So, as a historical fictional writer – how do you begin? The mastering of any situation is simplification. Picking a subject matter, which entails geographic elements and time, can harbor a wide array of possibilities. My scope has always been threefold: 1) will the historical event or series of events provide necessary elements for a compelling story,  2) can I infuse extraordinary story lines and characterizations to coincide with such historical events, and 3) is there an individual interest and passion for such events which can be effectively conveyed to the reader in a way that they will understand and be compelled by.

As we know the English language requires a very subjective skill-set. This is further complicated by the fact that we are dealing with a venue, historical fiction, which has its own subjective nature. The English language and the spelling/meaning of words have radically evolved over the years. This fact is not a concern in contemporary fiction, but it does play a critical role within the historical fiction element (i.e. the withdrawal of ‘slang’ terminology and the correct usage of language elements). Background, cultural persuasions, and geographic historical connotations all play an important role in the basis to writing a historical fiction novel. 

There is a wide variety of fiction out there. As a writer you have to take into consideration that some people simply will not like your work, no matter what subject matter you prevail to write about. Which brings me to the second point (and the most relevant one at this) – the answer to the basic question is a bit more complicated than what one might suspect.

The very first hurdle, and perhaps the most prominent, is what style and narrative would feel most authentic to the times. To take the case in point, I’ll use my just-released historical fiction novel ‘A Diary’s House’ as the prevailing example. The original manuscript start was completely different than the one I finally settled on. This also altered the writing style throughout the book; unique, in format to the Victorian style of the era.

I initially looked at having the narrative as a man in his middle years narrating the story of his own personal life. Once the reader makes it through the initial settings of the book, they quickly understand the power required to have the necessary affect at the ending. It is a very powerful, emotional, and impacting sequence which would have required an older man who can adequately relate his life, in conversation form, to the reader.

This also would have utilized a greater sense of the English language. I also looked at having the narrative as a young boy (such as Tom Sawyer/Huck Finn narrative style), with a more basic, simplified form of language use. But that would have presented an even more limited scope on the emotional impact the book entails at the end. It simply would have been out of sorts and not authentic – nor true to the ending.

Now to the writing style – I will defend the Victorian elements and use in this manner. I performed quite a bit of research on the Trail of Tears before I began this novel. I am, in some sense, a cosmic historical sponge. Many of the personal witness accounts to this episode in Cherokee history were riveting, emotional, and quite frankly, disheartening to read. But what you take away from such research is not only the details to these events, but also the manner by which they describe such events in the first place.

People from the 1830-1890’s range had no TV, no movies; nothing with regards to quick entertainment. The generations were completely different; highly educated in the reading habits and in their writing styles. Their essay skills were more elevated than in today’s terms. Their language content, syntax use, composition, and metaphor range all required more writing conversational performance than in today’s contemporary styles. Journal and diary excerpts were critical in getting a good feel on how people thought, how people spoke, and how people related to one another.  Authenticity is paramount to me when writing or reading historical fiction.

I’ll give you an example. The History channel’s current program of ‘Hatfields and McCoys’ was very popular. If you watched the series, you would have felt it was authentic to the times, and in large measure it was. The dialogue was riveting; the drama very well put together. The story was concise, though intricate at times. The language elements regarding ‘cursing’ could have been greatly toned down, due to the fact that it became disruptive to the core story lines. Then you get to the third episode and one of the characters used the term ‘knocked up’. This is like finding a big turtle in a tiny bathtub. It simply stuck out and was an incorrect use of language.

Another example – EL James Fifty Shades of Gray series. Many of the complaints are directed to her language use in relations to how the location residences speak. It sticks out. The language she uses, at times, is not authentic to the location. As a writer trying to write a novel authentic to a location, this can be a perilous attempt. If you don’t do enough research upfront – it shows. People from that locale will say “Hey, I live there and we don’t talk like that!”.

Perhaps the most critical element is taking a point in history, building a compelling storyline, and threading an important historical event within the novel. But the reader still has to identify with the work; the use of narrative formation, the times, the language elements, and the characters’ personality traits. It appears it’s an impossible task to be successful in every phase of your historical fiction writing. And still, the story is lost if the reader can’t identify with the work.

There is a classic difference between contemporary fiction and historical fiction. Bridging what the reader is not regularly exposed to with a place and time from the past can be a difficult hurdle to overcome. Some historical fiction today should not even be called this. The language elements are simply not there. Sometimes it’s a hidden term for ‘commercial fiction’ to be kind of wrapped up in ‘literary tones’.

There is a responsibility of engagement for both the writer and reader. The writer must relate the story in the most concise way possible where the reader needs to be open-minded and utilize a good degree of internal thought; not just be entertained – thus the difference between commercial and historical fiction. The reader should understand that with historical fiction, they are essentially walking into a different and sometimes foreign world. If you read only what you know, how can you ever expand and explore worlds, scenery, subject matters, and emotions you never thought you had?

A writer needs to have the intuitive notion that people have varying degrees of education, language skills, dialect use, syntax awareness, etc. Dealing with a vast audience can have great appeal to some while having no appeal to others. It’s simply not adept to some reader’s taste and the writer has to accept that some readers will not engage the work, and perhaps may not even find the historical fiction novel likeable at all. It’s quite true you can’t please everyone, and in large measure you can’t please most everyone.

There is a broad range of people out there. As a writer with exposure to a vast array of individuals you discover just how diverse people can become. The reader doesn’t see this – they only know what they know. If a reader is open-minded then you have the opportunity, as a writer, to expose them to a historical event, a world, a place in time they are not familiar with. And in greater terms, it stirs the reader to investigate the actual historical events you are writing about.

‘A Diary’s House’ exposes the tragic events relating to the initial outset of ‘The Trail of Tears’ – the great exodus of the Cherokee (and other tribes) in the mid-west. Capturing the emotional, spiritual, and physical aspect of such a horrific episode in American history was absolutely important to me.

A historical fiction writer should always be looking for compelling stories in history to write about. Justify the work with due-diligent research; demote the times you are writing about; language and usage form; select an appropriate narrative and type (whether in first person, third person, or narration) and the age by which you are narrating the story. Subsequent character invention, storyline creation, and streamlining events instills a good beginning to your story. Other elements, such as the pace and flow of the story, descriptive forms versus dialogue, and writing style are better suited for another topic discussion.

In conclusion, you want to write a good, compelling story; one that will reach the broadest readership possible, instill interest in the historical event you are writing about, and create general acceptance for your historical fiction work… 

C. David Murphy

[image error]

The post Writing Historical Fiction: The Specific and General Prose to Historical Fiction Writing appeared first on C. David Murphy.