History in books

[member 737]

Action of numerous fiction books takes place in the past. What's more, there are often real people portrayed as well as imaginary ones. However, the real characters' deeds or misdeeds are often deliberately changed, or they are presented in a different way than in historical analyses. For example, Richard III by W. Shakespeare.

Spoiler

It was never proved that he killed all the people who he kills in the drama. Yes, they all died in strange circumstances, but it could not be Richard who was responsible for that. Like two little princes, who did not stand in his way to the throne, because they had no right to it.

So, what do you think about those changes? Is it right that the authors can present the history in contradition to the facts? Their version may be regareded by many readers as the true, historical one.

 

[lies]

I think it's probably the reader's responsibility to not take whatever he reads (especially not if it's fiction) for absolute truth. I mean, whenever I read, even if it's non-fiction, I know it's just one person's (or in some cases: a couple of person's) opinion. Plus fiction has that one big warning sign for all us readers: it's fiction.

 

[Beatrycze]

I'd rather say that author is also responsible for not making a false impression about people. who really lived and their acts. Richard III is very good example here, because nowadays few people know truth about him. It's because books have greater impact than historical facts. Shakespeare had rather liberal attitude to history- we forgive him, because he is a genius. In his days truth was known and he couldn't suppose that his play would become only one source of knowledge for many people. But now, authors must be aware of that.

 

[member 737]

I agree with Beatrycze in this matter. When you read a story which happens in a particular time, you expect the author to have some decent knowledge about that time. You trust that he/she did some research in the subject (for instance, how did peasants lived in the Middle Ages) and may present historical details precisely. If we were suspicious about the author's accuracy, we should read a non-fiction historical work after each fiction historical novel, which would be an absurd. Many keen fiction readers don't enjoy scientific works and much of their knowledge comes simply from fiction books.

Besides, good name of historical people may suffer.