How Historical is Historical?

Zelenka · Oct 27, 2007

Just wondering - at what point in time do stories cease to be 'Historical fiction' and turn into, what, literary, mainstream, what have you? Reason I ask, a friend's persuaded me to have a look at an old project again, but it's set in the early 1960s. It just got me thinking - is that historical or not? I'm in a group on livejournal (not liverjournal, as I keep writing for some reason) where the cut off point is after the Second World War, but I mean I still need to do 'historical research' to get the period right.

So thought I'd ask - where do you consider 'Historical' fiction stops?
JessR

donroc · Oct 27, 2007

In the Los Angeles Unified High school district, there was a course called, oxymoronically, CURRENT HISTORY, which essentially was a current events class. I have seen fiction set in the 1950s reviewed in the HISTORICAL NOVEL SOCIETY's magazine. I suppose it depends upon with whom you speak.

www.donaldmichaelplatt.com

lkp · Oct 27, 2007

I think one general rule is that it is historical if it is about events before the author's birth.

donroc · Oct 27, 2007

Yikes! That omits everything after 1932 for me.

Does that make me a primary home front child's POV WWII resource for the young'ns?

www.donaldmichaelplatt.com

Puma · Oct 27, 2007

There've been some discussions about this before on this forum. I think the general rule is 50 years. But ... if someone writes a novel about the Vietnam War that is firmly based in fact, it sure the heck isn't contemporary and I don't think I'd classify it as Mainstream or general fiction. Same for if someone wrote about the fall of the Berlin Wall. I think there's a gray area for quite a bit of the 20th century with the determination of genre sort of dependent on what the story's about and how it's written. This is one of those issues where I think an author querying may be better off not to classify by genre and let an agent/publisher do the classification. Puma

Puma · Oct 27, 2007

Donroc's comment triggered another thought - items are considered an antique after 25 years. So if a 1982 car is an antique ... why isn't 1982 in the realm of historical?

If you look at it another way, contemporary is a very short period of time - what's in between contemporary and historical? I'm not sure there's much of anything. Puma

donroc · Oct 27, 2007

During the 1960s-80s, Oriental rug dealers I bought from used to classify pre-WWI rugs as antique, and everything after that semi-antique up to recent, which were called used.

I cannot imagine a classification such as semi-Historical novel. I would consider a WWII novel as historical.

I agree about the foggy area, but if pressed, I would use the HNS book review section as a guide.

www.donaldmichaelplatt.com

lkp · Oct 27, 2007

donroc said:
Yikes! That omits everything after 1932 for me.

Does that make me a primary home front child's POV WWII resource for the young'ns?

www.donaldmichaelplatt.com

I know. Chilling, isn't it?

But I think Puma is right, that as far as the market goes, there is a grey area for near-cntemporary stuff and it might be worth just letting the agent/publisher decide (eg. "I am seeking representation for a commercial/literary/mainstream novel set in the Vietnam era.")

I do remember Miss. Snark saying that a novel about the '80s would be a hard sell for an agent because it is both too far away to feel contemporary and not far enough away to feel nostalgic.

funidream · Oct 27, 2007

Some interesting viewpoints here -

http://www.historicalnovelsociety.org/definition.htm

pdr · Oct 28, 2007

The tricky bit is...

50 years or Events which occurred before the writer was born and thus they have to research for the novel.

I feel like cavilling at this because when I write literary/mainstream in a contemporary setting I still have to do a lot of research!

Puma · Oct 28, 2007

That was good for a chuckle, pdr - me too. Puma

Zelenka · Oct 28, 2007

Thanks folks,
This one I think would again be 'historical fantasy' as I'm playing around a bit, but I was sure it'd still be historical. But I agee on the research thing.

job · Oct 28, 2007

I think I'd call it historical if the events occur beyond living memory. That is, there's no one left for whom the events are 'contemporary'.

Look at Bronte's work or Dickens' or Austen's. These were not written as 'historical' novels. They became historical because the work stayed, stuck like a bug in amber, while the years moved onward.

So the Boer War would be firmly historical novel territory. The Edwardian era, likewise. But the Roaring Twenties and the Depression are still 'modern', because we have grandparents who can talk directly to us about them. Sayer's work will be historical when that generation that drove cars with running boards dies off.

Zelenka · Oct 28, 2007

Dickens and Austen though were writing about their contemporary period, more or less, wheras I'm not. My book's set fifteen years before I was born (and I don't have any grandparents to ask, btw). To me that's history. If I wrote about something in the 90s, however, something that is within my lifetime, I'd be more inclined to call it 'contemporary'.

job · Oct 28, 2007

JessRamage said:
Dickens and Austen though were writing about their contemporary period, more or less, wheras I'm not. My book's set fifteen years before I was born (and I don't have any grandparents to ask, btw). To me that's history. If I wrote about something in the 90s, however, something that is within my lifetime, I'd be more inclined to call it 'contemporary'.

And your definition is as good as anyone else's.
May I go on to say that the question of definition is largely useful in approaching marketing.

So the question becomes somewhat -- what do agents and editors and bookstores think of as 'historical'? Can one market 1930 or 1940 or 1950 as a 'historical' or will it be classified as 'General Fiction'?

Checking Amazon. (Books/literature and Fiction/Genre Fiction/Historical) we see hundreds of "World War" hits in the historical category. Proof enough that the first half of the Twentieth Century is considered historical fiction from a marketing standpoint.

Whether these books would be shelved with general fiction or Historical fiction probably depends on the book itself, I should think.

Woof · Nov 22, 2007

It think it's important to point out that history has already been divided into several periods, such as prehistoric, ancient, classical, modern etc. And the period that defines modern history can be as narrow and broad as one wishes, depending on the context. I think that what determines a modern 'historical' novel depends on the nature of events within the story. For instance, if there were a fictional novel set in Dallas on or around Nov. 22, 1963 and included the very real event of JFK's assassination, I believe that such a story would rank as modern or contemporary history, because that one single event was a pivotal point that most people agree changed the course of history-- for the United States, and indeed the whole world.

donroc · Nov 22, 2007

All this reminds me of one of the most evil men who ever lived, the wannnabe Nazi, HENRY FORD, who also declared HISTORY IS BUNK.

www.donaldmichaelplatt.com

Zelenka · Nov 22, 2007

Woof said:
It think it's important to point out that history has already been divided into several periods, such as prehistoric, ancient, classical, modern etc. And the period that defines modern history can be as narrow and broad as one wishes, depending on the context. I think that what determines a modern 'historical' novel depends on the nature of events within the story. For instance, if there were a fictional novel set in Dallas on or around Nov. 22, 1963 and included the very real event of JFK's assassination, I believe that such a story would rank as modern or contemporary history, because that one single event was a pivotal point that most people agree changed the course of history-- for the United States, and indeed the whole world.

I have a novel that's set in 1966 and involves situations that were important to that time (the London underworld, for instance, along the lines of Jake Arnott's novels), but not one particular, pivotal event (unless you count the world cup final, which is mentioned), so then is that mainstream rather than historical as it's more modern?

See to me that'd still be historical because the whole atmosphere and situation is peculiar to that time, as well as the other reasons of personal experience I've mentioned above.

donroc · Nov 22, 2007

You are right.

JessRamage said:
I have a novel that's set in 1966 and involves situations that were important to that time (the London underworld, for instance, along the lines of Jake Arnott's novels), but not one particular, pivotal event (unless you count the world cup final, which is mentioned), so then is that mainstream rather than historical as it's more modern?

See to me that'd still be historical because the whole atmosphere and situation is peculiar to that time, as well as the other reasons of personal experience I've mentioned above.

I agree it is Historical. Call it recent historical or modern historical, it sure as hell ain't contemporary.

Again, if the Historical Novel Review lists books from that era, then IT IS.

Good luck with it.

www.donaldmichaelplatt.com

truelyana · Nov 22, 2007

JessRamage said:
Thanks folks,
This one I think would again be 'historical fantasy' as I'm playing around a bit, but I was sure it'd still be historical. But I agee on the research thing.

That sounds a lot like mine too, but I'm keeping the speech in usage with the period. Staying with the subject, I was wondering if anyone could help me with something. I'm unsure of what 'fiction' means, and wanted to know what 'fiction' stands for in 'Historical fiction'?

From what I have read, we write events that happened in History. Is this part of what 'fiction' is? Linking real research into the story, or you can pretty much make up what you want?

Woof · Nov 22, 2007

JessRamage said:
I have a novel that's set in 1966 and involves situations that were important to that time (the London underworld, for instance, along the lines of Jake Arnott's novels), but not one particular, pivotal event (unless you count the world cup final, which is mentioned), so then is that mainstream rather than historical as it's more modern?

See to me that'd still be historical because the whole atmosphere and situation is peculiar to that time, as well as the other reasons of personal experience I've mentioned above.

You raise an important question about shared cultural experiences and how they may be perceived differently in other countries. My guess would be that the reading public in Britain would be more likely to view your novel as historical than say, readers in the U.S. or other English-speaking countries. This is not to say that Canadians, for example would find the London underworld of 1966 and the world cup final, uninteresting. But perhaps they would not view those events in the same historical vein as their British counterparts.

girlyswot · Nov 22, 2007

truelyana said:
That sounds a lot like mine too, but I'm keeping the speech in usage with the period. Staying with the subject, I was wondering if anyone could help me with something. I'm unsure of what 'fiction' means, and wanted to know what 'fiction' stands for in 'Historical fiction'?

From what I have read, we write events that happened in History. Is this part of what 'fiction' is? Linking real research into the story, or you can pretty much make up what you want?

Depends who you ask! We've discussed similar questions at length here, here and here.

You'll see that there are some of us who are completely committed to as much historical accuracy as possible and others who are more concerned to tell our story and have enough accuracy to make the story feel plausible. But the discussions raise a lot of important issues, not least with respect to publishing, that it would be worth reading through them.

Zelenka · Nov 22, 2007

Woof said:
You raise an important question about shared cultural experiences and how they may be perceived differently in other countries. My guess would be that the reading public in Britain would be more likely to view your novel as historical than say, readers in the U.S. or other English-speaking countries. This is not to say that Canadians, for example would find the London underworld of 1966 and the world cup final, uninteresting. But perhaps they would not view those events in the same historical vein as their British counterparts.

My point was though that the historical aspects in my idea aren't pivotal world events (even if England would like to think that of the '66 Cup final

). Mine more involves the cultural setting of the period, and what I'm asking then is, if it doesn't have some central event like the Kennedy assassination, is it no longer historical? For instance, if instead of being set in Dallas in '63, the story was set in Iowa in '67 and followed a story that was based on attitudes and beliefs at the time, would it not be historical any more, but rather mainstream or literary? That's what I was asking.

See, my thinking on it is that 'historical' fiction doesn't necessarily have to feature a well-known event in order to be classed 'historical', is what I'm saying.

girlyswot · Nov 22, 2007

JessRamage said:
See, my thinking on it is that 'historical' fiction doesn't necessarily have to feature a well-known event in order to be classed 'historical', is what I'm saying.

I agree. I'm not even sure that it has to feature any 'real' events at all, does it? Well-known or otherwise.

Zelenka · Nov 22, 2007

girlyswot said:
I agree. I'm not even sure that it has to feature any 'real' events at all, does it? Well-known or otherwise.

That's exactly my thinking - it just leads back to the question of time rather than content - how long ago from the present day does a story have to be set to be called 'historical'. Many historical novels that are obviously historical don't involve real events, or else have them as a background to the main plot. Sort of ties into the other threads you listed about fiction vs historical too.

How Historical is Historical?

Going home!

Historicals and Horror rule

Historicals and Horror rule

Retired and loving it!

Retired and loving it!

Historicals and Horror rule

Retired and loving it!

Going home!

In the end, it's just you and the manuscript

Going home!

In the end, it's just you and the manuscript

Outward Hound

Historicals and Horror rule

Going home!

Historicals and Horror rule

Set yourself free

Outward Hound

Going home!

Going home!