The Fiction in Historical Fiction

[Belle_91]

Hi gang. I hope everyone's been doing well. As some of you may know, I wrote a MS based on the true story of WWII nurses who became trapped behind Nazi lines. Anyway, I tried to stick to the historical events as much as possible. My MC and her LI are not based off real people, but some of the characters are. I have, as with anything, taken some liberties. At first, I thought they were mostly minor, but then the story maybe got away from me a little. I had them receive help from a local woman, who did not really exist, who also gets captured by the Nazis. I have my MC and LI back track to rescue her from a Nazi prison and then meet up with the rest of the group to where they were really rescued from. Only my MC and LI go back to save her, but I'm just worried it's too much. I'm afraid that switching character names based off the real people won't be enough. That it mirrors the real story too much, and thus, won't be marketable.

So, I guess how much is too much for artistic liberties with real historic events? I would obviously put an afterwards in about what really happened, but I'm worried this MS is DOA.

Thanks for any and all advice. If I've, once again, made a mountain out of a mole hill, I apologize. I'm seriously thinking about making the anxiety character from Inside Out 2 my avatar lol.

 

[Bitterboots]

Weird, I was just talking about this with a friend today. The reason I don't like people taking too many liberties with real people is that when I read historical fiction about real people I tend to like to learn more about them. That's what draws me to HF. If I read a book that takes too many liberties it just makes me mad, especially if they change really important details.
I would forgive an author if they use 'inspired by' rather than 'based on'. That tells me in advance that liberties have been taking.

 

[Tocotin]

It’s fiction. It’s your interpretation, your reinvention, your view of what was. You can do whatever you want. If you feel uncomfortable with the liberties you have taken with the source material and feel the need to explain yourself, write everything honestly in the Author’s Note.

I remember reading some books about historical personages (Murasaki Shikibu, Oscar Wilde) whose dialogue consisted almost entirely of words they had really said or written. It was verrry boring, and in my opinion quite cowardly too.

 

[The Black Prince]

You're an entertainer, not a historian.

Do what you need to do to entertain, then explain yourself in the Historical Note at the end.

Have a look at Bernard Cornwell's end notes. He very frequently changes historical "fact" including both dates and deeds for the sake of a good story. Then he comes clean afterwards. I love his books and very much appreciate the explanations at the end.

 

[Sonsofthepharaohs]

I never let facts get in the way of a good story! It's historical FICTION, not history. If you use real names of recently living people and feel like someone is going to recognise their relative and sue you for misrepresenting them, well... no one managed to make a lawsuit stick against James Cameron for Titanic. But if you're worried you don't have lawyers on retainer to deal with any potential problems, just change the names and say they're fictional characters.

 

[Elenitsa]

There is a writer licence for a reason. And yes, there has to be a note somewhere about the historical truth, maybe an inspired by real facts somewhere, but it in its entirety, is historical fiction, not historical chronicle, so you are free to make the changes which give a better story.

 

[Lakey]

I have read books actually purporting to be nonfiction that dramatize scenes with dialogue and interiority.* If NF authors can get away with that, then surely a book that is explicitly labeled fiction can get away with tweaking some facts, particularly if there’s an author’s note describing the liberties taken. If you are changing up the character names, so much the better.

Indeed, I think what you are describing is what a great deal of historical fiction is (not all of it, but a great deal of it).

An instructive example for you might be Rose Under Fire by Elizabeth Wein. If I recall correctly, her author’s note in that book describes the liberties she took in placing an American female pilot behind enemy lines in WWII, and of particular relevance to you, in her escape from Ravensbrück.

Go forth and write your fiction at ease!



* Incidentally, in my opinion these books are usually not very good, because they amount to attempts by a nonfiction author to write scenes of fiction, without having thought much about the craft of writing scenes of fiction. I’m not naming names here because of RYFW but I’m thinking in particular of one insufferable book I DNF’ed earlier this year.

 

[ElaineB]

Hasn't there already been a novel about Hillary Clinton? I agree that liberties can be taken. But as someone who hates when real people are fictionalized because I fear stating something as fact that was made up, I'd want some clear notes on what liberties were taken. FWIW, I'm addicted to For All Mankind, a TV series that imagines the Soviets beat us to the moon. They mix archival footage with fictional characters and have gone so far as to kill of real people (who are no longer alive but were at the time). We end up with President Ted Kennedy (who skipped a certain party on Chappaquiddick) and see him talking. And President Gore (who frankly doesn't come off very well) discussing space missions.

 

[Belle_91]

Thanks everyone! I feel a lot better. I really appreciate everyone’s input and advice. Thank you so much!

 

[The Black Prince]

Just on defamation...

I am aware that the law is different across jurisdictions, but in Australia (where I am) the dead can't sue.

Plenty of people have issues with this (including me, in appropriate circumstances) but that's the way it is. From a novelist's perspective... have at those dead bastards!

 

[Helix]

Pre-coffee opinions here:

I think there's a difference between fictionalising powerful historical figures about whom a lot is known and 'ordinary' (for the want of a better word) people. I think a lot more care needs to be taken with people for whom there are no libraries of analysis or memorials.

 

[CWatts]

Just on defamation...

I am aware that the law is different across jurisdictions, but in Australia (where I am) the dead can't sue.

Plenty of people have issues with this (including me, in appropriate circumstances) but that's the way it is. From a novelist's perspective... have at those dead bastards!

I know next to nothing about Australian history, but F*** YEAH this law is like Ned Kelly's armor for writers!

 

[Helix]

I know next to nothing about Australian history, but F*** YEAH this law is like Ned Kelly's armor for writers!

Full of holes?

 

[Leenie]

Hi gang. I hope everyone's been doing well. As some of you may know, I wrote a MS based on the true story of WWII nurses who became trapped behind Nazi lines. Anyway, I tried to stick to the historical events as much as possible. My MC and her LI are not based off real people, but some of the characters are. I have, as with anything, taken some liberties. At first, I thought they were mostly minor, but then the story maybe got away from me a little. I had them receive help from a local woman, who did not really exist, who also gets captured by the Nazis. I have my MC and LI back track to rescue her from a Nazi prison and then meet up with the rest of the group to where they were really rescued from. Only my MC and LI go back to save her, but I'm just worried it's too much. I'm afraid that switching character names based off the real people won't be enough. That it mirrors the real story too much, and thus, won't be marketable.

So, I guess how much is too much for artistic liberties with real historic events? I would obviously put an afterwards in about what really happened, but I'm worried this MS is DOA.

Thanks for any and all advice. If I've, once again, made a mountain out of a mole hill, I apologize. I'm seriously thinking about making the anxiety character from Inside Out 2 my avatar lol.

Belle_91,
Thank you for posing this question. I appreciate the issue and found the responses very helpful, too. Your novel sounds fascinating! It is not a story I have heard about, and I look forward to learning more about it. (My mss is set in WWII and after, and I am always interested in stories that have not been told.)
BTW, this is my first post, and it's great to find this historical fiction group!

 

[Leenie]

Oops. I see that my reply included Belle's original post. I'll go back to the newbie page and see what I missed. Sorry, folks.

 

[J Braden Traw]

My two cents: historical fiction is fiction for a reason. Your readers will expect that you'll take creative liberties with the plot and events. A lot of times if you force yourself to stick too close to the real history you'll find yourself constrained during the writing process. That being said, I do think it's any author's responsibility to thoroughly research their setting if they're writing in this genre. There's a big difference between taking some liberties and flat out making stuff up. I think it's especially important to stay away from stereotypes and pulpy, pseudo-scientific history. I think especially you need to stay away from plot points that lend credence to ahistorical conspiracy theories, for example.
I think at the end of the day it's important to be honest with yourself and your readers. History itself is more malleable than we give it credit: discoveries are constantly being made and old theories about certain time periods. All you can do is do enough research that you feel confident in creating a story in that area. Personally, I try to do as much research as possible. The more I know about how all the different people in a period go about their daily lives, the more comfortable I feel writing characters and scenes. Also, I've often found that real historical events really do inspire events in my work. In my serial, I go as far as to include some real historical figures, though I make sure not to make any of them protagonists, as the more scenes they're in, the further I'll have to stray from historicity.