Writing Myths // Fact or Fiction: Which is More Important?

Post five! I wonder how long I will keep up with how many posts I’ve written…

Hello and welcome back to Life of Heritage!  Today I have a special blog post. A dear subscriber asked me to write a series on Writing Myths/Historical Myths. So while this won’t be a monthly series, I will be gathering more information for this topic in particular! Hope you enjoy this post that has been begging to be written for a few months now. Without further ado, let’s hop to it!

A few months ago, I read a post that said one should never let history get in the way of a good story. Fiction before fact. I have to disagree with this bit of advice. Let me explain why.

History is unyielding. No matter how much you want to change it (like our textbooks today!) you cannot truly change history. It is as it was and just because you don’t like it doesn’t mean you can change it. Gen. U.S. Grant owned slaves, so it would be silly for me to write a story about a staunch abolitionist conversation between him and my main character. I don’t like it that he owned slaves. I don’t like slavery at all, but I cannot erase it from history.

Your readers won’t trust you. When you keep most of your history straight in your story, but change a timeline to suit your story, your readers will assume you are telling the truth. I can’t say that Stonewall Jackson died on May 15th just because I want to make sure one of my characters has enough time to ride all the way to Florida to fetch a long lost relative and make it back in time to hold his hand as Stonewall dies. That’s ridiculous. But what’s worse, I’ve lied to my readers by giving them a false date. Now, I understand adding fictional events to a story, like a skirmish or a debate or a town meeting or a conversation between a fictional character and a real person, but never change historical fact. Your readers will feel betrayed when they dig into the story and find out you lied.

You don’t have to add to history to make a point. If you are writing something fictional about a real character, it must be consistent with his character or be based on something they actually did. Now, I’ll give you four examples that will help you understand what I mean.

1. Let’s say I’m trying to convince my readers that Col. Banister Tarleton of the British Army was a horrible person. It would be wrong for me to say that he burnt down a church building to make you hate him if he didn’t actually do that. (I have no idea if he burned down churches or not. This is strictly an example.)
2. On the flip side of that it would not be wrong for me to say that he had my main character’s uncle executed for being a patriot, because he did have patriots executed, often in unceremonious ways. That would be consistent with his character.
3. Now, lets look at a positive example. Let’s say I try to convince my readers that prior to his treason to the American Revolution, Benedict Arnold was an amazing officer. And if he hadn’t let pride and greed get in the way, he would have been the hero of the Revolution and maybe even one of our presidents. It would be wrong for me to paint him as flawless and make him out to be the victim of circumstance. He was prideful, and he was greedy. Money mattered more to him than independence.
4. The right way for me to portray his good qualities would be to state the facts about his military strategy. Perhaps, I could let one of my characters be an admirer and have Arnold decide to invest some time into someone who truly respects him and knows how smart he is; let my character sympathize with his hard times but always remind Arnold that freedom comes with a hefty price tag. I can spotlight the good Arnold did for the nation while pointing out his struggles and flaws. And by making my character one you easily love and admire, Arnold’s betrayal of him and America will hurt that much more. When you can see the good in someone and then see how far bad he went, it makes you realize just how awful his decisions were. It causes you to analyze how the treatment of others can play into decisions, and hopefully make you think about the way you treat others. Win-win right there!
   

I said all that to say this: You can use real people in fictional circumstances as long as it is believable that they really would have done that, and it doesn’t conflict with historical fact. The situation/reaction must fit their personality. This is part of what is called Creative License.

But if you don’t get anything else from this post, get this. You do not change History to accommodate your novel. Ever. Your novel is flexible; History isn’t.

I hope this post was helpful for those writing Historical fiction. It can be confusing trying to find difference between lying and creative license. The absolute best advice I can give you is to pray over the scene. Ask God if that’s a scene He would want you to write. Your parents would be a big help too, or a fellow Historical Fiction author. It helps to bounce ideas off each other!

Have a blessed day!
Ryana Lynn
Jude 22