Story vs Vignette - Historical Plots

c.e.lawson · Oct 25, 2007

Puma said:
Girlyswot - I think you're right on the interpretation of plot - that there are differences and that's one of the reasons there's confusion in this thread. To me a plot is figuring out how you're going to have Guy A bump off Guy B and get away with it. You figure out the set up, the rising action, the climax, and the conclusion (when Guy B sails off to the South Seas.) A story having to do with the Conquest of Mexico or the French Revolution doesn't have a plot unless you create one extraneous to the normal course of events. And I don't think I agree with you on the "why" being a plot - it's a possible explanation, but it's not the creation of the story, the action. Changing POV isn't going to change the "action" (plot) in a work based on a historical event - it's a different perspective, but the outcome is going to be the same except that depending on which side of a battle the POV is on, the MC is either going to win or lose. Puma

Ahh - plot vs. character driven could be the issue here.

I think one of the problems, Puma, is that you're thinking of story in terms of a 'plot' comprised of historical events. But character driven stories can have a completely satisfying story arc -- a beginning, middle and end, while at the same time the historical events are occurring and impact the character in any number of ways without the need for inventing any original characters. I gave you three examples of this from your Cowes story and didn't invent a single original character. You can have great leeway in what happens emotionally/psychologically to your characters but still keep it all firmly in the context of the history, and what is central to the story is what's happening within the character. That's still a story. And in my opinion that's what many people read historical fiction for.

pdr · Oct 26, 2007

Goodness!

Look where we're going! Food for thought indeed. So many useful ideas to think about. Thank you!

For more information on Faction look it up. There are some interesting Faction comps run by some of the literary journals.

A plot is the story line, using Kipling's Honest Serving Men: what, where, when, how, why, who, and it doesn't matter that the main historical events cannot change. It's how those historical events have an impact on the people in your story, it's what the history does to their lives and how they perceive it, that matters. And it will be different for each of the characters, whether you create them or use the real ones.

This is why I say that in an historical novel the history is almost a character. It causes conflict and drama, tension and emotion too.

Puma, history is meant to be about people. And the events will be seen through people's eyes. Cromwell is a good example. I'm sure your own Civil War produces the same opposite opinions. Even one's political leanings alter how an event is viewed.

But whether you are using a real historical figure or a created character there is a story to tell using all the skills of a fiction writer.

Historical verisimilitude is only one part of that.
But a bloody important one. It's why readers read historical novels. They want to 'feel' what it was like 'back then' and if they discover that the author has not 'told them the truth' they will not trust hir again.

And before we get steam rollered into accuracy versus non-accuracy, can I add that we all, and that includes readers too, know that it is impossible to know what it was like 200, 500 or 5000 years ago. All the reader asks for is a world created by a skilled and knowledgeable writer which rings true for the reader.

Puma · Oct 26, 2007

Hi C.E. - Yes, you did give me three examples in the Cowes story. I didn't respond to those suggestions because there's another issue there. Cowes was designed as a short story. I think it's best if short stories don't have multiple scene changes - they should be about one event. Your suggestions were basically all lengthening the time frame (and scenes) to incorporate the voyage. I feel that for a short story, any expansion/increase in plot should be limited to the scene when the immigrants land.

But yes, character driven - Cowes and Agnes both are worthy of stories because of the characters. The history is the setting.

pdr - I think you and I are basically on the same page - saying things a tad differently - but the interpretation comes out pretty much the same. Thank you. Puma

wee · Oct 26, 2007

This conversation is very interesting. Maybe it is the weird feedback loop in my head, from growing up in a tiny little town where you knew every story about every person & how they were woven together... I'm always looking for the unknown detail...

I'm looking at a period of history where I'm trying to represent two sides. On one side all I can do is research the culture & know a few details about what happened to them, & then try to derive a completely fictional account that the reader will sympathize with & be interested in, within those parameters.

On the other side, I have a multi-page timeline & literally hundreds of pages of notes taken from more than a dozen books ... just on this ONE event, one small time period!

However, I still see a dozen different ways to build the story on the well-known side. Dozens of ways to build conflict, motivate these characters. Perhaps it is because the events themselves were so rife with intrigue -- political & personal -- filling in the blanks is almost too easy.

And that's just what I myself am coming up with -- someone else would think of a dozen other ways.

Isn't the point that even if you love history, you can find out the facts for yourself by reading up on it. What you want as a reader is to see these people as real, with emotions & motivations, and reactions? That they were more than just the sum of their actions? Can't you build all that without betraying the history?

In most cases, if the history can't be portrayed with changing it for interest, then I don't understand why it is being portrayed at all... (I'm thinking specifically of that movie Braveheart here, actually).

wee

girlyswot · Oct 26, 2007

wee said:
In most cases, if the history can't be portrayed with changing it for interest, then I don't understand why it is being portrayed at all... (I'm thinking specifically of that movie Braveheart here, actually).
wee

I'm thinking of the one where the Americans discovered the Enigma machine!!!

I agree, Wee, this has been a really interesting and useful discussion. It's certainly helped me to think a lot more clearly about what I'm trying to do in my so-called WIP. There, the 'story' is all laid out for me in the original myth that is the inspiration (except right at the end where the clay tablets are lost/broken). But I plan to have the focus in a different place from the original so that the 'plot' will have a different driving force to it and the reader will see things in a different way.

The basic story is: Daniel wants a son; eventually he gets one; son gets special bow; goddess decides she wants the bow and kills the son; Daniel's daughter goes to avenge her brother's death.

In the original, the focus is very clearly on the son. In mine, I plan to put the focus on the interaction between the two women - the sister and the goddess. Both appear in the original, but not as central characters.

I think that by changing this focus, the plot does change. It's no longer a story about how a man gains and loses a son (though that still happens), it's a story about how to become a victorious warrior woman.

So thanks, everyone for helping!

Doogs · Oct 26, 2007

Granted, it's not history, but I think "Rosencrantz and Guildenstern Are Dead" is a fantastic example of what we're discussing, in the way it weaves an entirely different story beneath the surface of Hamlet while in no way mistreating the original source.

It's the same idea of fixed points with a story weaved around them, and illustrates how shifting POV can radically alter the perception of events.

pdr · Oct 27, 2007

Exactly!

Perfect, Doogs, that shifted POV is what we historical writers need. Though I wouldn't mind having a tithe of Tom Stoppard's talent as well. He makes a script sing. I really enjoyed 'Shakespeare in Love', improbable though the plot was, because of his brilliant lines.

lkp · Oct 27, 2007

I read a couple of historical novels recently that didn't work for me, and this thread is helping me understand why. Each was about a powerful woman in a pre-modern society and they both tried to stick very closely to the historical record. I enjoyed the events and description of each character's childhood (where the authors' imaginations obviously had the most room to come into play) but when they got to the part about known historical events, I felt they both began to plod. It seemed like the authors were ticking through a checklist, one by one, of the known events of each character's life with the sole aim of getting to the end. There was no real story.

I think that's a danger (but an aviodable one) of writing historical fiction that sticks too closely to fact. The fact that one person was born, did stuff, then died, does not by itself create a story. Not even the fact that a person did a variety interesting things in an interesting time and place creates a story. The author has to do that.

But it doesn't mean that a novelist who wants to stick close to fact has to start inventing plots and characters in order to be interesting. Non-fiction historical writing, whether biographical or topical, solves that problem by requiring the author to come up with a thesis, an argument that binds the text together connecting each chapter to a larger idea or question. A thesis in non-fiction isn't the same thing as a story in fiction, but it can be the inspiration for a story, and it might not be a bad way to think if you want to write heavily factual historical novels.

Puma · Oct 27, 2007

That's a good observation and thought, lkp. One of the hazards in writing factual historical (my opinion) is when to end and how to end the story. There are events that are interesting in the period of time you're writing about, you can use some interesting filler to cover gaps, but what's the end of the story.

Looking at my Cowes story which started this whole thread - my main idea in writing it was because Franklin witnessed the arrival of the immigrant ship - something that didn't happen very often. It's a small historical fact. It was easy to add on the beginning about the ship's arrival and taking the immigrants up to City Hall with some filler about the sites in old Philadelphia. I could have ended the story with Franklin's signing the document (and maybe I should end it there), but it seemed logical to add some more about the Palatine immigrants and what they were facing so I took it on - but the ending (currently) leaves the latter part of the story hanging. If Cowes was part of a longer work, where I am now with the ending would be a chapter break, but for a short story it creates an incomplete ending. So you get into the hazard of plodding.

I think there's also a bit of an issue in what the purpose of the factual historical story is - what the market is. My factual Ohio historical is fine for someone who wants to know more about Ohio beginnings or someone who wants to have a feel for what life was like for their great grandparents, but it's not the compelling type of story with mass market appeal. I think it falls into a category of labor of love rather than work of passion - and that may be something of a way to differentiate how successful a WIP might be (and may be why some of the ones you've read recently fell flat in your opinion). Puma

lkp · Oct 27, 2007

Okay, Puma, I only just now *finally* went back and read the Cowes story that started this discussion (duh). I really liked it. And I think it works perfectly as a short story, as it is. If I were you, I'd do a couple more edits on the prose, just to get rid of a little wordiness and then I'd find a contest or a journal to send it to.

As I see it, your story in the Cowes piece is how two disparate, mutually suspicious groups become one. Even though the becoming one (ie. the British and Germans becoming American) takes place outside the world of your story, we know it is going to happen (the reference to Ben Franklin is a great pointer to the later history we know) and we read it with that in mind. So it was good that you didn't stop with Franklin's signature, but went back to Samuel and the Germans, and further follow-up on the Germans is not necessary (though it could be the seeds for an interesting novel, as some have said). To me, this is a fully realized and complete short story that takes a document and imagines the world surrounding it.

BardSkye · Oct 27, 2007

While "Cowes" left me wishing there was a novel underneath it, it didn't feel incomplete to me.

pdr · Oct 28, 2007

Actually...

I rather think that Cowes would work better as a short story if you used a different character's POV.

I'm not going to give my reasons because I think it would help Puma if everyone, who had time, tried to write just two or three opening paras of the Cowes story using their different character and POV.

Then we'd have a selection of brilliant examples (of course!) which would show what we've been trying to say about one piece of history and the different ways to write it.

Please excuse me! Looks like I'm stuck with two jobs until January!

Puma · Oct 28, 2007

Interesting thought, pdr - I'm game. Actually I had debated about starting the story on shipboard with the immigrants seeing Philadelphia for the first time (which would have been an automatic beginning if it was New York after the Statue of Liberty was put up). Puma

BardSkye · Oct 28, 2007

I'd like to try that. Should we tack it on the end of the Cowes thread rather than starting new ones?

Puma · Oct 28, 2007

I'd say if anyone wants to try a diiferent POV on Cowes, put it in the same thread - that way the discussion stays together.

But, I will say - I'm hoping to get together a collection of historical shorts for a competition coming up (January) and I do plan to use Cowes as one of the stories - probably with a bit of expansion of the end as it now stands. I just don't want anyone to think I cobbed their story. Puma

BardSkye · Oct 28, 2007

Shouldn't be a problem, Puma. We're stealing your idea, not the other way around.

Speaking of which, mine's up *hint, hint.*

I'll be gone until late Wednesday with no internet, so if you don't hear anything from me until then, that's why.

Story vs Vignette - Historical Plots

c.e.lawson

pdr

Puma

Retired and loving it!

wee

just a little

girlyswot

Doogs

pdr

lkp

Puma

Retired and loving it!

lkp

BardSkye

Barbershoppin' Harmony Whore

pdr

Puma

Retired and loving it!

BardSkye

Barbershoppin' Harmony Whore

Puma

Retired and loving it!

BardSkye

Barbershoppin' Harmony Whore