Truth or Pop?

[cheerful_deviant]

An actual writing question. (I know... *gasp*!)

Anyway, when writing a historical story which should you, or do you, work with? The actual circumstances as historians indicate it? Or as popular culture has immortalized it?

For example: I'm currently working on a piece involving Queen Cleopatra and the circumstances surrounding her death. Historians record that she died probablly from poison, possible the bite of an asp (although no snake was ever found) on her forearm (although this is also debated). But pop culture holds that she died form the bite of an asp on her breast.

Which to use?

I'm trying to make the peice as accurate as possible but it is a work of fiction afterall.

Opinions?

 

[Just-Legal]

Which fits the story best?

Simplistic question I know but sometimes the best.

 

[MagicaPractica]

lol, I just started a historical peice myself today, set during the Civil War. I think the first question I would ask is... are you writing a fictionalized account of the history or a story that uses historical fact in it? If the former, I would do as much research as possible to get the most accurate version and use that to work with. If the latter, then I would use what serves your story best.

 

[cheerful_deviant]

Which fits the story best?

Simplistic question I know but sometimes the best.

Well, the breast. This is erotica afterall. But in truth either will work.

I have already written the scene and spent some time researching the facts I didn't already know and think I got it pretty cloese. But contrary to the truth, I used that perticular peice of pop culture and put the bite on the breast. Now I'm having second thoughts.

The piece is pure fiction but I'd like it to be at least somewhat believable.

 

[MagicaPractica]

The piece is pure fiction but I'd like it to be at least somewhat believable.

Then just make sure you come up with a good reason for a snake to be near her breast.

 

[cheerful_deviant]

lol, I just started a historical peice myself today, set during the Civil War. I think the first question I would ask is... are you writing a fictionalized account of the history or a story that uses historical fact in it? If the former, I would do as much research as possible to get the most accurate version and use that to work with. If the latter, then I would use what serves your story best.

*see above*

(I'm to lazy to type it again. )

It's definitly fictionalized history (very fictionlized) but I'd also like it to have the ring of truth which is why I did my research.

 

[cheerful_deviant]

Then just make sure you come up with a good reason for a snake to be near her breast.

If I told you where I'm going with this story you wouldn't believe me.

 

[MagicaPractica]

If I told you where I'm going with this story you wouldn't believe me.

I'm very good at suspending disbelief but why spoil it? I'll look forward to reading it when it comes out.

 

[slyc_willie]

Well, no matter what you write, there will always be someone out there who will find fault with it, and be more than happy to correct your mistakes in a PC.

I'd say it depends upon what fits ebst for the story you have in mind. I love the movie 'A Knight's Tale,' despite it's liberal inclusion of historical figures doing and saying things they most likely would not have done. Same with Gladiator.

If you want to get technical, you can always put a little disclaimer at the top of the story, something like, "the author makes no (or little) attempt to stay true to actual historical events. This is a work of fiction, and as such, I reserve the right to indulge in artistic interpretation."

 

[MagicaPractica]

Well, no matter what you write, there will always be someone out there who will find fault with it, and be more than happy to correct your mistakes in a PC.

Very true. On my story, I know someone is going to claim there were no tobacco fields in New York State during the Civil War period but i have it in my great-great grandfather's own handwriting.

 

[BlackShanglan]

I enjoyed "Knight's Tale" completely against all of my expectations, and I think that it's a good object lesson on historical accuracy. They began with some nice period elements - I seem to recall it was there that I saw a gruesomely accurate representation of period medicine. As they moved toward places where they wanted us to suspend disbelief, they offered some cues, like the knight's support team singing football-style cheers in the pub. It's a cue to the audience - "We're not going to be entirely serious, because it might be fun not to. It's OK for you to laugh and just have fun in some parts." The fact that they didn't do it too gratuitiously and did make some nice efforts at accuracy in other places made it work for me.

I'm working on an historical piece too, and I am trying to be accurate on the basics - houses, clothing, social structure, technology. Personally, I'm more forgiving of liberties if there's care shown in other places and the deviations are not completely outrageous. I'm stuck with one deviation; someone has to wear hobnail boots in England in the year 1100, and there's no evidence that they were in use. Still, I feel fairly good about it; hobnails were used before and after that time, and people did wear boots; the idea of putting some nails into them can't have been so novel that someone could not possibly have come up with it on his own. I'm hoping that the audience feels the same way!

I would certainly feel that way about the asp. Much of your audience won't know that the arm / bosom debate exists, and with luck the rest will largely recognize that the bosom just has greater dramatic value.

 

[Liar]

But pop culture holds that she died form the bite of an asp on her breast.

Never heard that one. Thought the most common theory was that she died from lead poisoning from her regal make-up.

But that's not very, um, sexy. And as long as it's fiction... So go with whatever explanation tickles the imagination. Or make up your own. Worked for Dan Brown.

 

[BlackShanglan]

Never heard that one. Thought the most common theory was that she died from lead poisoning from her regal make-up.

But that's not very, um, sexy.

It is, however, wonderfully poetic when the wicked female schemer in Les Liaisons Dangereuses ends up horribly disfigured by the effects.

 

[slyc_willie]

I've always thought that, if you wanted to be completely accurate when writing an historical piece, it would end up as anything but sexy given the hygiene conditions that existed before, say the 1930s.

We're talking horrendous breath, rotting teeth, body odor, oily hair, greasy clothes . . . sure, you could write a story without explicitly including all that, but if you're detailed on setting, clothing, political and economic conditions . . . when Jonathan is panting passionately in Isabel's face while they're making love, I'd be thinking 'toxic cloud.'

Sometimes, historical accuracy isn't all it's cracked up to be.

 

[rgraham666]

Don't forget the boils.

 

[slyc_willie]

Don't forget the boils.

And fungus rot, yeast infections, smegma . . . *shudder*

Give me romanticised history any day.

 

[jomar]

I've always thought that, if you wanted to be completely accurate when writing an historical piece, it would end up as anything but sexy given the hygiene conditions that existed before, say the 1930s.

We're talking horrendous breath, rotting teeth, body odor, oily hair, greasy clothes . . . sure, you could write a story without explicitly including all that, but if you're detailed on setting, clothing, political and economic conditions . . . when Jonathan is panting passionately in Isabel's face while they're making love, I'd be thinking 'toxic cloud.'

Sometimes, historical accuracy isn't all it's cracked up to be.

Story goes that Napoleon wanted his woman 'ripe' and had her quit bathing days/weeks before he returned home.

As far as cheerful's OP goes, I heard she died in a 'riding' accident. Or maybe that was somebody else.

 

[jayce1066]

I thought Cleo was holding a beast to her ass. I gotta check my history books again.

 

[cloudy]

I've always thought that, if you wanted to be completely accurate when writing an historical piece, it would end up as anything but sexy given the hygiene conditions that existed before, say the 1930s.

We're talking horrendous breath, rotting teeth, body odor, oily hair, greasy clothes . . . sure, you could write a story without explicitly including all that, but if you're detailed on setting, clothing, political and economic conditions . . . when Jonathan is panting passionately in Isabel's face while they're making love, I'd be thinking 'toxic cloud.'

Sometimes, historical accuracy isn't all it's cracked up to be.

Speak for yourself. We bathed regularly.

 

[slyc_willie]

Story goes that Napoleon wanted his woman 'ripe' and had her quit bathing days/weeks before he returned home.

These days, that would be a fetish. Maybe it was then, as well. After all, the more 'well-to-do,' such as Josephine or any of Napoleon's other lovers, could afford to bathe daily. I understand that wealthy women could even douche, in a fashion.

Maybe The Beast was simply indulging in youthful memories.

I dated a girl, long time ago, when I worked a job that was very physically demanding. Every day when i got off work, I was sweaty, smelly, my clothes ticking to my skin . . . but she would want me to come over to her apartment without taking a shower. She loved the way I smelled, she said. The dirtier the better.

 

[slyc_willie]

Speak for yourself. We bathed regularly.

*snicker*

Your ancestors may have, but mine sure as hell didn't.

 

[Stella_Omega]

Well, the breast. This is erotica afterall. But in truth either will work.

I have already written the scene and spent some time researching the facts I didn't already know and think I got it pretty cloese. But contrary to the truth, I used that perticular peice of pop culture and put the bite on the breast. Now I'm having second thoughts.

The piece is pure fiction but I'd like it to be at least somewhat believable.

Have you never been kissed on the wrist? Or bitten, or suckled there?
You could write about the snake moving along her arm and make it orgasmic.

 

[Rumple Foreskin]

IMHO, if the story/novel is going to be marketed as "mainstream," then depending on the nature of the factoid, you can probably get away with pop. But if the primary target audience is readers who enjoy "historical" fiction, then go with the truth.

Rumple Foreskin

 

[slyc_willie]

Have you never been kissed on the wrist? Or bitten, or suckled there?
You could write about the snake moving along her arm and make it orgasmic.

Indeed! Or, the inside of the elbow, the edge of the armpit . . . There are some unlikely erogenous zones there.

 

[cloudy]

*snicker*

Your ancestors may have, but mine sure as hell didn't.

Well, one side of my family did, the other didn't.