Cameos

Hi Jess, I think the majority of historical writers throughout time have used cameos. Think about the converse - if a story is only about fictional characters or unknown real people and not rooted in actual known historic personages - how interesting would it be? But being able to sneak in a somebody or even an event provides a rush if it's well done.

In answer to your question, yes, I have cameos of important people in my novel and in the short stories I'm writing. Sometimes they're not even in speaking roles, but the impact is still the same. Puma

I think the only thing you have to worry about is having your guest star act out of character or appear in a place that doesn't fit with the historical accounts. It just wouldn't do to have Sir Isaac Newton make an appearance in Australia, or say that science is just a bunch of hooey.

What I think works effectively is to work your character into an event that happened. Maybe he was there at Czar Nicholas's coronation feast when the alcohol tents were stampeded and 10,000 people died.

I haven't done this so far in any of my novels. I've seen it done poorly (and unnecessarily) often enough in historicals to turn me off from doing it myself. So often it seems that an author brings in a big historical figure just for the sake of having a big historical figure, even if the story would be fine without it, the way that a film will give a cameo to a huge Hollywood star just for the sake of putting their name on the trailers. I don't think that you would do that yourself, Jess, and I am sure that you would keep it relevant and plausible. Just grousing as to what often bugs me about this.

Now that being said, I am tossing around the idea of having a cameo for the sake of having a cameo in my NaNo novel. It's about the 1893 Chicago World's Fair and perhaps the most infamous person associated with the Fair is Dr. H. H. Holmes. Obviously my characters wouldn't know who he is, but the reader who had read The Devil in the White City would recognize the name and the person. I have a scene where I think I can work him in, as he would be an interesting contrast to my MC. So to those readers who know something about Holmes, it would be an 'Aha!', for other readers he would just be another minor character.

Andrew's mention of having a MC there at the coronation feast of Czar Nicholas is the way I think popping in a notable works well. It makes the reader understand the circumstances and the times - the MC was there! Even though the MC is an unknown, he or she was there when history was made. That's the good way. Not so good would be having Czar Nicholas drop something as he walked by on his way to his seat - and no one noticed except the MC who retrieved it and got to meet the czar - that's too contrived.

Actually, Jess, this might be a good topic for one of the SYW challenges in historical - see how people are doing it and whether it works. It's a good idea especially with Pastmidnight's bad feelings about the way it's been done sometimes. Why don't you suggest it in the challenge thread. Puma

PastMidnight said:

ea of having a cameo for the sake of having a cameo in my NaNo novel. It's about the 1893 Chicago World's Fair and perhaps the most infamous person associated with the Fair is Dr. H. H. Holmes. Obviously my characters wouldn't know who he is, but the reader who had read The Devil in the White City would recognize the name and the person. I have a scene where I think I can work him in, as he would be an interesting contrast to my MC. So to those readers who know something about Holmes, it would be an 'Aha!', for other readers he would just be another minor character.

Click to expand...

What a marvelous opportunity for drama. Imagine the reader somehow shown how close the MC came to becoming a victim. Maybe an invitation from Holmes to meet somewhere, MC innocently agrees, but something comes up and the MC has to cancel. End of episode, Holmes is gone from the story, but informed reader wonders what might have happened otherwise. I love stuff like that.

One cannot avoid cameos and more of historic personages in a classic historical novel if the story/plot calls for it. It would a stretch to have TR visit the Little House on the Prarie and save the family from bears, Indians, or bad guys. Whereas, Cortez must appear in Captain from Castile.

www.donaldmichaelplatt.com

My novel/series includes a large section of time in which the MC(s) are members of the 19th century Surete. Therefore, I do have Francois Eugene Vidocq turning up throughout the storyline. I'm not certain if that could be termed a cameo, as he will be quite a major character.

Jesus, Joseph and Mary will make an appearance in my WIP, but aren't likely to see more than a few paragraphs.

"Hi, how are ya, I'm one of the three wise men. That the kid there? Great, here's some presents my boss sent me all this way to bring. Oh, and I'd leave town if I were you."

a_sharp said:

What a marvelous opportunity for drama. Imagine the reader somehow shown how close the MC came to becoming a victim. Maybe an invitation from Holmes to meet somewhere, MC innocently agrees, but something comes up and the MC has to cancel. End of episode, Holmes is gone from the story, but informed reader wonders what might have happened otherwise. I love stuff like that.

Click to expand...

That's the sort of cameo I was thinking of (although not with my MC, because he's a he and not quite Holmes' type ). I might give it a whirl and post it over in SYW for the challenge Jess proposed. I'll see if I can get it to work!

JessRamage said:

That would be really cool. (I have to show my ignorance here and say I hadn't heard of Holmes before, despite the amount of Crime TV my mother watches when I'm over at her house). That's sort of what I'm doing with one of my cameo appearances, although my MC does sense that the historical character is a bit 'off' at the time.

Click to expand...

You know, I hadn't heard of Holmes myself until I started doing research for the novel and realized that Devil in the White City was the only book on the Chicago World's Fair that I could find in the city of Edinburgh. Fascinating book, by the way, if you are interested. Holmes' story interspersed with the story of the Fair, with random little interested facts tossed in amongst it all. Non-fiction, but the author does an excellent job of telling a story.

JessRamage said:

Anyone have any 'guest appearances' in their story by historical figures (for those not writing a novel about a historical figure specifically

Click to expand...

Yes. Edward III.
Linnea

I have...

the strongest dislike of writers seizing a real character and turning them into a detective or other major player in a so called historical novel.

pdr said:

the strongest dislike of writers seizing a real character and turning them into a detective or other major player in a so called historical novel.

Click to expand...

Even if the real person is someone we don't know much about?

Ooh, I know what you are talking about, pdr. Like Jane Austen mysteries and the like. If you are going to have a real personage in your story, have them do the things that they did!

I would think, girlyswot, if it is someone about whom much isn't known, then you have more leeway. But I see this done quite often with well-known figures.

pdr said:

the strongest dislike of writers seizing a real character and turning them into a detective or other major player in a so called historical novel.

Click to expand...

Well, I suppose that bodes ill for any writer using real characters as their MCs?

What if the real character was a major player in historical events? What if the real character did play the detective (see Robert Harris' IMPERIUM, which offers a fine portrayal of Cicero's travels around Sicily building his case against Gaius Verres)?

If it fits the story, and the story fits the history, what's wrong with it?

JessRamage said:

I have no idea if any of that made sense. It's too cold for rational logic...

Click to expand...

That's why I haven't left the flat today.

I think you explained it well. Folks who may have possibly had a role crime-fighting or those who are too obscure for us to know for certain are fair game. But Oliver Cromwell or Jane Austen or Shakespeare? I think they all were a bit too busy to investigate the recent spate of horse thefts or whatnot.

PastMidnight said:

That's why I haven't left the flat today.

I think you explained it well. Folks who may have possibly had a role crime-fighting or those who are too obscure for us to know for certain are fair game. But Oliver Cromwell or Jane Austen or Shakespeare? I think they all were a bit too busy to investigate the recent spate of horse thefts or whatnot.

Click to expand...

I am happy to say that I did not know such books existed.

I like historical detective fiction (a la Brother Cadfael) and I like historical real-person fiction (a la Philippa Gregory) but I agree that it would be VERY ODD INDEED to mix the two!

Sorry to miss this discussion but...

here I am again.

Yes, I have had to review oodles of wretchedly researched, murder mysteries with Jane Austen, Beau Brummel, Shakespeare, Old Uncle Tom Cobly and all (Name any well known historical figure and you will find some ******** person has written them into a whodunnit as the crime solver! And most are so crass! I wrote such a savage review last time, I am now happy to say I am not asked to review them any more. I get the difficult non-fiction instead where I have to research to make sure the author is correct!

No, Doogs, you write about real people in your way. You are sticking to your historical interpretation and it's a valid one. But wouldn't you spit tacks if a writer took someone from your time period and made them a detective or amateur sleuth? Like PastM said, they had a real, possibly well documented life, and tacking the detective onto it is, well, plain tacky!

Very few writers are able to take a real person and make fiction around them. After all, if we are writing novels, we should be creating the characters. We are involved in fiction.

I'm with Jess, in that a cameo from a real character shouldn't be for show, but to add to the story. And yes, of course your characters will talk about the real people of the day, those who are important in politics or religion or war or just plain notorious. But taking a reader back to 1001 or 1348 or 1650 or whenever is to give them a taste of that time, show how close we really are as people despite the time distance, and give them a darned good tale which they can think about. It's cheating and lazy writing to seize on a well know figure and then make them do things they couldn't possibly have done. It's dishonest to history, the character, and the reader. It's as bad as those writers of what they call historical romance or erotica where the history is a pretty setting for a modern couple to have sex and act out the writer's fantasies. And yes, I am aware of some superb historical romance which is well researched, well written and which gives us an honest taste of love in 1269 or whenever. It's just that a lot of it isn't!

Well said, pdr! Puma

pdr said:

No, Doogs, you write about real people in your way. You are sticking to your historical interpretation and it's a valid one. But wouldn't you spit tacks if a writer took someone from your time period and made them a detective or amateur sleuth? Like PastM said, they had a real, possibly well documented life, and tacking the detective onto it is, well, plain tacky!

Click to expand...

In that case, I agree wholeheartedly.

I was taking exception to the "or other major player" part of your comment, which for some reason I took to mean major player in the plot.

Forgive me. Just ended a long road trip. Too many miles of driving, far too little time to do more than skim the forums!