and entertains.
I would say those people are largely in the minority though.
I would like to think you are right, Robin, in which case Colin and I might gain more lovely readers. My auntie is certainly in a minority of one and represents the Regency berserker branch of hardline HF fans!
Hahaha, J.D., I love the notion of Regency berserkers! So apt!
Thank you, Abigail :) It is fortunate for the Northmen that she wasn't around in the 9th century. The whole of English history might have been changed. That said she would have had them crocheting shields and possibly wearing undergarments!
I can just picture her in her pelisse and pattens (because I always think of battlefields as muddy), whacking the Vikings with her reticule! Have at ’em, auntie! (Sounds like a scene out of Monty Python.)
You have a complete idea of the phenomenon that is my auntie. I will mention your suggested use of her reticule, which I'm sure will be received with enthusiasm :)
I'm working on a book set in the cold war ... so though that is post WW2 I expect that would qualify as historical?
T.J. wrote: "I'm working on a book set in the cold war ... so though that is post WW2 I expect that would qualify as historical?"Like I said before, I've seen novels about the Cold War set in the 80s categorized as historical fiction. The general "rule" is if it's set more then 50 years before it's written, it's considered historical (so Jane Austen is not historical fiction because although set more than 50 years ago, she was writing during the same period it was set in). That's what the Historical Novel Society goes by anyway.
So to me, the 80s is not historical fiction - but the Cold War covered a long period of time - if it's set in the 50s, for example, that is more than 50 years ago. When exactly during the Cold War is it set?
Great discussion thread! I'd like to offer my two cents from a different perspective.In a recent LinkedIn Historical Novel group chat, I made a casual comment that it seems in the world of historical fiction, history is almost automatically taken to mean Western History, and that such an assumption ignores a large part of humankind history.
To my above casual comment, one group member, who formerly taught History of Philosophy and World History at an American university, remarked that my observation is correct and that “Western History” is still assumed by some to be “history”. Gladly though, he added, things are changing for the better, a phenomenon borne out by the fact that even the “Epic of Darkness” (a collection of Chinese tales and legends depicting primeval China in epic poetry) is being taught and studied in American classes.
Another group member explained that the assumption is due to publishers and film producers only going with what is “popular” and thus to some extent limiting Western readers’ choices. It is assumed in the publishing industry that “Western” is what readers want, and so that is what readers get.
I am not a historian and my abovementioned observation arose purely from my reading experience, through which I noticed that the bulk of historical fiction written in English is related to Western History or has a Western historical setting. There is obviously a relative paucity of fiction with an Oriental or Chinese historical context or setting. When publishers, literary agents, booksellers or writers refer to “historical fiction”, they seem to have only “Western historical fiction” in mind.
Being bilingual, I can easily satisfy my interest in Chinese history by reading fiction and non-fiction in Chinese. But I can see this would be a problem for Westerners who may share my interest but who only read English. Their only option would be to read translated works, and even these are in short supply in the historical fiction genre.
As readers, would you agree with what the two LinkedIn members said? Would you like to see the historical fiction genre diversify into the Oriental history field?
Great remark, Alice :) I appreciate and have learned a lot through non-Western historical fiction, but you are correct that it is not mainstream. I wish I could be fluent in more languages!
Alice wrote: "When publishers, literary agents, booksellers or writers refer to “historical fiction”, they seem to have only “Western historical fiction” in mind."I think you are making a similar mistake, equating "Western world" with the American or English speaking world. Personally I am very careful when reading novels written by people who are not natives of the country they are writing about. I also remember studying some non-Western history in school. Besides, I live in a Western country but I still don't "recognize" the historical fiction by foreigners written about my country. I keep wondering "what?".
