today's list and an uncharacteristic writerly post

[ewein2412]

almost equally ridiculous, but a little less difficult:

+ Fish
+ Skis
+ Check train light

Why do I write these things down at half past midnight?

Incidentally, thank you, o my flist, for your stellar responses of support to that interesting review I linked to yesterday. I was rather more shaken by the politics of that review than anything else--way down at the bottom of his rant the guy did say "she writes well" or something like that. Interesting issues got raised in comments to my post, on the subject "Historical Fiction or Fantasy or What?" with estara weighing in on my books as alternative history rather than historical fiction. Which raises the question--when you head that far back in time, and the knowns are very vague, what exactly is the difference?

When I was in Aksum in 2004 I had a guide who took us to see some 2nd-4th century CE ruins which he told us were the remains of the Queen of Sheba's palace and were 3000-4000 years old. I did not contradict him (what authority do I have?), but I remember thinking at the time: It is more likely that Telemakos lived here than that the Queen of Sheba lived here. Which doesn't actually make either theory true.

In the book I'm working on now, the WWII flying-and-spying travesty (which I now think of as Code Name Plausible), I have made up all the names of the British airfields. Almost all of them, anyway. Then I started making up names of British towns. Then I started making up names of French towns (harder to do). AT WHAT POINT does this become an "alternate" Europe--and therefore a fantasy novel--rather than a historical one?

Comments

Tanita Says :

[(Anonymous)]

Hm.
If you have one factual anchor incident in the story, I think it stays safely historical fiction. Basically, the biggest "fact" in MARE'S WAR is that there was a 6888th Battalion. Everything else can be made up from there on, practically. Mostly. Somewhat.

Re: Tanita Says :

[ewein2412]

Hmmm... I'm not entirely convinced. But Mare's War does sound more, well, plausible than anything I write. I am plagued by implausibility.

I really have to read it, you know!

Sara just finished A La Carte. I told her she needs to write a review for you! (I think she is also planning to try some of the recipes)

Re: Tanita Says :

[estara.livejournal.com]

By that light Jo Walton's trilogy about Hitler winning the war (starting with "Farthing") would be historical fiction... because after all there was World War 2 and Hitler existed.

Historical fiction to me has been so far: invented characters interacting but not changing (sort of offering new viewpoints to the reader) historical events.

Re: Tanita Says :

[holyschist.livejournal.com]

I dunno; Naomi Novik's Temeraire books have a lot of factual anchor incidents. They also have dragons, and huge deviations from history events because of those dragons.

[lnbw.livejournal.com]

I've seen people suggest that all historical fiction is alternate history (to me, "historical fantasy" means history + magic and "alternate history" means history that's been altered, though I know those distinctions aren't universal).

I tend to think that what makes alternate history is a deliberate alteration of history on the author's part. Or, looking at it from a reader's perspective, departures from historical fact being essential to the story. If you're going way back in time and using the best historical records we have -- historical fiction. If you're going way back in time and ignoring some records in favor of ones that better support your story -- alternate history.

I don't know anywhere near enough about 2nd-4th century Ethiopian history to have a specific opinion!

[ewein2412]

I alternate between calling my stuff "historical fiction" and "historical fantasy" (I try to infuse everything I write with an intangible fantasy *feel*, going for tropes and metaphors rather than actual magic), but I have never thought of it as "alternate history." I don't *change* history consciously, but add unmentioned possibilities. Or try to, anyway.

And I guess part of the reason I think of it as fantasy is because I rely on narrative, myth and legend, as my sources as much as historical records.

[estara.livejournal.com]

That works for me as another way of expressing my own distinction ^^.

[holyschist.livejournal.com]

I agree with this comment.

[deliasherman.livejournal.com]

Look at it this way (nomenclature, I'm talking about, not Ethiopia). Thomas Hardy and Anthony Trollope wrote whole series about English counties and towns that did not exist. And does anyone call the Barchester or Wessex novels fantasy or alternate history? Of course not.

Names are fungible. As long as you don't make up "alternate" names for London or Paris, it seems to me you're free to invent airfields and hamlets as you please. I am of the opposite school--I just pretend stuff happened in real places it might have happened if my characters had existed, on the theory that real place names lend verisimilitude to an otherwise bald and unconvincing narrative (I draw my analogy from Mikado). Both schools have long literary roots.

[ewein2412]

I have previously been an advocate of the second school for exactly that reason, and it took me a while to realize that it was ok to do it differently this time. The British/Ethiopian settings are all put in real places with real names (or a cognate of a real name), something that to my mind gives the stories not only verisimilitude but also a kind of misty plausibility.

What I'm discovering in writing a story set more recently is that it's impossible to make all the threads match up exactly the way I want them to--there was no RAF squadron stationed at Manchester Airport at the time I want them there, for example--and I suddenly thought, CHANGE THE NAME OF THE AIRPORT, for goodness sake, and then you can do anything you want to with it. After the first one it became easier.

However (this is so e wein), I am having a little trouble deciding whether it's me making up names to aid my narrative flow, or this utterly and completely unreliable narrator making up names to confuse everybody. I honestly don't know which it is.

[deliasherman.livejournal.com]

At this point, does it really matter? You might have to decide eventually (in aid of figuring out just how unreliable the narrator is, for instance, and why). But not in what I'm assuming is a first draft, surely.

Besides, making up names is FUN. I've just made up a Welsh town and manor and baronetcy out of stray consonants, and am in the process of planting a completely bogus plantation in the middle of Lafayette Parish, LA.

[ewein2412]

no, it doesn't matter at ALL, maybe even in the long run, who's making up the names. And YES, it IS fun! At first I only did the one and then I sort of got into the swing of it.

[tiboribi.livejournal.com]

I actually really like the idea of your World War II Scheherazade making up the names to confuse everybody. It seems to fit in so perfectly.

[ewein2412]

I know. it is very In Character.

[ewein2412]

oh, haha, I used my "once I was a scholar" icon thinking it said "Harriet Vane" at the bottom. I forgot that it actually says "Shrewsbury College." I am going to use it all the time.

[estara.livejournal.com]

"I've just made up a Welsh town and manor and baronetcy out of stray consonants,"

*grin*

[rymenhild.livejournal.com]

On the subject of your work's historical plausibility, have you seen this? It's archaeological evidence for high-level Africa-Britain trade connections and for multiracial inhabitants of Britain in the fourth century, and it made me think of you at once.

[ewein2412]

You cannot imagine how excited this makes me! I have put down in my diary the dates for the exhibit, which I am determined to see. A thousand thanks for pointing this out!

Incidentally, I have just worked out why your lj username is so familiar. You wrote "The Fifth Branch"! I am a huge admirer.

[rymenhild.livejournal.com]

*blush* Thank you. Actually, I always meant to reply to the email you sent with your detailed comments on The Fifth Branch, because they were incredibly careful and thoughtful and totally understood everything that I was trying to do, and that meant a very great deal to me. But I wasn't sure how to thank you properly, so I never sent it.

Anyway, I recognized your name when you left the first comment, and because you did I tracked down all of your books -- I think I'd thought I'd read The Winter Prince already, but I hadn't. Now I am an enormous fan of yours, so everyone wins. :)