Historical Fictionistas discussion

By its very nature, history, perhaps a little like the realm of science and its theories about the universe and the laws that govern it, is an evolving domain. Things of myth and legend suddenly revealed to contain elements of truth. In the case of Pontius Pilate, a figure long thought to be only a character in the bible, until the Pilate Stone was discovered...and then a ring bearing his name.

Playing with the greys of historical record to weave events into a tale of mystery and plausible explanations for gaps in what we know is a great way to tell a new story. What do you think? A compelling read, or a betrayal of a reader's trust that as authors we always keep to the straight and narrow even if the "fiction" components should be obvious?

Alexw wrote: "There is no difference as explained by the only thing written worthwhile by Stephen King-"When it comes to the past, everyone writes fiction.""

What a ridiculous statement. "The past" is such a vaguely broad concept that it makes that whole comment pointless and inaccurate. Someone can't write a nonfiction account of what happened last week? Yesterday? The news is all fiction then?

He's likely trying to say that nobody can have all of the facts, and therefore needs to fictionalize, but as someone who is as well read as he is (and I know he is), he should know better. Many historical nonfiction writers are not afraid to admit their knowledge gaps, or missing history, etc.

History is listed among the Humanities, not under Social or Behavioral Sciences. It consists of gathering facts and various elements from a variety of disciplines, then assessing and recognizing patterns, and finally developing a hypothesis, narrative, or list of verified components to present a story about what we believe took place in the past. That is a rough description of historiography,., Hence what novelists or fiction writers do has many similarities to the art of history writing.

I know someone in Portland, OR, who was born in North Wales, but grew up in the United States. He hosts a podcast, The British History Podcast. He is approaching 500 episodes. He and his wife, who has a Ph.D., from the London School of Economics in political science with strong background in sociology and some science and archeology, guide their listeners and continue to develop by demonstration just how history has been and is written and remembered. Thus, their work may be beneficial to this HF community.

Another element or component are archiveds. What is so freaking exciting is the digitalization of documents and images for Web access today! We are experiencing a revolution and a golden age of access to historical records. When documents and other source material from a period are gathered and retained, decisions must be made about what is preserved in archives. Time and space are always limited, even in our new digital era. So, priorities determine what is retained and remembered. The resources retained are by no means limited to documents. Folks might enjoy visiting or looking at some archives or asking a reference librarian for assistance. Or, perhaps ask someone at your local state/province/regional historical society. What get preserved shapes what is remembered and becomes part of “history.” As you might surmise, this is a process I delve into almost daily. Hope this is useful, :)