Historical Fiction: Purely Fact, Imagination, or Both?

Historical fiction brings together historical fact and imagination. Authors craft historical fiction by weaving together pieces of factual information and filling in the gaps of available information with imagination. The Joy's of Children Literature Chapter 8 states that "the success of a work of historical fiction depends on the author's ability to combine the facts of the event, their vision of the meaning of the event, and the fictional tale surrounding the event. This description leans more towards the factual aspects of historical fiction being of most importance. I agree that facts in historical fiction are the most important because we're talking about something that has actually happened, so there shouldn't be any reason for the facts not to be stated.

However, many works of historical fiction consider the imaginative aspects to be more important. Family of Readers states that "authors have three responsibilities in writing historical fiction: have to create a story that catches the attention of readers; must interest these readers in a particular time period; and must ensure the story suits the setting." This description leaves me thinking that authors of historical fiction should talk about a particular time period but it is more important to catch the readers attention. Many historical novels for children ignore known historical realities to accommodate political ideology. Also, authors of children's books have an obligation to moderate information about the unpleasant aspects of our history to soften human injustices that occurred in our history, such as racism and sexism.

In my opinion, these human injustices actually occurred in our history and should therefore be discussed. I don't think all the details should be included in children's books because a lot of what has happened in our world is inappropriate for young children, but I think it is important to at least have accurate information, or else readers will be learning things that are not true. I also understand that writers of historical fiction select, describe, and explain historical evidence, and thereby interpret in their own way. It makes sense that both sides of a confrontation would have different opinions on the way in which things went down, so there is always two sides to every story.