Growing up I always hated reading historical fiction. I always thought it was boring probably because I didn’t really find history that interesting. Now that I am older, I have really started to enjoy historical fiction novels. I think that now that I know more about the history aspect behind them, I find them an interesting way to learn about different time periods.
A few of my classes in college have required me to read historical fiction such as The Book Thief, and Roll of Thunder Hear My Cry. I found both of these books to be very interesting and they gave me a better look into how things were during these time periods. Both of these books deal with a time when groups of people were being persecuted; Jews in The Book Thief, and African Americans in Roll of Thunder Hear My Cry. I have found that by reading about these events in a novel, I am able to connect to the characters and get a feel for what it was like for these people. Reading about these things in a history text book, I always knew that they were terrible, but by reading about it in a novel where I could connect to the characters, I really got a better idea of all the little things that people went through back then.
One thing that was brought up in class that I had never really thought about was the believability of these types of books. This is especially prevalent in The Book Thief. Being in the right/wrong place at the right/wrong time plays such a huge role in this story especially involving life and death. In reference to this, someone asked at what point does the story like that stop being believable? Personally, I tend to be an optimist and like to believe that something like that could have actually happened in real life, although when I really think about it, I feel as though it is not very likely. What do you think? Do you think that historical fiction books are mostly believable, or do you think that sometimes the author takes things too far making it unrealistic?
I think that authors definitely take some liberties in historical fiction, having something be just so, so then people survive or whatever. However I think that authors are allowed to stretch fate a little bit because they want certain things to be included in the book, it is supposed to be entertaining and its fiction. I feel as though even the most unlikely of events in historical fiction could have happened and who is to say it didn’t. As far as I am concerned, as long as the reader is aware that what they are reading is fiction the author can push the odds quite a bit. I would like to point out though that they shouldn’t change any of the actual historical facts in the story.
ReplyDeleteI have been required to read some different historical fiction books throughout college too. I think that authors do push the envelope in some of these historical fiction books. Especially in the book thief, there are some examples of the author going so far that it is not believable. When you think about Liesel being the only one who survived the bombing because she so happened to be downstairs at the time, you start to question the author a bit. But one has to stop and think that the book is still fiction, just with a historical base. So the author in these situations can go farther. I still think that these types of books are good for kids because these stories are usually a bit more interesting in terms of plot, but can still teach some history.
ReplyDeleteI agree that authors do take it past the point of being believable at times. Although I am with you and tend to being optimistic when reading historical fiction books. I often do not question whether or not it could actually happen when reading these books. I also did not enjoy reading historical fiction when I was younger but have become more interested in it over the years, probably because I have some more knowledge like you said. I do think historical fictions is good for children to read because of the knowledge and insights they can get by making connections to the characters and seeing what types of emotions they felt.
ReplyDeleteWith historical fiction books I think there is a fine line between truth and distortion, and if the historical event is diluted too much in order to get readers interested, I don't think it should be considered historical fiction. After all, the point of reading historical fiction is to learn something about history, right? I agree that a big part of this comes from having the story be believable and I think a big part of that, for me, comes from the characters themselves. In, The Book Thief, it was almost hard to read it as a historical fiction novel because the book was narrated from such a strange perspective. There were a lot of missing pieces to the story that made it hard to fully understand so I think that kind of took away from the historical aspects in it. Don't get me wrong, I love a good fictional story, but with historical fiction I think there has to be some standard of truth or else the whole historical event becomes lost in the storyline.
ReplyDelete