Historical Fiction

[kevikens]

I suspect that many users of this website are readers of historical fiction. I hate to admit this, but it is my own favorite genre. Some of it is pretty good, where the author has done his research. I am sure Michael Shaara's Killer Angels comes to mind. His son, Jeff has written a number of historical novels ranging from the Revolutionary War World war II. I enjoy his books.

Recently I have come across Ralph Peters who I was surprised to realize is a featured guest on cable news where military matters come up. I found his "Cain at Gettysburg" hard to put down and the same for "Hell or Richmond". I wonder though, if the salty language, actually some pretty raunchy stuff was actually used by the troops at that time. Reminds me of a police locker room. Also I think he does not know how to load a cap and ball percussion revolver and like almost all writers of works of history, including non fiction, he does not know the monetary system in use during the Civil War. He has a character saying that "he would not give a nickel for..." when, of course, the five cent piece of the time was the silver half dime. But for the most part Ralph Peters gets it right.

So my question is do you read historical fiction, yourself? If so, who do you find to be both accurate and interesting and who would you recommend as an author of historical fiction?

 

[Greg Taylor]

I'm not much of a reader of historical fiction. Read and enjoyed Killer Angels. Started, but did not finish Gods and Generals. That's about it.

 

[DixieRifles]

I tend to stay away from Historical Novels. I read one and it took me a several months to shake out the info that I had stored in my mind about the battle but which was not verified as fact.

However..... my cousin wrote a historical novel about our family. It is heavily footnoted with both historical facts about the war and three specific regiments and with genealogical facts about our family. He documents 18 family members and in-laws who served in the War. So this is an exciting Novel to have on my shelf as it has family connections. Also I know the parts of the war history that is proven facts and the parts that is opinion. I still read something about the family and I have to call my 3rd cousin and ask him--- Was that based on fact or your imagination?

http://www.amazon.com/dp/1490724400/?tag=civilwartalkc-20

 

[Brendan]

Peters' work sounds interesting, thanks. I'll have to check his stuff out. Read Thomas Lowry's Sexual Misbehavior in the Civil War if you want to learn more about raunchy language of the period. He has a whole chapter on cussing!

Regarding historical fiction, Civil War vet Ambrose Bierce is my absolute favorite, though he only wrote short fiction on the subject. You can read his stories online here: http://www.ambrosebierce.org/works.html

 

[dlofting]

I do read historical fiction, but tend to stay away from books on the Civil War......but I have read "The Killer Angels" and "A Blaze of Glory". The first was a great book and the second was entertaining, but not quite in the same class.

I have read a number of Bernard Cornwell novels, and have found his Sharpe series to be historically accurate at least as far as my reading of Wellington and the Peninsular army goes.

I've also read the Aubrey/Maturin series by Patrick O'Brian. He replaces an historical figure like Thomas Cochrane with Jack Aubrey and builds a story around an actual incident or incidents. He tends to "bend" history to suit his purposes, but will explain that in a preface or historical note. His descriptions of the ships and Royal Navy of the time, including its customs and practices is historically accurate as far as I can tell.

 

[Lnwlf]

As a general rule, no, I do not read historical fiction. I would tend to pick a book apart if I see something that is incorrect, which ruins the pleasure of the read. I do like a good western though, and have many of Louis L'Amour's books.
I do applaud the folks that can string words together to form a story, and I am sure many of them try to stay historically correct, but the genre is just not my cup of tea.

 

[pamc153PA]

I have nothing against historical fiction. After all, The Killer Angels was what piqued my interest in the CW a long time ago. I have read some pretty good historical fiction over the years, but like Lnwlf said above, I tend to get stuck on what's fictionalized when I know the real facts, and have a hard time sometimes getting past that. It still gives me the willies to watch the movie Gettysburg and see the huge hill behind Longstreet when Pickett comes up to ask if he should send his men in, since there is no hill behind Seminary Ridge like that!

 

[Brendan]

Tough crowd! I recently finished a Civil War novel and now I'm more afraid than ever to put it out in the world...

I do share your frustration when it comes to inaccuracies, but movies and television make me cringe more than anything. I'm more interested in depictions of common soldiers than of generals and politicians. There's enough great secondary and primary source material out there to piece together an idea of what things were like for Robert E. Lee or Abe Lincoln without needing to pour over fictional recreations. For me, great historical war fiction is a sort of "literary reenactment," as Craig Warren puts it.

 

[Scotsman]

I do not care for historical fiction books. There are so many fascinating true stories and events to read and write about, I am not sure of the value of them. My bigger concern, however, is the introduction of even more inaccuracies and fictionalized accounts than currently exist within the public's understanding of the past.

 

[nitrofd]

As a rule I need footnotes and a bibliography

 

[huskerblitz]

Reading historical fiction is a lot like watching a film version of the era. You need to know going in that it's not non-fiction or a documentary and its purpose to entertain. If one is unable, or unwilling, to remember that they need to simply avoid the genre.

 

[lakertaker]

As a historical fiction author (which I'm not), I wouldn't worry about the fact nit-pickers too much. It's going to be a small part of the audience. Humans have enjoyed a good story since we've been writing on cave walls. Don't see that changing any time too soon. Herman Wouk wrote some great WWII stuff. As a young person, James Michener introduced us to Texas, Hawaii, the South Pacific etc. Never let the facts get in the way of a good story!

 

[Brendan]

How many of those who don't like historical fiction are reenactors? You can research your impression exhaustively, but when it comes down to it, you have to make choices using a combination of informed judgement and imagination. Is that not, essentially, historical fiction in motion?

 

[GELongstreet]

I´m an avid fan of historical fiction ... and for sure not only the civil war. Beside ACW-related books I read e.g.

Aubrey-Maturin series (British Navy 19th c.)
Hornblower series (British Navy 19th c.)
Steel series (British Army 18th c.)
Hayden series (British Navy 19th c.)
Eagle series (Roman Legion 1st c.)
everything by Bernard Cornwell (though Stonehenge was ****)
everything by Rebecca Gable (Medieval Britain)
several books by Gisbert Haefs (ancient mediteranian world)
books from Robyn Young (Knights Templar & Medieval Scotland)
the other Shaara books (Revolution and Mexican war)

Hm, in the end my booktaste seems pretty anglophile ... I blame the quality and quantity of the available books!

 

[tmh10]

I don't have a problem with historical fiction. I tend to read more non historical fiction, however. Even though I have read book after book over the years, I continue to learn new things everytime I get a new one. I also have been known to reread my old ones untill a new one is obtained.

 

[Scotsman]

How many of those who don't like historical fiction are reenactors? You can research your impression exhaustively, but when it comes down to it, you have to make choices using a combination of informed judgement and imagination. Is that not, essentially, historical fiction in motion?

I used to be a reenactor. Reenacting incorporates an element of fiction--although it varies according to the participant.

While I do not care for historical fiction writing, I have less problem with historical movies or reenacting (as an activity). I approach them as different forms of media. To me, reading is mostly about the sharing of information. I rarely read purely for entertainment purposes. (That does not mean I do not enjoy reading--but that I almost only enjoy reading that which contributes something to my understanding of a topic.) On the other hand, I do enjoy movies for pure entertainment.

Reenacting certainly included an element of entertainment, but was still primarily a means of sharing information and history for me. I reenacted for 10 years, and during that time I never adopted any persona at the events (like some of my colleagues did) and I never I went into first-person acting around the public. I always spoke to the public as a modern reenactor dressed as a person of the past. I also never felt as if I were carrying on the legacy of any regiment or soldiers. I saw myself as a historian who reenacted to learn and experience an element of the past and share that with the public, more in the form of teaching than portraying. I left reenacting when my means of learning and sharing Civil War history turned more to the academic and scholarly route.

 

[phil1861]

I don't read much HF but I write it. You have to read and study mostly non-fiction to write civil war HF convincingly. I'm a reenactor and that informs a lot of my writing as well experientially. I've not read any Peters but I'm surprised that he wrote that in about the nickle. But, one can't tell much how an editor might have a lot of sway on making a period piece sound like Viet Nam set in the Americas if they believe that is what their readers expect when picking up a military book.

As far as myth goes, probably more has been promulgated by serious non-fiction than in fiction - where the research relies upon what another historian has chronicled taking for granted that they themselves validated the information.

 

[IcarusPhoenix]

I suspect that many users of this website are readers of historical fiction. I hate to admit this, but it is my own favorite genre. Some of it is pretty good, where the author has done his research. I am sure Michael Shaara's Killer Angels comes to mind. His son, Jeff has written a number of historical novels ranging from the Revolutionary War World war II. I enjoy his books.

Recently I have come across Ralph Peters who I was surprised to realize is a featured guest on cable news where military matters come up. I found his "Cain at Gettysburg" hard to put down and the same for "Hell or Richmond". I wonder though, if the salty language, actually some pretty raunchy stuff was actually used by the troops at that time. Reminds me of a police locker room. Also I think he does not know how to load a cap and ball percussion revolver and like almost all writers of works of history, including non fiction, he does not know the monetary system in use during the Civil War. He has a character saying that "he would not give a nickel for..." when, of course, the five cent piece of the time was the silver half dime. But for the most part Ralph Peters gets it right.

So my question is do you read historical fiction, yourself? If so, who do you find to be both accurate and interesting and who would you recommend as an author of historical fiction?

Personally, I feel that Cain at Gettysburg is by far Peters' weakest work; the rest of his Civil War novels are a mystery series under the pen name "Owen Parry" centering around a Welsh-immigrant Union officer named Abel Jones, the first of which is Faded Coat of Blue; he's not written any in several years, which is irksome, since he's only up to early-1863.

Beyond that, I have a weakness for most of Jeff Shaara's continuation of his father's style (his World War II stuff is a tad weak), and I mostly agree with dlofting and GELongstreer about Cornwall; the Sharpe series is almost universally brilliant, most of the Medieval stuff is quite good, and The Fort is an interesting take. I find his American Civil War stuff, however, to be both stilted and absurdly Euro-centric.

On the non-war end and moving back towards historical mysteries, Ellis Peters' Cadfael works are absolutely amazing.

 

[Nathanb1]

Phil has a good point. Years ago I met an author who writes crime novels set in the Texas Panhandle. Her publishers (and editors) are British. She sent her latest novel for editing...and got it back with a note. They'd like her to change one scene so all the ranch hands could be called with a dinner bell--one of those triangle things you whack with another piece of metal.

Well.....no. The ranch was supposedly more than 15 sections, and the hands were scattered over it. For those unused to Texas ranch measurements, one section is 640 acres. She wrote back in a note explaining that the chances of anyone hearing that bell were slim to none--and she'd just leave it as it was, thank you very much.

I'm sure she's not the only one who has had that experience.

 

[IcarusPhoenix]

one section is 640 acres.

Or, to put it another way, a square mile.