Fictional history is best. And that’s the truth

[rdenning]

Re: Fictional history is best. And that’s the truth

Another fun way to learn history are those horrible history books and now the TV series. Like this one about Charles II
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P2kyNbZc7oc

 

[Connavar]

Re: Fictional history is best. And that’s the truth

In my opinion the best historical fiction concetrates on the minutaie. No need to mess with historical fact, as that's interesting enough as it is ; but concentrating on the characters of the period, their thoughts opinons and actions, really bring history to life.

We know what famous histoical characters did and what heppened in the period they lived ; but what where their hopes and fears? And what of the courtiers, landowners or peasants ; the ordinary folk of whom the history books rarely speak. Historical fiction is a great way of speculating on how people lived their lives from day to day.

Thats why i read historical fiction really. Take Hornblower series for example, i like Horatio Hornblower but he is a great man like the men he is based on. What i really love reading is the minute historical details of naval ships,sailors,warefare in late 1700s and early 1800s. Many of the characters are regular people that history often forgets to tell about.

 

[Dave]

When at school I absolutely HATED history, boring to say the least

So did I, but that was the fault of my syllabus - British History from 1832-1914, Corn Laws, Great Reform Act, Irish Question - we started after the Napoleonic Wars and finished before the Great War - we missed out all the exciting parts!

Flashmans been on my to get list for sometime (note to self, Must find Flashman).

I devoured them all as a teenager. They are like a Victorian version of Forrest Gump. I'd doubt that every historical fiction is as well written or as well researched as George MacDonald Fraser though.

I'm ashamed to say I haven't read any of the others you mention. I did watch the BBC adaptation of the the Claudius books. Some of the best TV of the 1970's! And I bet it is just as good to watch on DVD; it can't really age can it?

There was talk of a Flashman TV series several years ago, but it must have fallen through because I haven't seen one. If there was I think I'd keep thinking of Michael Palin's Ripping Yarns. Now there was a series that gives you some real history!

I've just finished reading a book called A Little History of the World by E. H. Gombrich. It was written for schoolchildren in 1936 and from the point of view of a German, but I found that fresh as all the other history I have read is from a British rather than a European perspective.

 

[paranoid marvin]

Re: Fictional history is best. And that’s the truth

Rik Mayall would still make a fine Flashman. I'm sure someone will make it sooner or later.

 

[marklord]

My school actually had a class that was a sort of alternative to CDT or general studies that encouraged the students to write up an incident from history as a fictional story. We'd spend one class watching a film like Cromwell and then for homework write up our own story based on what we'd watched. Greet fun and more intestine way to get inside historical events in a way. This didn't relace the standard history lessons by the way!

 

[marklord]

Connnavar I seem to have the same Avatar as you! Coincidence only, hope it doesn't confuse anyone!

 

[Connavar]

Hehe thats confusing

 

[Dave]

Separated at Birth?

 

[WJCherf]

Re: Fictional history is best. And that’s the truth

I must agree that the best way to appreciate history is to spicy it up. In the realm of ancient history, this can be deftly done IF the writer is up-to-date on the historical and archaeological records. Then, wherever there is a gap, it can be artfully filled in. The ultimate result is that the reader sometimes cannot tell were history and fiction diverge.

 

[primalscream]

Re: Fictional history is best. And that’s the truth

historical fiction is fun and I learn a lot from it, but it is also just a starting point to look further into the subject. Once I read the Shardlake series I began to look much more into the events of Henry VIII's reign especially the lives of lawyers at the time.

Great stuff!!

 

[Carrie Bailey]

Re: Fictional history is best. And that’s the truth

I will never stop being a fan of the Brother Cadfael series. It's almost difficult to doubt medieval Shrewsbury existed the way "Ellis Peters" portrayed it. Last night, my boyfriend asked me, "Do you really think it was like that?"

For me, great historical fiction is a sensible story about believable characters within an environment that fades into the background as it should. I want to read and then be there without thinking about it. I've watched the tv series, read the books, listened to them on tape and even with my normally analytical mind, I almost never questioned the setting.

 

[Brian G Turner]

Re: Fictional history is best. And that’s the truth

C.S Forester is THE HF writer for me, the straightforward writing style with great characters,more historical realism,knowledge than you can find in 10 books.

He did win the biggest prize in the english language.

His novels A Ship of the Line and Flying Colours were jointly awarded the 1938 James Tait Black Memorial Prize for fiction.

That's so strange - I swear I have a memory of getting one of this books, probably an omnibus, and starting the first few pages - but I'm buggered if I can find it.

 

[Gramm838]

Re: Fictional history is best. And that’s the truth

My all time favoutrite historical novel is 'Unto This Hour' by Tom Wicker; even as a Brit I really bought into the novel which tells the story of the battle of Manassas/Bull Run in the ACW.

The descriptions on the opening few pages simply draw you into a stiflingly hot and dusty day in Virginia in 1862, and just kept me captivated the whole way through.

 

[Snowdog]

Re: Fictional history is best. And that’s the truth

These days I'll read non-fiction history over historical fiction, but it was historical fiction that got me interested in history. The problem is that the few good authors around at the moment seem to cover the same ground and also concentrate on the most well-known periods and people. I've never read Conn Iggulden, for instance, only because he writes about things I know reasonably well and I'm more interested in finding something new.

With non-fiction you can usually find something written about almost anything you're interested in.