Have the stories all been told?

Great question, Puma! I'm certain the answer is no. Just look at all the amazing stories that people here are in the process of writing.

I think there are two ways of looking at this. The 'best' stories don't necessarily come out of what we think are 'major' historical events. In the hands of a skilful storyteller, comparatively minor incidents can be both captivating and illuminating. Indeed, by telling the stories, the significance of the events can increase. So there's a lot of great stories out there that really haven't been told yet.

But then there's also the possibility of exciting new retellings. At the beginning of Georgette Heyer's 'An Infamous Army' which tells the story of the Battle of Waterloo, and has the Duchess of Richmond's ball as a key element, she speaks of the 'spectre of Thackeray' who described the same events in Vanity Fair. Daunting, indeed, to take on something that's been done well in the past. But Heyer has a different story to tell and her take on the event is equally compelling (and by far more historically accurate!)

Imagine, for instance, writing a novel about the Princes in the Tower. You could write at least two completely different versions of that story, both sticking to the historical facts, - one which shows Richard III as guilty of their murder and one which doesn't. I'd say they could both be great novels. Most events don't have quite such disparate possible interpretations, but every historical fact is subjective in some way.

Imagine 'A Tale of Two Cities' told from the point of view of Madame Desfarges - it would be a completely different story, and no less good for that reason.

History supplies us with infinite variety, and if we feel that its story has been told, I suspect that's due to a lack of imagination on our part.

NO! Even in the narrow historical field which is my day job, I could write stories for the rest of my life abut fascinating historical events few have heard of. And as girlyswot says, even a well known tale can be completely turned upside down by telling it from a different point of view.

Puma, have you read Salvador de Madriaga's (hopes the sp. is correct) Heart of Jade about the conquest of Mexico? It's a Spanish (translated) classic, and I bet you'd like it. Half is told from the perspective of a Spanish conquistador, and half from the perspective of a Mexican woman.

I'm going to have to agree with girlyswot and lkp and answer negative.

Ignore writing for a moment. Consider churches. I think we can all agree there are a number of staggering, breathtaking cathedrals dotting Europe, all of them different, all of them unique. Or consider the number of treatments of landscapes, or of the Madonna and Child.

No two artists - be they sculpters, architects, or writers - approach the same subject the same way. There are variations of perceptions, variations of craft and of execution.

I think this is even more pronounced when it comes to historical fiction. Our subject matter is drawn from written (and often vague, biased, untrustworthy, or contradictory) records. There is a great degree of subjectivity in unearthing the "why" behind events. Girlyswot's Princes in the Tower example is perfect. I would add to it the story of Alexander the Great. His motive for perpetual conquest is one of history's greatest questions, and one to which there is not and probably never will be a right answer. It comes down to interpretation, and that interpretation drives the story.

I think the constant retreading of the same major stories (Alexander, Caesar, Henry VIII, Elizabeth, the American Civil War, etc) more than prove this point. Are there derivative and subpar works on each topic? Certainly. But there are plenty of original and unique stories as well, each with its own merits. Which one is the best is open to the reader's subjectivity. I mean - I happen to think Dumas' Count of Monte Cristo is the single best revenge story ever written - but I'm certain a poll of other frequenters would reveal another five, six, or seven titles in its place.

As for major events "languishing in wait" - they are out there. Off the top of my head:

1. The Trojan War
2. Romulus and the founding of Rome
3. The story of Cincinnatus
4. The Gracchi brothers
5. Vespasian's rise to emperor
6. The Visigoths. The Huns.
7. Charles Martel and the Battle of Tours.
8. The Norman Conquest of Britain (I've read so many books set from the White Ship on...but precious little about 1066).
9. The Norman conquests of Italy and Sicily.
10. The story of El Cid

And those only bring us up to about 1100 A.D. And skip over plenty of other novel-worthy events. History is full of fantastic stories. More, I think, than can ever possibly be compellingly conveyed in the form of historical fiction.

There's still so much out there waiting to be written about. Example: I was in Frankfurt a couple of months ago and visited the Jewish Ghetto museum. There I saw details of an attempt in the seventeenth century to clear the Jews out of Frankfurt. Those who survived the massacre were literally herded on to boats and shipped away. When the Emperor heard about this he was furious - among other things he depended on the Jews for finance - so he had the perpetrators rounded up and executed, and had the Jews all brought back to the city again, and caused changes in the city ordinances governing the citizenship rights of Jews. What a story waiting for a writer - especially in view of the Holocaust a few hundred years later (also dealt with, poignantly, at the museum). Made me wish I was more familiar with German history and, more to the point, the German language.

And often...

it's not the big events that mean most to people it's the little ones about people like themselves. And those stories will go on and on.
It's when history is personalised that it means something to today's reader.

The grand epic tales will always be grand! But the ones that hit home and have an effect are those about how the people with little power and influence were affected.

Doogs, I'd read books about all those topics.
With respect to #9, have you read Cecilia Holland's Great Maria? It is the best book I've read on Normans in Italy and Sicily.

pdr said:

it's not the big events that mean most to people it's the little ones about people like themselves. And those stories will go on and on.
It's when history is personalised that it means something to today's reader.

The grand epic tales will always be grand! But the ones that hit home and have an effect are those about how the people with little power and influence were affected.

Click to expand...

Similarly, I've always said Gone With the Wind isn't a war story; it's a love story with a war as a backdrop.

scarletpeaches said:

Similarly, I've always said Gone With the Wind isn't a war story; it's a love story with a war as a backdrop.

Click to expand...

Agreed.

And I don't think Gone With the Wind captures the Civil War to such a degree as to render all other attempts inferior. It was such a massive event, and impacted so many lives, that there must be an infinity of stories that could be written just dealing with it. GWTW is regarded as a classic, but that doesn't detract from other stories set in and during the Civil War. Consider Glory, or Cold Mountain, or Michael Shaara's Killer Angels.

lkp said:

Doogs, I'd read books about all those topics.
With respect to #9, have you read Cecilia Holland's Great Maria? It is the best book I've read on Normans in Italy and Sicily.

Click to expand...

I have not, but I will. I'm fascinated by the Norman experience in the Mediterranean, but it's not the easiest topic to find material on.

Here's a fascinating story about a real historical event (that I just saw on the History Channel the other day) Vlad Dracul's rise to power---twice! After taking the throne and ruling for five years, he was overthrown by his brother, sent into exile, captured by a neighboring country and held for ransom (which was never paid--because the brother didn't want him back! ) After twelve years in a cold stone dungeon...TWELVE, he escaped, went back home and took the palace again, becoming the same tyrannical leader he was before. Didn't learn a thing, that one.

But there's definitely a book in there for the right author.

Cathy C said:

Here's a fascinating story about a real historical event (that I just saw on the History Channel the other day) Vlad Dracul's rise to power---twice! After taking the throne and ruling for five years, he was overthrown by his brother, sent into exile, captured by a neighboring country and held for ransom (which was never paid--because the brother didn't want him back! ) After twelve years in a cold stone dungeon...TWELVE, he escaped, went back home and took the palace again, becoming the same tyrannical leader he was before. Didn't learn a thing, that one.

But there's definitely a book in there for the right author.

Click to expand...

Have you read 'The Historian' by Elizabeth Kostova? It's a vampire story, but involves a lot of the details you mentioned, so you might enjoy it if that's what you're interested in. Weirdly, I was thinking that Vlad Tepes would make a good straightforward (ie non vampire) historical novel as I was reading.

As for all the stories being gone, I hope not! One thing I've noticed is there's a dearth of novels about my period. Those that are around are either very old and hard to get hold of (a lot written in the nineteenth century) or they are Harlequin-type romances. I like that though as it gives me a big sandbox to play in.

Other than that I agree with the other posts. The first thing that came to mind as you mentioned A Tale of Two Cities is that you've also got Baroness Orzcy's 'The Scarlet Pimpernel' set in the same era, yet both are great books. Sitting on my shelf at the moment, I have two biographical fiction books about Attila the Hun by different authors, too.

Personally, I'd love to see a good book about William Rufus, something focussed on the civil war between Stephen and Maud (I know the Cadfael novels are all set in this period, but I mean something actually about the events), actually I want to read girlyswot's Princes in the Tower book, or anything fiction-y on the War of the Roses, as that's my latest thing I'm reading about right now, Roman London. Lots of things. Even if there are books out there, I'd want more than one to read.

JessRamage said:

Personally, I'd love to see a good book about William Rufus, something focussed on the civil war between Stephen and Maud (I know the Cadfael novels are all set in this period, but I mean something actually about the events), actually I want to read girlyswot's Princes in the Tower book, or anything fiction-y on the War of the Roses, as that's my latest thing I'm reading about right now, Roman London. Lots of things. Even if there are books out there, I'd want more than one to read.

Click to expand...

Jess - if you haven't read Sharon Kay Penman, do so. When Christ and His Saints Slept covers Stephen and Maud, and The Sunne in Splendour is a fantastic take on Richard III.

Puma said:

As several people have mentioned, there are also many good stories of the little people, those insignificant to history. But, if you write about the little people, there's the immediate problem of who cares enough to read about them or that the stories are only of regional interest. They aren't about someone important so they have to include a major event to have half a chance of success.

Click to expand...

Well, that depends why you're reading the novel, doesn't it? If you're reading to 'learn history' then maybe the little people aren't so interesting. Although, even there, the rise of interest in 'social history' suggests otherwise. People do want to know what life was like for ordinary people in other times and places. And, of course, the viewpoint of a 'little person' on a major event can be really fascinating - more so, sometimes than the key players.

But also, I think that the 'little people' stories are interesting just because people and their stories ARE interesting. Here, the historical setting is almost incidental. What matters is the story and the characterisation. The readers care because the writer makes them care, not because they have any prior knowledge or interest in the period. It's that same debate we've had before. Maybe these are historical NOVELS, rather than HISTORICAL novels. Or something?

Puma said:

Donroc prompted this thread in my mind. He and I share a great admiration and love of "classical historical fiction" - Shellabarger, Sabatini, Costain, etc. Thinking of those writers and their stories made me wonder - have the best stories already been told?

There's no way anyone (in my opinion) could write a story based on the Conquest of Mexico that would eclipse Shellabarger's Captain from Castille. The same goes for me for Dickens and A Tale of Two Cities, Margaret Mitchell and Gone with the Wind, plus a host of other writers who first (or best) wrote stories of historical events (in my opinion).

Click to expand...

Quick and simple: No way.

Well, do remember that's your opinion and not everyone holds those individual books in such high esteem. Amazing, but true.

What those books explored were just parts of the over all of those eras, one story out of millions that are possible there. Just because Dickens was a genius doesn't mean there's nothing more to be discovered in the vast depths and intrigues of the Victorian era. The American Civil War affected far more than one southern woman and her estate after all. There's still lots of stories to be told and they are, in no way, sequels to the greats that have gone before.

JessRamage said:

something focussed on the civil war between Stephen and Maud

Click to expand...

Ask and ye shall receive: When Christ and His Saints Slept by Sharon Kay Penman

JessRamage said:

something focussed on the civil war between Stephen and Maud

Click to expand...

Ken Follett's Pillars of the Earth is also set during this time.

Jean Plaidy wrote many, many historical novels and she certainly focused on the Stephen/Maud relationship - trouble is I can't for the life of me remember the title.

Obviously the Stephen / Maud thing was a bad example, since there seem to be a load of books. Sorry to show my total ignorance but it's a period I've only recently gotten interested in.

Puma said:

As several people have mentioned, there are also many good stories of the little people, those insignificant to history. But, if you write about the little people, there's the immediate problem of who cares enough to read about them or that the stories are only of regional interest. They aren't about someone important so they have to include a major event to have half a chance of success.

Click to expand...

I don't know if I would agree with this, although perhaps this has to do more with personal taste. Generally, I prefer historicals involving the little people as opposed to those about major historical figures. I suppose I feel that, if I wanted to read about Charlemange, I would rather read a biography on him, rather than a novel. I want to read novels about the people that no one is going to write a biography about. That's what I lean towards in my writing as well. Ordinary people doing ordinary things, but living in extraordinary times that cannot help but have an impact on them.

JessRamage said:

Obviously the Stephen / Maud thing was a bad example, since there seem to be a load of books. Sorry to show my total ignorance but it's a period I've only recently gotten interested in.

Click to expand...

No worries! We were just giving you a few more titles to add to your 'To Read' list. I agree that it is an underrepresented period.

scarletpeaches said:

Jean Plaidy wrote many, many historical novels and she certainly focused on the Stephen/Maud relationship - trouble is I can't for the life of me remember the title.

Click to expand...

I don't know if there is a period that Jean Plaidy didn't write about.

PastMidnight said:

I don't know if I would agree with this, although perhaps this has to do more with personal taste. Generally, I prefer historicals involving the little people as opposed to those about major historical figures. I suppose I feel that, if I wanted to read about Charlemange, I would rather read a biography on him, rather than a novel. I want to read novels about the people that no one is going to write a biography about. That's what I lean towards in my writing as well. Ordinary people doing ordinary things, but living in extraordinary times that cannot help but have an impact on them.

Click to expand...

I'm sort of on the fence on this as I like both kinds of novel. I'm not sure which one I'd lean more towards and even looking at my bookshelf, there's a mixture of the two there. But I do tend towards the little people stories when I write.

girlyswot said:

Well, that depends why you're reading the novel, doesn't it? If you're reading to 'learn history' then maybe the little people aren't so interesting. Although, even there, the rise of interest in 'social history' suggests otherwise.

Click to expand...

I agree. For what it's worth, the novel I recently completed was definitely about "little people," and the agent who accepted it said she's marketing it to publishers as the kind of thing teachers might suggest to students when they're studying that period. It probably couldn't set the world on fire as a best seller--which is the fault of my writing rather than the setting, I think--but it still could contribute to a niche of social history.

But also, I think that the 'little people' stories are interesting just because people and their stories ARE interesting. Here, the historical setting is almost incidental. What matters is the story and the characterisation. The readers care because the writer makes them care, not because they have any prior knowledge or interest in the period. It's that same debate we've had before. Maybe these are historical NOVELS, rather than HISTORICAL novels. Or something?

Click to expand...

That kind of historical novel has always been my interest. We don't expect contemporary novels necessarily to include famous people or events, and I think one can approach a historical novel the same way.