Cora
Agatucci
English 339-E, Prof. C. Agatucci
Seminar #1 Summary
10 April 2002
Seminar #1: What Is Historical Fiction?
Summary of Seminar #1 Report by Jim Hawes
Jim began with a general definition of the
genre: historical fiction is "a fictional story that is
based on a time, event, or series of events that have taken place in
history. The players or characters in the story are either
entirely fictional, or they are based on a real person or persons in
history." "[H]istorical fiction might be an
explanation of how history may have developed in regards to a
particular event or events." Good historical fiction,
according to Brenda Hoffman,
should present a "'well-told story that doesn't conflict with
historical records.'"
In his report, Jim refined his general definition
of historical fiction by drawing upon readings by Sue
Peabody, William Rainbolt,
Soon Y. Choi, and a review of
the film Braveheart
by Peter Renier. Seminar discussion focused on these
points:
 |
| Characters and characterization:
historical fiction can dramatize what fictional or actual
historical characters are thinking, as history often
cannot. These interior views of characters' thoughts can
be used to represent the author's point of view on an historical
event.
|
|
| Authorial point of view and
alternative versions of history: The (hi)story being
dramatized might "represent a culture's struggle or
worldview of their own history"--for example, in Beloved.
"It may be that a domineering culture has stolen or hidden
a less powerful culture's history. In a fictional account,
the author may be using the story or characters in the story to
represent the less powerful culture's ideal of the
truth."
|
|
| Interesting historical fiction raises
thought-provoking questions and makes the audience think
critically--e.g. about stories such as Beloved that
official history has not told.
|
|
| How accurate or true to (verifiable) history
does an historical fiction have to be? The
way one answers the this question may depend upon how one is
using historical fiction, for what purpose(s). Accuracy is
critical if a teacher, for example, is using historical fiction
to teach history. An English teacher, on the other hand,
may be less concerned with historical accuracy than with
literary aesthetics if she is using historical fiction to teach
literature or film. As William
Rainbolt maintains, "'Historical fiction isn't
history in the conventional sense and shouldn't be judged as
such. The best historical novels are loyal to history, but
it is a history absorbed and set to music, so to speak'" (qtd.
by Hawes).
|
Summary of Seminar #1 Report by Wendy Weber
Wendy raised these questions and issues important
to study of historical fiction:
|
| Why is historical fiction so popular? Wendy
finds one answer in Brenda
Hoffman's observation: "historical fiction offers a
way to 'take a field trip to a place and time long past.'"
|
|
| What can historical fiction do that history
cannot? Historians must stick to the
"facts": "they sometimes fail to capture our
imaginations" because they are not free to "make
up" colorful detail and dramatize "'what if'
scenarios, "but authors of fiction can; and in doing so,
they offer a more complete picture...."
|
|
| Historical fiction offers a powerful way for
minority cultural groups to "recapture their history"--lost
or untold in the official history of the dominant culture.
Wendy cited points made in Edna
Aizenberg's article, noted her agreement with Jim
Hawes's discussion of alternative versions of history, and used
the example of Toni Morrison's Beloved.
|
Wendy generated further discussion on
interpretations of Thomas Mallon's
observation about the "two reasons for a historical
novel": "when facts are lost to time" and "when
time has been lost to facts." Wendy disagrees with
Mallon's cautious view that historical fiction "'does not
rise to a higher truth than perceptively written history'";
Wendy asserts, "For me, the historical novel can bring an event
or historical figure to life when facts alone fail to do
so." Wendy also critiqued the film Pearl Harbor as
an example of bad historical fiction.
Summary of Seminar #1 Report by Boone Nicholson
Boone built upon the previous two seminar
reports--which presented points that coincided with those made in
his own report--by adding or emphasizing the following:
|
| Defining conventions of the historical
fiction [HF] genre: It should be set at a time in the
past--whether recent or long past--and for Boone, the setting
must be far enough in the past to require imaginative
reconstruction of that period. And HF should
"weave" invented characters, events, etc. and actual
"historical figures and/or events" together into a
fictional narrative.
|
|
| Historical fiction "should not attempt
to judge past events or people with today's values,"
but should "help us understand not only how people lived in
previous eras, but also what they believed in, and how they
experienced events."
|
|
| Historical Fiction vs. Historical
Romance: "Romance idealizes a previous era to
tell an unrealistic story," whereas "true"
historical fiction "doesn't ignore the warts, the rapes,
and the betrayals," but acknowledges "[t]he
innumerable flaws and injustices of life."
|
|
| Historical Fiction vs. History: Boone
discussed (1) Joyce
Sarrick's "rules," especially her call
"for a wealth of accurate historical detail" when HF
is used to teach history to the young; (2) the use of
historical fiction to tell the previously untold alternative (hi)stories
of the losers; and (3) HF's freedom to "tak[e]
liberties, not with the facts, but with what seems likely or at
least possible if not probable. This is what makes it
fiction."
|
|
