Historical Fiction

[FarawayFriend]

Does 19th century German writing and vocabulary seem richer than modern German as seems to be the case with English?

Yes, it does. And especially Fontane was a master of metaphors, you can translate nearly any outward action into an emotion. I wish my English would be better so I would be able to describe it better. Some folks find him boring because nearly every German student had to read one of his novels and most have not discovered the beauty behind that old-fashioned but somewhat refined language.

Which of Fontane's books have you read?

All of them.
I liked best his 4-volume novel "Vor dem Sturm" which describes the last winter of the Napoleonic era, Prussia's struggle for freedom from French government by describing the lives of some noblemen and their families and some scenes from everyday life in Berlin in 1812.
Then I like "Frau Jenny Treibel", "Der Stechlin" and "Unwiederbringlich". And all the other Berlin novels.

 

[damYankee]

Historical novels should be called Historical Fiction, which is what it really is. W.E.B. Griffin is a good example, I have been reading his book "Battleground" which is about Guadalcanal, an event that is well documented, yet according to him the 5th Marine's fought the battle.
The 5th Marines were not formed until after Guadalcanal.

 

[JeffBrooks]

Historical novels should be called Historical Fiction, which is what it really is. W.E.B. Griffin is a good example, I have been reading his book "Battleground" which is about Guadalcanal, an event that is well documented, yet according to him the 5th Marine's fought the battle.
The 5th Marines were not formed until after Guadalcanal.

This is less likely to have been an error on Griffin's part and more likely to have been a literary device to allow flexibility that makes it easier for fictional characters to take action during a historical event. Another example is Richard Sharpe in the Cornwall novels; he serves in the South Essex Regiment, which is entirely fictitious.

When writing Shattered Nation, I placed my fictional character James McFadden in Company F of the 7th Texas Infantry. In actual fact, Company F had already been disbanded by the time the Atlanta Campaign began. The names of the other men of Company F are the actual names of men who served in the 7th Texas, though their personalities were entirely the product of my imagination. This kind of thing simply allows the author of historical fiction greater flexibility.

 

[John Davison]

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?

First and foremost, Patrick O'Brian for his brilliant Aubrey/ Maturin series of Naval life and operations during the 19th century Napoleanic wars. Closely following would be Kenneth Roberts for his novels surrounding the times of the French and Indian War and The American Revolution. Read either of these literary giants and "you are there."

 

[jay gale]

I almost never read it because there are far too many incompetent hacks like Jeff Shaara out there who think that they actually know the history and actually think that they can write (Shaara can't even begin to hold his late father's pen--he's an awful, terrible writer). The overwhelming majority of the so-called historical fiction out there is just atrocious (with no offense intended to anyone here). I have so little time for pleasure reading that I elect not to spend time reading atrocious fiction. Besides, there are enough interesting things that actually happened to keep me busy for the rest of whatever time I may have on this planet of ours.

and I thought I was the only one that held that opinion of Jeff Shaara......

 

[John Davison]

I almost never read it because there are far too many incompetent hacks like Jeff Shaara out there who think that they actually know the history and actually think that they can write (Shaara can't even begin to hold his late father's pen--he's an awful, terrible writer). The overwhelming majority of the so-called historical fiction out there is just atrocious (with no offense intended to anyone here). I have so little time for pleasure reading that I elect not to spend time reading atrocious fiction. Besides, there are enough interesting things that actually happened to keep me busy for the rest of whatever time I may have on this planet of ours.

Geeze, now I'm sorry I read all that trash -- and liked it. So many "historians" write for fellow historians and the result is labored prose that's enough to gag a maggot. No offence to maggots. Judging by the current population of our country, any device that will provide the motivation to actually read should be applauded.

 

[M E Wolf]

MOVING THREAD TO "BOOK AND MOVIE REVIEW" Forums

M. E. Wolf
POSTED IN THE CAPACITY OF MODERATOR
July 20, 2014 9:50 p.m.

 

[BillO]

I like historical novels but I realize what the novel part means. I recently read a book about Gen. Custer's son flying a dirigible across the west and he was captured by Indians riding dinosaurs. I'm pretty sure it was mostly fiction but it was a fun read. They are only a problem when they try to pass as factual.

 

[huskerblitz]

I've read a lot of John Jakes books. I'm obviously a huge fan since I have most of his historical fiction books. And he's pretty accurate and is tedious about it. But I also understand those who don't like the flowery writing, or the definitively good or evil characters he includes (very few fall in between) or the steamy love scenes that, as he said, is to get females to buy the book. I get that it's not everyone's cup of tea. But the purpose for his books is pleasure, not historical research. I mean seriously, if people can't understand that then they probably deserve the indigestion they get from it.

 

[7th Mississippi Infantry]

Many times there's a blurry line between historical fiction and novels set in a historical background. In either case, to me. . . it depends upon the author's ability to successfully blend the two together.

As far as alternative history, nothing against the genre . . . but it's not something I'm interested in reading.

I couldn't get past the 2nd chapter of Turtledove's Guns of the South. However, I thoroughly enjoyed Robert Conroy's 1901.

 

[Nathanb1]

LOL. After the second chapter of Guns of the South is when it got good. I enjoyed the heck out of it. I never thought I'd say that, but as a teacher, you get absolutely crazed reading nonfiction and teaching all day. I usually do a big spurt of nonfiction during the end of the summer--but during the school year, I want something I don't have to think too hard about. Like someone mentioned, I grew up with Louis L'Amour, and as he used to say, if he wrote about a rock, it was there. I like that. I also like great nonfiction like that of Mr. Wittenberg. Just depends on the mood. And no one here has mentioned Howard Bahr and his wonderful trilogy on Franklin...but it should be.

I do teach English. We do read novels. I enjoy good writing, no matter the genre. And a final shout out to the much-maligned Abraham Lincoln, Vampire Hunter, which turned several of my kids on to history, because some mean old teacher wouldn't answer their questions and made 'em look it up.

 

[Nathanb1]

and I thought I was the only one that held that opinion of Jeff Shaara......

Naw. I think you'll find some reviews around here somewhere...I honestly wanted Albert Sidney Johnston to die wayyyyy before he did.

 

[huskerblitz]

I'm very open about the genre. My 8th graders once each semester have to read a book based in history and do a project over it. My goal is to open another genre to them that perhaps they hadn't thought about. I remind them that the books they pick (almost all pick fiction) are BASED in history and not meant to be an exact history. If I demanded they all read non-fiction book I'm not sure they would ever pick up a book ever again.

 

[7th Mississippi Infantry]

LOL. After the second chapter of Guns of the South is when it got good. I enjoyed the heck out of it. I never thought I'd say that, but as a teacher, you get absolutely crazed reading nonfiction and teaching all day.

I understand. Quite a few people enjoyed it.
When the AK-47's appeared, all I could think about was Spock arguing with Kirk about violation of the Prime Directive.

 

[timk]

My daughter has to read "All Quiet on the Western Front" for summer reading. I grabbed it first and just finished it minutes ago. A great, great book. Highly recommended.

 

[jay gale]

I do teach English. We do read novels. I enjoy good writing, no matter the genre. And a final shout out to the much-maligned Abraham Lincoln, Vampire Hunter, which turned several of my kids on to history, because some mean old teacher wouldn't answer their questions and made 'em look it up.

I really liked that movie........ol' Abe swung a mean axe.

 

[Nathanb1]

Oh yeah! Good to see you, Tim!

I forgot to mention classics like True Grit (watching the film right now), Woe to Live On, and Old Yeller/Savage Sam. Good grief. They still resonate. They're built around history, and the "authenticity" is what makes them great.

 

[Shadow9216]

Time to confess: I've written several books set during the Civil War, ranging from novellas up to full novels, which are centered around a proto-intelligence officer. I wouldn't say they're historical fiction, rather they use a historical setting to explore various concepts relating to information and intelligence (NOT the same LOL) and how someone in that time might have developed methods to exploit them. It also allows me to obliquely explore more modern themes, by removing them from their present-day setting. I try to get the history correct, knowing there are people out there who would happily savage any historical errors (Main Street doesn't run north-south, you idiot!) while ignoring the actual story, but at the end of the day I'm writing a story about information warfare, not a history book.

 

[FarawayFriend]

Time to confess: I've written several books set during the Civil War, ranging from novellas up to full novels, which are centered around a proto-intelligence officer. I wouldn't say they're historical fiction, rather they use a historical setting to explore various concepts relating to information and intelligence (NOT the same LOL) and how someone in that time might have developed methods to exploit them. It also allows me to obliquely explore more modern themes, by removing them from their present-day setting. I try to get the history correct, knowing there are people out there who would happily savage any historical errors (Main Street doesn't run north-south, you idiot!) while ignoring the actual story, but at the end of the day I'm writing a story about information warfare, not a history book.

Shadow, did you publish these novels? If so, would you mind to reveal the titles to us? From what I have come to know about you in these forums and from the content you described, I would be very much interested in reading them!
(Maybe I have them already waiting in my shelf ...)

And as this seems to be the time to confess, so I have to confess that I'm reading (end enjoying) the "Wagons West" series by Dana Fuller Ross. 24 volumes - and I have read until vol. 13 (Idaho) up to now.
Bang!
Just as Nate said, an easy entertaining read without much thinking about. Just right for bedtime reading:

"The Wagons West series by Noel Bertram Gerson, under the pseudonym of Dana Fuller Ross, contains a blend of western romance and adventure. Gerson, a prolific writer, wrote numerous works under many pseudonyms including the White Indian novels, which he wrote as Donald Clayton Porter. The first of the Wagons West series begins in 1837 with the organization of the first large wagon train of settlers headed for the Oregon territory. The series goes on to chronicle the settling of the West, tracing the lives of a large cast of characters"
From: http://www.loc.gov/nls/bibliographies/minibibs/wagonsw.html

 

[JPWalton]

One of the reasons why some history fans can't enjoy historical fiction is because they are unable to see past their own opinions.

The whole point of historical fiction is to fill in the gaps and add personal color to factual events. For example, you know Jefferson, Madison, and Hamilton met to forge the Compromise of 1790 over dinner. Yet even with all the documentation we have of the event, if you wanted to write a story about it, you would need to invent details as to what was the fare that night, and what the conversation outside of the compromise itself was. All those things require an author to make (hopefully well-informed) choices.

Now some people would quibble with every single detail and every single choice, not because they were historically inaccurate, but simply because they disagree. How can something be wrong if there is no proof to it one way or the other, but it is a possibility?

Such people can't see past their own opinions. Of course, they don't see it that way, but will instead present what is merely a difference of opinion as a matter of fact and accuracy. You see this sort of thing in reviews of historical fiction all the time.

No one is immune to it, but I think being aware of this sort of thing makes for an interesting exercise. When you read something and it strikes you as strange, ask whether that is because you think it's flat out wrong, or because you disagree with the way the matter has been colored.

And then there are always the people who don't read anything that isn't non-fiction in the first place. That's fine, but they shouldn't pretend their issues with a novel are anything but the fact that they don't like novels.