On writing historical fiction
Sunday, June 4th, 2006 06:42 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
tamaranthI've been reading quite a bit of historical fiction lately, and some thoughts are crystallising.
Good Enjoyable historical fiction (A Dead Man in Deptford, True History of the Kelly Gang, James Miranda Barry [but I'm only 10 pages into the latter]) is often written in a style that evokes the period in which it's set, even if the language is in no sense authentic.
Bad Irritating historical fiction (Bone House, the historical sections of The Conjuror's Bird, others that escape me) are written, often, in a bland and solemn style; a style that indicates that contractions, slang and humour are vile modernisms and to be avoided.
There are historical novels I've enjoyed recently that don't fit into the first category (The Crimson Petal and the White, The Penelopiad): in those, the voice is ahistoric or has a post-modern knowingness, a modern perspective.
When I write historical fiction, I aim for Style A: I suspect that Style C, though effervescent in the right hands, is much easier to get wrong.
There are historical novels I've enjoyed recently that don't fit into the first category (The Crimson Petal and the White, The Penelopiad): in those, the voice is ahistoric or has a post-modern knowingness, a modern perspective.
When I write historical fiction, I aim for Style A: I suspect that Style C, though effervescent in the right hands, is much easier to get wrong.
