Fashion Girls

Belated Bookshelf - Historical Worldbuilding

At first, I didn't write a "bookshelf" entry because I didn't have anything remarkable to say about what I was reading.  Then, I didn't write one because I was a bit overwhelmed by what I'd been reading.  So, without further delay...

Last week, I finished reading Sarah Dunant's - IN THE COMPANY OF THE COURTESAN.  It's set in 16th century Rome and Venice, and it feels very much - to me - like a fantasy novel.  The details of the world are rich and complete; it feels completely different from my modern, protected, electrified, sanitized life.  While characters have strong motivations that are similar to 21st century motivations, they act upon them in a world with clearlyl defined, very different-from-ours rules.  In short, I think that a lot of historical fiction reads like fantasy - perhaps *especially* those that are well-researched.  (I had the same reaction to MEMOIRS OF A GEISHA when I read it.  The world of the Japanese geisha was more thoroughly created by the author than many a fantasy world I've read about it.

For those of you who read both fantasy and historical novels - do you find the same thing?  Which historical novelists do the best worldbuilding, in your opinions?

Over the weekend, I finished reading Audrey Niffenegger's THE TIME TRAVELER'S WIFE.  I *loved* it.  It was an all-consuming read; I didn't want to do anything else but finish it.  (I'm not 100% that the author keeps her timelines - and her characters' self-knowledge - straight, but I loved the conceit, the characterization, and the storytelling.)  Now, explain to me why this novel is "mainstream" instead of SF?  (And while you're at it, toss in the explanation for FLOWERS FOR ALGERNON - it'll be the same one :-) )

And here the rest of the Bookshelf:

THE TIME TRAVELER'S WIFE, by Audrey Niffenegger

ME VS. ME, by Sarah Mlynowski

THE THIEF WITH NO SHADOW, by Emily Gee (read for blurbing purposes - not yet publicly available!)

IN THE COMPANY OF THE COURTESAN, by Sarah Dunant.

MORE TO LIFE THAN THIS, by Carole Matthews

FISHBOWL, by Sarah Mlynowski

THE LADY AND THE UNICORN, by Tracy Chevalier.

THE MATZO BALL HEIRESS, by Laurie Gwen Shapiro.

THE KITE RUNNER, by Khaled Hosseini.

PREP, by Curtis Sittenfeld.

WHAT MEN WANT, by Deborah Blumenthal.

THE DEVIL'S ARITHMETIC, by Jane Yolen.

WONDERBOY, by Fiona Gibson.

FREEDOMLAND, by Richard Price.

MEAN SEASON, by Heather Cochran.

THE LOST PAINTING, by Jonathan Harr.

HARDLY WORKING, Betsy Burke.

THE ART OF DECEPTION, by Ridley Pearson.

DO THEY WEAR HIGH HEELS IN HEAVEN, by Erica Orloff.

THE YEAR OF MAGICAL THINKING, by Joan Didion.

LOVES ME, LOVES ME NOT, by Libby Malin.

ON THE VERGE, by Ariella Papa.

THE LION, THE WITCH, AND THE WARDROBE, by C.S. Lewis.

A LITTLE CHANGE OF FACE, by Lauren Baratz-Logsted.

THE SEA, by John Banville.

Mindy, wishing as always that she had more time to read...
Tags:

Comments

I'm going to have to add IN THE COMPANY OF THE COURTESAN to my reading list now.

I don't really read historical novels, not that I don't like them, but there's so many of dubious quality that I have a hard time finding GOOD historical novels. Add to that difficulty is the penchance for all of said books to be TPB. Call me cheap, but if I'm not sure I'll like a book I'm not dropping $14.95 on an oversized PB. So, I'll leave answering your world-building question to someone who knows what they're talking about.

OTOH, I can toss out my .02 on FLOWERS FOR ALGERNON. A few years ago, I had the pleasure of listening to Daniel Keyes talk about all things Algernon. I came away from the talk under the impression that it was such a success in the literary world was because the critics liked the story, despite it's SF elements, and because it used SF elements to tell a story, not the other way around. YMMV.

There are many, many SF books that get the literary "pass". Some authors of those books fight to retain their SF title (e.g., Ursula LeGuin.) Others try to shrug it off as soon as possible. Certainly, there's a wider audience, if you're not just writing books for those Klingon-costume-wearing wierdos :-)

Mindy, more of a Ren-fair wierdo, herself :-)
Mindy,

Me too wishing for more time to read. I found when researching my own historical fantasy series, Merlin's Descendants, that the hardest thing to bring across is the difference in attitude. Get that right and the world really feels alien. One of my beta readers had a lot of trouble with my characters accepting superstion as fact. But that was the correct attitude. Not every hisotrian groks that concept.
And yet, the historical books that work the best are the ones where the author has internalized the underlying thoughts of the time.

"Of course one doesn't walk alone at night. Demons will get you."

When that is *believed* in the core of one's soul (word chosen purposely), then it influences every single thing one does.

(Anonymous)

Thank you

(Anonymous)

I understand in courts of Kingdoms they many from of life.
For those of you who read both fantasy and historical novels - do you find the same thing? Which historical novelists do the best worldbuilding, in your opinions?

Among the still living? Cecelia Holland, no question at all. The Firedrake, The Earl (A Hammer For Princes), Until the Sun Falls, she just plunks you down in the context and away you go. Even the minimalist stuff like Two Ravens.

Then there's Dorothy Dunnett, and Mary Renault, and Bryher. And OMG, Dame Edith Pargeter, the "Brothers of Gwynedd" quadrology about Llewelyn ap Griffydd, the "first, last, and only true Prince of Wales". (Even better written than the Brother Cadfael mysteries she wrote as "Ellis Peters".)

I wonder why so many of the best historical novelists in English have been women? I mean, in that genre, Robert Graves, Gore Vidal and Alfred Duggan are exceptions!
Really interesting observation, Ross.

I took a class on historical novels at the Smithsonian, and all of the authors interviewed were women, with the exception of Arthur Golden (Geisha) and Michael Shaara (or was it Jeff? - The living son, in any case, who continued the Gettysburg novels of the father.)

Perhaps historicals were considered marginalized fiction, so it was a field where women were "permitted" to flourish?

I've got a copy of BROTHERS OF GWYNEDD somewhere, alas, unread. Time to dig it out...
One warning ... the story will break your heart, in the same way as Dunnett's King Hereafter.

(Anonymous)

Historical fiction vs fantasy

I have to agree on Dame Edith Pargeter/Ellis Peters, at least as far as the Cadfael series goes. All 20 books captivated me precisely because the author clearly did a lot of research on England between 1138 and 1145, highlighting the civil war between King Stephen and the Empress Maud. The stories, set mainly in Shrewsbury but occasionally in Wales, are very skillfully interwoven with actual historical events. The characters and events are so believable that Mom and I frequently talk about "England at the time of Cadfael", as if he had actually existed. Thus, the books read like fantasy even though they're actually "medieval murder mysteries".

Shrewsbury is definitely on my list of places I'd like to see, should I ever get across "The Pond" again.

As for the "Brothers of Gwynedd", I'll have to look into those. It's the first I've heard of them.

And, speaking of Gwynedd, I have to say that my favorite fantasy authors over the years have tended to approach their works like historical fiction. Case in point: Katherine Kurtz and her "Deryni" series, set in an imaginary kingdom called "Gwynedd". As a child in the late 1970's, I could recite key events of the timeline in her novels as easily as I could the actual Middle Ages in our own universe. And then, of course, there was J.R.R. Tolkien.

While I haven't read too much of Barbara Hambly's historical work, it seems that she's very good at it as well. I certainly loved all of her earlier fantasy novels. I'm tempted to pick up her "Benjamin January" series, which is set in or around New Orleans in the 1830's.

I've also noticed that women seem to be better at this sort of thing than men; at least, women outnumber men on my list of favorite authors at least two to one.

Bob Shepard of Denver

Re: Historical fiction vs fantasy

I was a *huge* fan of Katherine Kurtz as I was growing up - I read DERYNI RISING so many times that I could recite large passages from memory. I learned more about the Catholic Church from Gwynedd than I did from my history classes :-)

Mindy, who had a *serious* crush on Alaric Anthony Morgan. Sigh...

(Anonymous)

Re: Historical fiction vs fantasy

right now that's my life, I work on fact and fiction getting all together

(Anonymous)

Re: Historical fiction vs fantasy

I deal with fact and fiction a lot more these days than years ago

(Anonymous)

Re: Historical fiction vs fantasy

right now that's my life, I work on fact and fiction getting all together, really