Historical Fiction has always been a genre that must be handled with care, particularly because it seems to focus on the more distressing aspects of past events, simply because they provide a more interesting story. But how much can you get away with altering history in the name of story-telling? And how much fiction can you add to the past before you begin to betray it completely?
Some authors choose to add aspects of fantasy to history, therefore almost completely re-writing it. For example, R.F. Kuang’s Babel is set in 19th century Oxford, in an alternate reality where magic is not only real but is, in fact, an intrinsic part of society. The novel deals with ideas of colonisation and the subsequent erasure of languages, all very real and serious topics. Does the fantasy element undermine these issues by marking them as purely fictional, or does the magical blend act as a clever way to make these difficult topics more digestible for the average reader?
People have been adding fiction to history for a very long time; Homer’s the Iliad and the Odyssey fit into this genre, as they were composed during the Iron Age but set during the Bronze Age, and even they have fantastical elements like gods and omens.
These additions can make for a more interesting plot and provide an easier way for the author to communicate their desired message: Babel exists to show that “an act of translation is always an act of betrayal,” and so creating a magic system fuelled by language shows this well.
But other authors choose to keep to something more realistic when dealing with upsetting historical events, such as Sarah Waters in The Little Stranger, set soon after the Second World War. The characters, although dealing with supposed ghosts, are more so haunted by the after effects of the recent war. The family’s struggle to keep a hold of their wealth, and the fact that one of its members has a lasting injury from fighting, very clearly shows the toll the war has had on them. So perhaps staying more loyal to history’s truth makes for a more successful Historical Fiction novel. Waters successfully shows issues of class and war in England during the 1940s, while also simply creating a thrilling ghost story to satisfy enthusiasts of the gothic genre.
So what makes a Historical Fiction ‘good’ or ‘bad’ is objectively subjective, though any historical inaccuracies are, of course, always subject to critique.
Photo by The New York Public Library on Unsplash
