History and Science: Responsibility of the Writer?

areteus · Nov 18, 2011

MDSchafer said:
The biggest thing that looks amateur to me is to have a modern, or mostly modern woman historical fiction. Yes, it happens with men too, but in a lot of the unpublished fantasy/historical fiction I see a self-confident woman who doesn't need a man and sling a sword/run a business as well as any man and doesn't seem to suffer any sort of sexism as a result.

Modern social mores is a common one, I agree. It is too easy for a modern writer and a modern reader to react as a modern person would and impose those morals on the characters. It's not just sexism, but racism and classism too.

On the one hand you have to accept that sometimes the MCs are exceptional people who are more enlightened than the average person of the period. Often the story is about how the bigoted old baron came to understand that the woman who cleaned his toilet is an intelligent and thoughtful woman he might fall in love with or how the staunch Nazi forms a friendship with the Rabbi and learns that the propaganda is not true. I think it becomes annoying when everyone in the world is happily egalitarian - as if someone from the modern day had travelled back in time and taught them all 'the error of their ways'.

I did put a throwaway line in Gods of the Sea when introducing Rachel - who is a strong woman of the type you describe above. It was a comment about how the country she came from is considered 'weird' by every other place because of their strange attitude to women (they could own businesses! Dress how they like! There was even women in the Government!) which I think covered that issue nicely.

There was a LRP game I played where the players displayed this sort of behaviour. It was supposed to be authentic medieval (around 10th - 11th century) attitudes and as a result any female players got bonuses to make up for the fact that they would get sexism. Trouble was many of the male characters were too nice and modern to actually play that out so they got the bonuses for nothing anyway

And there was a specific incident where my wife decided to play a Jewess from York at a time, historically, just after the infamous well poisoning incident (where the Jews were blamed for poisoning the wells because, likely, they were a convenient scapegoat). She was looking forward to lots of accusations and drama and sidelong glances and mutterings and being socially ostrachised and Christian priests trying to preach to her. Unfortunately, as the referee said at the time, it seems as if the shadow of Belsen caused the players to be nicer than they should have been and about the worst she got was 'So, you're a Jew, are you? How is that working out for you?'

It is very difficult to play or write or think like a person from a historic period...

gothicangel · Nov 19, 2011

I think this discussion with a friend sums up the subject of a film:

Friend: "Well, the costume was cliched, wasn't it?'

Me: "What? You mean historically accurate?"

[I'm still trying to pick my jaw off the floor.]

areteus · Nov 19, 2011

Yeah, everytime you dress a Roman in a toga you are just perpetuating the cliche that all Romans wear togas

gothicangel · Nov 19, 2011

areteus said:
Yeah, everytime you dress a Roman in a toga you are just perpetuating the cliche that all Romans wear togas

Which [strangely enough]is similiar to the response I gave.

Another classic is 'it has cliched ideas of honour.' Well, duh, that's exactly how the Greeks and Romans thought about honour. :Headbang:

VictoriaWrites · Nov 19, 2011

I think authors should strive to be as accurate as possible- in most cases.

When authors purposefully change history for the sake of the novel, I like it when there's an afterword. (I made this up, but that was true, etc.)

What really got me was when I read a

(amateur) review of Scott Westerfeld's Leviathan. It's an alternate history, where WWI is fought using giant "Clanker" machines and huge fabricated "Beasties". The entire history- the entire world was different. But this person was more concerned about the fact that the Archduke Ferdinand was poisoned, not shot. (A matter that was addressed in Mr. Westerfeld's afterword.)

You will never please everyone. But you can do your best.

Lyra Jean · Nov 19, 2011

I remember when Titanic came out. I believe it's one of the most historically accurate movies at the time. They tried their best to make it accurate without turning it into a documentary and people were still complaining.

The town that Jack said he is from wasn't founded until 5 years after Titanic sank. The corset that Rose is wearing didn't come into fashion until 2 years later. The song that Rose is singing wasn't written until 1914.

I have no idea if those times were right. I was making the time up as an example but they did complain that those particular facts were wrong. I'm like wow really that is what you are going to complain about with this movie.

I know it's a movie and not a book but thought it fit.

Lyra Jean · Nov 19, 2011

There is a book I used to like the author was a scientist. I think she specialized in biology. One of her characters is a doctor and she went into boring detail about heart defects. It was part of the characters job to try and come up with new cures, programs, or something for the sick on his homeworld. Yes it was science fiction. But she went on for chapters at a time and it was like I know this stuff so I want my readers to know I know this stuff. I ended up giving the novel away. I swear you could skip large parts of that novel and not miss a thing.

gotchan · Nov 19, 2011

Lyra Jean said:
I have no idea if those times were right. I was making the time up as an example but they did complain that those particular facts were wrong. I'm like wow really that is what you are going to complain about with this movie.

I was involved in a discussion about the objectification of women, and, fooling around in Photoshop, I came up with a cow pin-up. (Link here: http://www.flickr.com/photos/gotchan/5830255062/ Possibly NSFW, in case the phrase "cow pin-up" didn't give you a clue.) I've gotten several critiques that were nothing more than accusing me of never having seen a cow, because udders aren't built like that nor is that where they are located.

I'm like you, Lyra. I'm thinking, "Really? You look at that picture and your complaint is the udder's in the wrong place?"

You can't satisfy Sheldon.

thothguard51 · Nov 19, 2011

areteus said:
Yeah, everytime you dress a Roman in a toga you are just perpetuating the cliche that all Romans wear togas

And exactly when did togas go out of style? Geezzzz, no one tells me anything...

Becky Black · Nov 19, 2011

I like to be able to tell that the writer has done their research and has a grasp of the subject. But if the facts are bent a little in a mindful way to suit the story I don't mind that. Historical events annoyingly don't always arrange themselves to fit a nice story structure, so have to be tweaked. Things like taking a couple of real life incidents that happened during an event to a couple of different people and giving them both of one character instead, just to cut down on the dreaded "cast of thousands" problem for a story is very common.

But in the end I have to say to myself, it's just fiction. If I want to learn about the actual facts I should read a history or science book as well. The story writer's first obligation is to keep me entertained by and enthralled in that story. If I'm fool enough to think that what I read or see in fiction is the way things really are, then that's my funeral. And people definitely fall into that trap. The number of people I've talked to who've cited The Da Vinci Code as their source for their claims about the iniquities of the Vatican is worrying!

gothicangel · Nov 20, 2011

thothguard51 said:
And exactly when did togas go out of style? Geezzzz, no one tells me anything...

gothicangel · Nov 20, 2011

Becky Black said:
Things like taking a couple of real life incidents that happened during an event to a couple of different people and giving them both of one character instead, just to cut down on the dreaded "cast of thousands" problem for a story is very common.

Oh, my God. The Tudors, for morphing Margaret Tudor [who married King James IV of Scotland] with her sister Mary [who married the King of France.] Which really f***ed up the Scottish history.

http://www.thetudorswiki.com/page/Princess+Margaret+Tudor

amlptj · Nov 20, 2011

My series takes place in the real world and my Freaks i want to be completely explainable by science. I strive and pride myself on making everything explainable by real world science and historically accurate. To do this i painstakingly do a massive amount of research.

For days in question in my stories i even look up what the weather was like!

For the science aspect. I'm already a chem major in college right now but i have sat in and secretly taken biology classes that are not relevant to my major just so i would get a better understand of the human body so i could make my Freaks completely explainable by science. There mutations I've actually done research to figure out what genes they effect and such. Yes there abilities and the outcomes of the mutations are only theories but i still base it off of hard core real science.

Personally i find it is the writers job to do there homework and create a real world experience for there readers as much as within there capabilities.

areteus · Nov 20, 2011

Lyra's point about going on too long with the details is a good one. There is a limit between 'realistic setting' and 'lecture' and a good editor should have cut all that stuff about heart defects out or at least minimised it a bit to reduce the drag on the flow...

I've only once been impressed by the accuracy of biological science in a story. That was Greg Bear's Blood Music. In it there are descriptions of cell biology techniques which tallied with how I've done similar research on blood cells so I felt comforted to know that the detail was there. I suspect only a small number of the population would even care about this but it reassured me

Of course, the fact that phycisists tend to get riled by sci fi more than biologists (because more sci fi touches on concepts like time travel and ftl travel than it does on genetics in general) is another issue I shall have a rant about later

I remember watching the X files once and they were 'doing PCR' and not only was the investigating officer (Scully) doing the actual work (slightly dodgy from a procedural PoV due to risks of skewing the evidence due to having a vested interest) but it seemed to take her less than 2 hours to do the whole process - from isolating the DNA (at least 30 minutes in my experience, even using a kit which speeds the process up), to amping it up in the minicycler (anything from an hour to 8 hours depending on the program you use - common practise is to leave it running overnight) to running the gel (30 minutes to an hour again, depending on the length of the gel) and analysing the results... OK, you could do it in about 2 hours but I've never managed it- most of the programs take at least 2 hours to run to get enough DNA to work with. If they wanted accuracy in that they should have said 'next day, minimum' but the plot needed the result quickly so a bit of a stretch was done...

shaldna · Nov 20, 2011

I think it all depends on the genre and the rules you set up for yourself.

For instance, if you are wititing military hisotry then I expect you to get dates right, and to know the available technology and the key players involved in big events.

If you are writing alternate history then you can do as you please, I'll not care.

If you are using, as the example upthread was, radiation then how you handle that depends on what your end goal is and what your genre is. If you are writing a superhero type novel then I have no issue with your character gaining superpowers, it fits my expectations of the genre. But in other circumstances, say you are writing a sci-fi type thriller about a terrorist attach on a nuclear power plant, then I expect you to know all about radiation and what it really does and how it works,.

That said, is you are clever in how you write these things then the average reader will overlook the mistakes, even when they spot them.

For instance, CSI is a case in point. I have a science background and can frequently be heard shouting at the TV when it's on - luminol, for instance picks up lots of stuff, including fruit juice, so that purple lit 'murder' scene is probably, in the real world, where someone spilled their orange juice. And all those women who AREN'T WEARING HAIR NETS, not even tying their hair back, CONTAMINATING EVIDENCE!! (breathe in, breathe out) it annoys me because I know the protocol and I know the science.

BUT I'm still willing to overlook those things because of the way they are presented to me, and I would say that most people, even those who are familiar with the science, would overlook those mistakes.

gothicangel · Nov 20, 2011

shaldna said:
That said, is you are clever in how you write these things then the average reader will overlook the mistakes, even when they spot them.

If the story is good enough, then I will overlook errors. But saying that, I set myself high standards. I would never say, 'oh X author got away with this, why can't I.'

I had an instance yesterday while reading Ken Follet's The Pillars of the Earth. One character employs a torture method that wasn't used until the Spanish Inquisition [300 years later.] Though a quick Google would have told him the Romans had quite an ingenious variation.

Becky Black · Nov 20, 2011

gothicangel said:
Oh, my God. The Tudors, for morphing Margaret Tudor [who married King James IV of Scotland] with her sister Mary [who married the King of France.] Which really f***ed up the Scottish history.

http://www.thetudorswiki.com/page/Princess+Margaret+Tudor

Now that sounds like a bit much!

Lyra Jean · Nov 20, 2011

areteus said:
Lyra's point about going on too long with the details is a good one. There is a limit between 'realistic setting' and 'lecture' and a good editor should have cut all that stuff about heart defects out or at least minimised it a bit to reduce the drag on the flow...

I've only once been impressed by the accuracy of biological science in a story. That was Greg Bear's Blood Music. In it there are descriptions of cell biology techniques which tallied with how I've done similar research on blood cells so I felt comforted to know that the detail was there. I suspect only a small number of the population would even care about this but it reassured me

Of course, the fact that phycisists tend to get riled by sci fi more than biologists (because more sci fi touches on concepts like time travel and ftl travel than it does on genetics in general) is another issue I shall have a rant about later

I remember watching the X files once and they were 'doing PCR' and not only was the investigating officer (Scully) doing the actual work (slightly dodgy from a procedural PoV due to risks of skewing the evidence due to having a vested interest) but it seemed to take her less than 2 hours to do the whole process - from isolating the DNA (at least 30 minutes in my experience, even using a kit which speeds the process up), to amping it up in the minicycler (anything from an hour to 8 hours depending on the program you use - common practise is to leave it running overnight) to running the gel (30 minutes to an hour again, depending on the length of the gel) and analysing the results... OK, you could do it in about 2 hours but I've never managed it- most of the programs take at least 2 hours to run to get enough DNA to work with. If they wanted accuracy in that they should have said 'next day, minimum' but the plot needed the result quickly so a bit of a stretch was done...

I remember that episode. I have a couple of books about the science behind the X-Files. That is the only sciency thing that Chris Carter really cheated on. He put a lot of time, effort, and research to make sure that everything was as accurate as could be. Which is why Scully isn't an expert in all things science and actually has to refer to other science type people for things.

Dave.C.Robinson · Nov 20, 2011

What really annoys me is when an author goes into very specific detail and then gets it wrong. Stephen King is particularly bad for that - especially with cars. If you're going to go into make, model, and year get it right.

areteus · Nov 20, 2011

Lyra Jean said:
I remember that episode. I have a couple of books about the science behind the X-Files. That is the only sciency thing that Chris Carter really cheated on. He put a lot of time, effort, and research to make sure that everything was as accurate as could be. Which is why Scully isn't an expert in all things science and actually has to refer to other science type people for things.

Oh, I know, which is why it stood out more than it might have done in CSI who break the rules all the time

Though I find CSI useful as a teaching aid sometimes - either to give an example of where science may be useful or to point out their mistakes. A pop culture reference is always handy to have to hand in an emergency

Lyra Jean · Nov 20, 2011

areteus said:
Oh, I know, which is why it stood out more than it might have done in CSI who break the rules all the time

Though I find CSI useful as a teaching aid sometimes - either to give an example of where science may be useful or to point out their mistakes. A pop culture reference is always handy to have to hand in an emergency

Ah okay. I was just like oh goody something I know. LOL. There are even classes like this in college. One I took was Ancient Rome in Film.

IceCreamEmpress · Nov 20, 2011

I say either get it right, or be vague. Don't be specific and wrong.

History and Science: Responsibility of the Writer?

areteus

gothicangel

Toughen up.

areteus

gothicangel

Toughen up.

VictoriaWrites

Typing away...

Lyra Jean

Two years old now.

Lyra Jean

Two years old now.

gotchan

thothguard51

A Gentleman of a refined age...

Becky Black

Writing my way off the B Ark

gothicangel

Toughen up.

gothicangel

Toughen up.

amlptj

Speling & grammer murderer, Sorrie!

areteus

shaldna

The cake is a lie. But still cake.

gothicangel

Toughen up.

Becky Black

Writing my way off the B Ark

Lyra Jean

Two years old now.

Dave.C.Robinson

... with the High Command

areteus

Lyra Jean

Two years old now.

IceCreamEmpress

Hapless Virago