Tag Archives: historical fiction

Hedgebrook, Workshops, Writing process

Lessons in Creative Writing from Deborah Harkness – Part 1

, , , , , , 11 Comments
This was our last day of class. Yes, we had wine.

This was our last day of class. Yes, we had wine. (Deb is on the right.)

I received permission from Hedgebrook, Deb and my classmates to post a series of blogs about what we learned from Deb during our Master Class called Past Tense: History as Resource and Inspiration. Since she covered a different topic every day, that’s how I’m going to present them to you. She purposefully taught us different aspects of creative writing in the order she feels they are most important.

A Few Notes on Writing Historical Fiction
Before Deb got into the specifics of her first topic, she gave us a nice lecture about how we are perfectly qualified, as storytellers, to write historical fiction even though we’re not historians. I touched on that a little in my first post about the Master Class, but I’ll add a few details here.

Non-historians tend to think of history as right and wrong; historians know no such thing exists. History is an interpreted discipline in which they make an argument based on what they can back up with evidence. Circumstantial evidence doesn’t count for them, but it is a boon for historical fiction writers. It is our job to “write between the gaps,” as one of my follow writers said.

Novelists need to take authority over our story and characters and give up on the idea that historians have “the truth.” If it is not historically impossible, then for us, it is historically possible. It is our job to make it believable.

She emphasized that history should be a tool and not an obstacle. Our first job is to tell a great story. For that reason, any historical fiction story should be able to be set in contemporary times and still make sense. That is how we know the story itself is solid. The history simply places in another time.

Lesson #1: Character
Deb is a character-driven writer, meaning that for her, stories begin with and are propelled by the characters and their journey. The plot arises from what they do, rather than being thrust on them. (I’m a character-driven writer as well.) Her main point is that if your readers don’t care about the characters, all you’ve done is write history. The characters are what people relate to as they read your story.

In order for your characters to have integrity, they must be real, three-dimensional people who are consistent and make decisions that ring true, even if you don’t always agree with them. She believes that oftentimes readers are willing to trust historical fiction authors with history because they trust the characters. They are willing to forgive and forget a lot, but usually not a character that doesn’t speak to them.

History can give us the basis for creating characters, whether we pull them straight from history or use it as the context of the lives of fictional characters. Either way, when used correctly, historical details reveal things about the characters.

One character development tool Deb introduced us to is the Proust questionnaire. I’ve seen lots of lists of questions to interview your characters with, but this one was new to me. (Interestingly, this is what part of the interviews on Inside the Actor’s Studio are based on.) The idea is that by answering these questions, you begin to learn what makes your characters tick and see patterns in their lives. Most of what you answer won’t end up in your book, but knowing this information will help you start immersing yourself in their world. The better you can do that, the more believable and real your characters will be.

Another tool one of my fellow writers mentioned was the question Anne Lamott poses in Bird by Bird, “What does your character have in his/her pockets and why?” The “why” is the true purpose of any of these interview techniques because it starts to get at motivation, which is key to both a believable character and story. As Deb said, “History can be a crutch for us. Sometimes problems are better solved by asking ‘why?'”

She ended our first lecture by reiterating her belief that (at least in character driven fiction) the character’s journey transcends all the other stuff: the setting, the plot, the historical context. She taught us about each of those, but set the tone by teaching us their place: they are all secondary to character.

Next week: Plot and history.

Random bit of trivia: Deb doesn’t outline. She says her stories evolve as she goes and does lots of editing.

What do you think about Deb’s thoughts on historical fiction, history and character? Do you agree or disagree? Why? Did anything you read here strike you as important or unusual? Please tell me your reactions in the comments.

Book reviews, Books

Book Review: The Lost Sisterhood by Anne Fortier

, ,

LostI’m thrilled to share with you an extended version of one of my first reviews for the Historical Novel Society. And I’m even more excited that it’s this book. Anne Fortier is one of my favorite authors and one you should read, if you haven’t. Her new book, The Lost Sisterhood comes out March 11.

Told in dual time period, The Lost Sisterhood is the story of two very different women who have the courage to defy convention in order to fight for what they believe in.

One is Diana Morgan, an Oxford philologist driven by family lore to prove that the legendary Amazons actually existed. When she’s approached by a stranger who offers her just the opportunity she needs, Diana embarks upon an adventure that takes her around the world in search of the last vestiges of this ancient civilization. But there are those who believe some secrets are meant to be kept, and Diana soon finds herself in grave danger.

Her ancient counterpart is a North African hunter named Myrina. She and her sister, Lilli, are the lone survivors of their village. Taken in by a group of priestesses, their idyllic life quickly becomes one of terror as hostile invaders desecrate all they hold dear. Myrina and the other survivors vow to never be victims again, a resolve tested many times, in many ways throughout the remainder of their lives.

As the narrative flips between the two tales, Fortier interweaves the story lines masterfully, giving just enough hint of what’s to come to keep the pages turning. Initially drawn in by the contemporary adventure, I quickly found myself absorbed by the historical tale, which puts a clever spin on Greek history and myth, making them come to life in fresh, compelling ways. By the end, both story lines had me racing to learn the final outcome, one which artfully marries the two stories in a series of twists that leaves you wondering just who to trust and who will prevail.

I had feeling there would be a love story somewhere in this book, and sure enough, there was (there are two, actually, but I’m referring to the contemporary one). When I first realized who it was going to be, I rolled my eyes and thought, “Oh God, please no.” But I give Fortier full credit for winning me over by the end of the book. Despite my initial resistance, I was cheering for the couple by the last few chapters and was thinking of them long after I finished the book.

If I had any criticism, it was that the ending, while good, wasn’t quite strong enough for me. The book was so exciting, I would have liked to have seen a more definite ending, rather than the general summary that was given. But all in all, that’s forgivable in light of such a strong story.

Fortier’s first novel, Juliet, is one of my favorite books, so this story had large shoes to fill. It did so well. Very highly recommended – 4.5 stars.

Have you read any of Anne Fortier’s books? Do you want to read this one? Why or why not?

Book reviews, Books

Book Review: Shadow on the Crown by Patricia Bracewell

, , , , , 6 Comments

shadowWe’re less than half a month in to 2014 and I’ve already found what might just be my favorite book of the year. Shadow on the Crown by Patricia Bracewell was published in 2013 and highly lauded by the Historical Novel Society. Now I know why.

The book, the first of a trilogy, tells the story of a little-known historical queen called Emma of Normandy in the years before William the Conqueror did his thing in 1066. The Saxons are at the height of their power in Britain, but are heavily threatened by the Danes, who raid their coasts yearly. Emma’s Norman noble family is an ally of both, and seeks to raise their own prestige by balancing the favor of both kings. In an effort to broker peace, young Emma is married the British king, Aethelred, who is a haunted, brutal man. Once at court, Emma finds that her role as queen is not at all what she expected and she must use all the wits God gave her to survive in a world that is a real life game of thrones.

Shadow on the Crown sucked me in from the first pages. To me, this book embodies everything historical fiction should be. Bracewell is particularly adept at world building. Despite my Arthurian research, the Saxons are not a people I’m intimately familiar with, but after reading this book, I feel like I have spent time in their bleak, brutal world and have come away with a greater understanding of what life in those times was like. Part of what I think makes this possible is that Bracewell based her story heavily in the Anglo Saxon Chronicle and uses actual Saxon words throughout the book (oh, that such a thing were possible for Arthurian legend!), which lends a strong air of authenticity to the story.

While the book is far from doom and gloom, she doesn’t shy away from the realities of the time: abusive men, dismissive attitudes toward women, brutal war and savage tactics, including rape. But beyond that, Bracewell has done a superior job of getting into the mindset of the Anglo-Saxon people, a reality where signs and portents were everywhere, ones fate (wyrd) was pre-ordained and death and betrayal lurked around every corner.

In addition, Bracewell’s characters are well crafted. Four tell the story, each with their own point of view. Emma is incredibly strong for her time period, but it is not at all anachronistic. This is a strength that comes not from taking up arms, but from being unwilling to surrender to less than perfect circumstances, using all her wits to stay one step ahead of those who would harm her, and when necessary, being as manipulative as the men to gain what she wants. The other female lead, Elgiva, is similarly strong, although her intentions are much darker than Emma’s. While Aethelred is violent and possibly insane, it isn’t out of keeping with a man who has known treachery since childhood and suffered great loss in his life. His foil is his eldest son, Aethelstan, who is much more noble and likable, showing that the Saxons were not just men drunk on blood and gore, but living, breathing human beings who cared for one another as well.

Bracewell’s writing style is one that should be studied by every writer. She uses every word intentionally, and when taken together, they are almost poetic. Her ability to evoke a time nearly a millennium in the past is masterful, as her descriptions put you right in the center of the action in a world so foreign to our own. Her dialogue is witty and well crafted, with every character having a distinct voice. In particular, Shadow on the Crown is one of the best examples of how multiple points of view should be handled, as each change in perspective blends seamlessly with the one before and after, avoiding the “head hopping” and jarring transitions that can sometimes occur in this style.

This book has taught me so much as a writer, which is the highest praise I can possible give a novel. It makes me want to go back to my manuscripts and see how I can improve them. I will certainly be studying her use of multiple points of view, as I attempt that in my own novels in the future.

I cannot wait until the next book comes out. Shadow on the Crown proves that a debut novel can – and should – be a masterpiece. Five stars.

Have you read this book? Did you like it? Why or why not? After reading this review, are you interested in reading it?

Blogs, Everything else

Six Articles for Readers, Writers and History Buffs

, , , , , , , , , , , , , 2 Comments
This 5th century ring, recently discovered in Britian, will important in book 2. (Photo credit: Mail Online)

This 5th century ring, recently discovered in Britian, will important in book 2. (Photo credit: Mail Online)

If you follow me on Twitter, you may have noticed I spent almost my entire 3-day weekend making edits to the rough draft of Book 2 (working title: Camelot’s Queen). This means I didn’t have time for a proper blog post. So instead, here are a handful of news items and blog posts that have made my author’s heart sing over the last few weeks. I hope you enjoy them as well.

  1. Unique sapphire ring found in Yorkshire field may have been owned by 5th century European royalty – Hmmm….considering the time period and location, it was likely to have been owned by a post-Roman Briton. Can we say King Arthur or Guinevere? Look for this ring to make several appearances in Book 2.
  2. Social Media for Writers – My agent extraordinaire, Jen Karsbaek, wrote this insightful piece on the Foreword Literary blog last week. She makes some great points I didn’t even think of when I wrote mine. (PS – Did you know you can get Foreword shirts/hoodies online?)
  3. Why I Love Novels in First Person – HF author Nancy Bilyeau (whose first book, The Crown, I am currently loving!) wrote a fantastic post over at Historical Tapestry on the merits of writing in first person. This POV has its limitations, but I have to admit I love it. I’m not sure I’ll switch third in the future.
  4. Let Your Characters Live and Breathe – James Scott Bell wrote a lovely post on what to do when your characters won’t do what you want them to do. My favorite tip: go with them; they’re usually right. The surprises in writing are actually my favorite part. They are what tell me this particular story has taken on a life of it’s own – and when it does that, it’ll be successful.
  5. An Interview with Ashley Barron – I don’t know any of this writer’s work, but I LOVED her interview. Worth reading for writers and readers alike.
  6. Think You Ought be in Pictures? – In case you’ve ever wondered about how books get turned into movies, here’s  a great post from agent Rachelle Gardener that spells it all out. (I don’t know about you, but I’m still crossing my fingers!)

And for my fellow history lovers, don’t worry, I’ll get back to the Celtic history and Arthurian legend posts soon. I still owe you posts on divorce and children in the Celtic world and I have two DVD series from the Great Courses to load me up with new material as soon as I get a chance to watch them.

What about you? What articles/blog posts have you enjoyed lately? Please share them in the comments so we can all read them.

Books, Other Voices

David Pilling: A Bolton, a Bolton! The White Hawk!

, , , , ,

TWHpaperbackcoverToday please help me welcome blogger David Pilling, author of the historical fiction novel  The White Hawk.

“A Bolton, a Bolton! The White Hawk! God for Lancaster and Saint George!”

England, 1459: the kingdom stands divided and on the brink of civil war. The factions of Lancaster and York vie for control of the King, while their armies stand poised, ready to tear each other to pieces.

The White Hawk follows the fortunes of a family of Lancastrian loyalists, the Boltons, as they attempt to survive and prosper in this world of brutal warfare and shifting alliances. Surrounded by enemies, their loyalties will be tested to the limit in a series of bloody battles and savage twists of fate.

This period, with its murderous dynastic feuding between the rival Houses of York and Lancaster, is perhaps the most fascinating of the entire medieval period in England. Having lost the Hundred Years War, the English nobility turned on each other in a bitter struggle for the crown, resulting in a spate of beheadings, battles, murders and Gangland-style politics that lasted some thirty years.

Apart from the savage doings of aristocrats, the wars affected people on the lower rungs of society. One minor gentry family in particular, the Pastons of Norfolk, suffered greatly in their attempts to survive and thrive in the feral environment of the late 15th century. They left an invaluable chronicle in their archive of family correspondence, the famous Paston Letters.

The letters provide us with a snapshot of the trials endured by middle-ranking families like the Pastons, and of the measures they took to defend their property from greedy neighbours. One such extract is a frantic plea from the matriarch of the clan, Margaret Paston, begging her son John to return from London:

“I greet you well, letting you know that your brother and his fellowship stand in great jeopardy at Caister… Daubney and Berney are dead and others badly hurt, and gunpowder and arrows are lacking. The place is badly broken down by the guns of the other party, so that unless they have hasty help, they are likely to lose both their lives and the place, which will be the greatest rebuke to you that ever came to any gentleman. For every man in this country marvels greatly that you suffer them to be for so long in great jeopardy without help or other remedy…”

The Paston Letters, together with my general fascination for the era, were the inspiration for The White Hawk. Planned as a series of three novels, TWH will follow the fortunes of a fictional Staffordshire family, the Boltons, from the beginning to the very end of The Wars of the Roses. Unquenchably loyal to the House of Lancaster, their loyalty will have dire consequences for them as law and order breaks down and the kingdom slides into civil war. The ‘white hawk’ of the title is the sigil of the Boltons, and will fly over many a blood-stained battlefield.

In the following excerpt, the Lancastrian lord “Butcher” Clifford prepares to defend a river crossing against the Yorkist host:

“Lord Clifford sat his horse on the north bank of the River Aire and watched the glittering mass of the Yorkist vanguard march into view from the south.

It was a bitterly cold afternoon, with a hint of ice on the wind. Clifford took no notice. He was the lord of Skipton and Craven in Yorkshire, and the atrocious weather and desolate landscape of the north appealed to his stark nature. This was his country.

“The Butcher,” the Yorkists had started to call him, for his cold-blooded killing of Edmund of Rutland after the Battle of Wakefield. Clifford gloried in the name. The more his enemies feared him, the better. He was a hard man, consumed by a lust for revenge since the death of his father at the First Battle of Saint Albans, six years previously.

Clifford had slaked his thirst for Yorkist blood somewhat on Rutland, and still felt a tight little shiver of pleasure at the memory of his knife plunging into the boy’s soft white gullet. One death, however, wasn’t enough. Only the bloody annihilation of all the Yorkists in England would suffice.

“Fauconberg’s men are in the van, as we suspected,” said Lord Neville, his second-in-command, pointing at one of the enormous standards carried at the head of the Yorkist troops, displaying blue and white halves painted with Fauconberg’s distinctive sigil of a sable fish-hook in the top right corner.

Clifford said nothing. He had already repelled an attempt by the Earl of Warwick and Lord Fitzwalter to cross the stone bridge over the Aire, falling on the Yorkist camp at dawn and slaughtering many soldiers in their beds. More had died as they tried to escape across the river, drowned or swept away in the icy waters. Lord Fitzwalter had been mortally wounded, and Warwick himself barely escaped with an arrow in his thigh.

The bridge was the only reliable crossing over the flood-swollen Aire for miles in either direction. The Yorkists had to cross the river to engage the enormous Lancastrian army slowly deploying a mile to the north, between the villages of Towton and Saxton. Sooner or later, Clifford appreciated, they would realise how small the force was that opposed their crossing…”

If this whets your appetite, then please check out the paperback and Kindle versions of Book One below…

The White Hawk – paperback version

Kindle version

David can also be found online at Bolton and Pilling and Pilling’s Writing Corner.

Readers, what do you think of David’s post? Please leave your comments for him below.

Arthurian Legend, Books

Arthurian Legend: Historical Fiction or Fantasy?

, , , , 17 Comments

When I first started to seriously consider getting my work published, I posted to an online message board asking whether agents/publishers consider Arthurian legend historical fiction or fantasy. I received only one reply (rather snarky), “Oh that stuff gets passed off as historical fiction all the time.”

That was when I realized not everyone thinks Arthurian legend is a serious topic (or sub-genre, if you will) for historical fiction. Where it should be classified really depends on your definition of “historical.” If by that word you mean something firmly grounded in evidence and fact (especially written), then you won’t ever be able to accept Arthurian legend as historical. But if you accept a looser definition that includes anything that takes place in another time period and attempts to recreate the history, culture, politics, religion, etc. of that time, then you open yourself up to including Arthurian legend.

I’m happy to say that the Historical Novel Society (HNS) counts it as historical fiction. As stated in their Guide to King Arthur:

From the point of view of historical fiction, the Arthur mythos has always pin-pointed the fault-line between history and story. The historians pull in the direction of a realistic, Celtic post-Roman world. Their Arthur is without magic, without high-Catholic symbolism, and without chivalry. The fantasy authors pull the other way, setting the stories in a time outside time, often depicting a battle between Christian ‘magic’ and pagan ‘magic’, plundering the myths for narrative and atmosphere. Literary authors tend to stand one foot in both camps, enchanted by the magic realism and epic poetry at the heart of the stories, but wanting to give emotional consistency and humanity (usually historical humanity) to the protagonists.”

Personally, I believe that Arthurian legend can be either historical fiction or fantasy, depending on if the author chooses to ground his/her story in history. As I’ve said before, there is very little historical evidence for Dark Ages Britain and King Arthur. Really all we know for sure is that the tribes of Britain fought against each other after Rome left their shores in 410 AD. They united (presumably under a single leader) to face the Saxons in battle at a place traditionally known as Mount Badon, somewhere around the year 500 AD (some argue as much as 30 years earlier or later on the date). They roundly defeated the Saxons, who then left them alone for decades. Their leader is traditionally called Arthur, which may be a title or a name. Around him grew the stories we know as Arthurian legend (see parts 1, 2, and 3 of my series on the evolution of Arthurian legend to learn more).

Because we have so few reliable records, those of us interested in Arthur and Celtic Britain must rely heavily on myth and tradition. This opens up a lot of room for interpretation and invention. (Hence, the “fiction” part of “historical fiction.”) But it can also lead into the realms of fantasy when we make up things to fill in the historical gaps, especially if those things involve the supernatural. But does magic always mean fantasy? Again, the answer depends on your point of view. The Celts certainly had a belief in magic. And there are people in our world today who will swear psychic abilities, the manipulation of energy and Otherworldly beings are very real, while others say they are pure make-believe or wishful thinking.

In short, until the day someone can definitively prove one way or the other that Arthur did or did not exist and we find records of his culture, there will be the possibility for both historical accuracy and fantasy in fiction that deals with him and his world.

And my books? I never thought I’d say this, but according to the HNS definition, I think I fall in the literary category. My Arthur and Guinevere live in post-Roman Britain (approximately 491-530 AD) and I’ve tried very hard to make the culture/politics true to the time period, but I also couldn’t imagine an Arthurian world without magic. Because of the tensions of the time, I carry on the fantasy tradition of emphasizing the clash between pagan and Christian, but not only in theology, also in politics and power.

Do you think Arthurian legend can be considered historical fiction? Or would you define it as fantasy? Why? Does how it’s classified or shelved at a bookstore even matter to you as a reader?

Everything else, Writing process

Midnight in Paris: A Movie for Writers

, , , , , , 4 Comments

Woody Allen’s Midnight in Paris is a movie all writers should see. No matter what you write, you’ll find something to appreciate in this film. But what surprised me the most when I saw it last weekend was how much it moved me as a historical fiction writer.

I don’t intend this to be a review, so I’ll just touch on the high points of the plot, as they apply to this post. The movie is about Gil (played by Owen Wilson), a successful Hollywood screenwriter turned aspiring novelist who regrets never living and writing literature in Paris. On a trip there with his fiance and her family, he finds that every night at midnight he can travel back in time to the 1920s, a time he yearns for as an ideal age. After various adventures with the literary and artistic elite of the time, including his idols F. Scott Fitzgerald and Hemingway, Gertrude Stein, Cole Porter, Picasso and many others, Gil realizes that everyone finds the present boring and longs for another time.

I’ll admit, I’m a little jealous of Gil being able to have his work reviewed by one of his historical idols (who wouldn’t be?!) And real-life quotes like Hemingway’s “No subject is terrible if the story is true, if the prose is clean and honest, and if it affirms courage and grace under pressure,” and “If you’re a writer, declare yourself the best writer,” make the movie relatable on a personal level.

But what makes it truly great is a strong theme of living in the past. Anyone who writes historical fiction can no doubt relate to this exchange:

One of the two over-the-top antagonists (I wish Allen had been a little more trusting of his audience and more subtle in their characterization) has one of the most poignant lines in the film, “Nostalgia is denial – denial of the painful present… the name for this denial is golden age thinking – the erroneous notion that a different time period is better than the one ones living in – it’s a flaw in the romantic imagination of those people who find it difficult to cope with the present.”

Is he right? Yes and no. I agree that yearning for the past is a way of dealing with a difficult present (if we didn’t have difficulties, what would we write about?), but I don’t think it’s a flaw. For some of us, it’s just the way our brains work. If wasn’t, there would be no historians and no record (romantic or otherwise) of what came before. I disagree that nostalgia is denial. It’s recognition that something in the past resonates with us more than the present. We can find ways of mining our love of the past to improve our present by incorporating the values or ways of life we feel our society has lost or is losing, or at the very least, capture them in our writing for future generations.

Historical fiction serves a great purpose. It not only entertains and provides a means of escape, it educates about a bygone time in relatable ways history textbooks never can. Until time travel becomes more than fantasy, it’s the closest thing we’ve got.  We’re fortunate that history gives us such a rich tableau from which to draw in our writing.

By far my favorite scene is this one (I wish I could find a video clip for you):

Adriana: Let’s never go back to the ’20s!
Gil: What are you talking about?
Adriana: We should stay here. It’s the start of La Belle Époque! It’s the greatest, most beautiful era Paris has ever known.
Gil: Yeah, but about the ’20s, and the Charleston, and the Fitzgeralds, and the Hemingways? I mean, I love those guys.
Adriana: But it’s the present. It’s dull.
Gil: Dull? It’s not my present. I’m from 2010.
Adriana: What do you mean?
Gil: I dropped in on you the same way we’re dropping in on the 1890s.
Adriana: You did?
Gil: I was trying to escape my present the same way you’re trying to escape yours, to a golden age.
Adriana: Surely you don’t think the ’20s are a golden age!
Gil: Well, yeah. To me they are.
Adriana: But I’m from the ’20s, and I’m telling you the golden age is La Belle Époque.
Gil: And look at these guys. I mean, to them, their golden age was the Renaissance. You know, they’d trade Belle Époque to be painting alongside Titian and Michelangelo. And those guys probably imagined life was a lot better when Kublai Khan was around.
Adriana:  What are you talking about?
Gil: Adriana, if you stay here, and this becomes your present, then, pretty soon, you’ll start imagining another time was really your, you know, was really the golden time. That’s what the present is. That it’s a little unsatisfying, because life’s a little unsatisfying.

The key point here? No one is ever satisfied with the time in which they live. It’s possible to view the past through rose-colored glasses, but the present is seen with painful clarity. That’s exactly why historical fiction has a market. Everyone has a different point in time that is their escape.  Like Gil says about living in the past, if you read (or write) too much of one time period, you get comfortable with it and it gets boring, so you move on to another, seeking to fill a void created by the present. But for historical fiction writers, the past is the present, and that’s what sets us apart from other writers.

So what do you think? Have you seen Midnight in Paris? Did you like it? Can you relate to what I’ve said or do you think I’m totally crazy? Do you think living in the past is pointless or do you see some value in it?

Writing process

On Historical Fiction Writing

, , , 6 Comments

"Looking Back Through Time" by adrians_art

Over the weekend, I took a break from editing book 1 to work on a short story that’s been haunting me since 2007. It’s totally different from everything else I’ve ever written (read: it takes place in modern times and is a little gritty). I don’t know if I’ll ever do anything with it, but I thought it would be a nice change of pace. And it was.

But what surprised me most is that it gave me a whole new appreciation for historical fiction (HF). HF and fantasy are all I’ve ever tried to write because, well, apparently I enjoy other time periods and worlds more than this one (I blame it on one too many past lives). In one weekend, I wrote more words than I usually do in twice that time, all because I was writing about my own time period. What did this teach me?

  1. It takes patience to write HF – You would think after 10+ years of research I would realize that, but I guess I’m a little slow. Until I wrote about my own time period, I didn’t realize how much of my time writing HF is taken up by second guessing word origin (i.e. time period and place), looking at maps to confirm geography, or fussing over some other detail to get things just right. These details are what make HF pop, but you don’t have to think about them as much when writing modern fiction – they just come because you have a natural frame of reference. It’s one thing to transport readers within their familiar world, but to take them somewhere else in time is completely different.
  2. Good HF looks deceptively easy – Why? A good HF writer (like any professional) makes it look effortless. But in reality, HF writers voluntarily become experts in their chosen time and place. That’s not something everyone (outside of historians and archeologists) can say. And why do we do it? Well, insanity is one possibility, but mostly it’s a labor of love.
  3. I wouldn’t want to do anything else – Yes, I can write modern fiction faster. But, there’s something about being able to bring the past to life that makes HF special and makes me want to keep doing it. (I have plans beyond Guinevere and Isolde, I’m just not ready to talk about them yet.) There’s something special about resurrecting lost voices or rescuing those on the brink of being forgotten. After all, we all want to think we’ll be remembered; perhaps helping others secure their place in history will somehow assure ours.

What do you think? If you write or read HF, what draws you to it?