Saturday, April 25, 2009

When historical fiction is more fiction than history

I just returned from Grub Street's 'Muse and the Marketplace'. Although I'm a published writer, my novel The Stone House Diaries didn't launch my writing career, leaving me a humble librarian (I don't know any terribly vain librarians). I've attended several writing workshops, focusing on the craft, and they usually sent me home spiritually recharged. 'Muse and the Marketplace' left me feeling like toast. Listening to agents, writers with several titles published who can't get any publicity...

Years ago I wrote book reviews for Library Journal (hell of a segue, eh?). I enjoyed getting the titles, I enjoyed working against a deadline, I enjoyed seeing my name in print. I did this for over fifteen years before I got tired of seeing my name in print (oh, that's a lie, I never tire of that), but I was getting a stale diet of Irish history. They were sending it to me because I had an appropriate graduate degree, but when I asked for more variety... I stopped getting sent any titles.
So I'm hoping this blog lets me do the reviewing again.

A very useful requirement of LJ reviews is that the reviewer is supposed to advise libraries on whether or not to purchase: was it good for public libraries, academic libraries, or just good for a gift? Or was it a sad waste of trees? It required me to objectively decide whether others might not enjoy reading the book whether I'd enjoyed it or not.

During today's 'Muse and the Marketplace' author Kathleen Kent spoke of her debut novel, The Heretic's Child, and answered a question from the audience on historical accuracy that it wasn't that important to get the history down, so long as you've convinced the reader of the setting. I haven't read her book yet, but her comment irritated me. I expect she's correct, because several years ago Joyce Carol Oates wrote a book about Niagara Falls, titled 'The Falls'. She begins at Goat Island and creates a toll bridge in 1964 - there have been no toll bridges since 1880. I don't think anyone called her on it, which is why I suspect Kent is right. She told of getting an email from a historian of the Salem Witch Trials, enumerating her mistakes, and telling the story just made Kent smile in amusement.
For the record, I care about the history...

No comments:

Post a Comment