Tips and recs for writing historical fiction

[DokiDokiTsuna]

...I don't write historical fiction (and I NEVER WILL) so I don't have any tips. ^^; Even normal people have to do months of research for that sort of thing, and as a perfectionist that sounds like a road I reeeeally don't wanna go down.

But I have read some historical fiction, and I've definitely watched it. And I think my personal favorites are the ones that show untold, or rarely-told narratives. Tell me about the black cowboys, or the female 17th century mathematicians. Or the dark sides of civil rights movements (I was already out of public school before I even began to learn how MLK was threatened and vilified by the US government, and I think that's far, far too late).

And I know this is petty, but what I like most about those stories is watching people claim that they're "wrong" or "unrealistic" simply because the only history they know is the basically propagandized version they were taught in school, and nothing outside of it. And then watching those who know better "well, actually..." them into the ground. ^^

[AilyneGouveia]

Researches, a lot and a lot of researches... checking the sources, compare them... I also read old newspapers from the 20s and watch advertising and stuff to try to understand how people where thinking back than. I also ask old people to tell me stories about their parents to have even better idea of it.
There are a few other things i havent metioned, and i don't know if it's a good approach. But it works fine for me ^^

[NickRowler]

Well fiction is fictional, so of course there are going to be stuff that may not be true to what happens. However, I feel like accuracy of fashion and technology is important if you want it to seem believable. So doing research in that sense is important.

I am saying this as someone who works with a lot of vintage home movies, and seeing bad historical accuracy is like nails on a chalkboard. Like people in the 70s did not dress like this, STOP!

[WriterLinXiaolong]

Well, for one, remember that you are making a fiction. Fictions should be a mix of creativity and facts.

Secondly, heavy research. Even if it's set in fictional location, you still need to do research! For example, my story's time setting is in Ancient China, but the location is fictional. I still have to do research on how the cultures was back then, how the government work, how they calculate time, etiquette, how some people in social class view others, etc etc.

I also had to research how the Emperor's harem works, how the Emperor's court work, the officials, the titles, the way they address themselves... it was a lot of work 🤣

It is fine to be unrealistic as long as it's not too much (having mobile phone in a setting that might be set around 100BC is too much unless you made the tech advance much faster in a fictional world). After all, you are writing a fiction not a documentary. That brings to the third point.

Avoid info dump. Yes, we want readers to immerse themselves into the settings but, we can do so without info-dumping lessons. For example, I could explain what a 'Di' child and 'Shu' child is in a paragraph, or I could show the readers conflicts between them so they could see how the two type of children is treated. I think latter would garner more interest than the first.

[WOSTR]

There are a number of historical themed YouTube's, something I find interesting and helpful is their historical inaccuracy videos, as they've done their research, they're invested and they're spotting things I would miss.

[rajillustration]

I think it's also good to get a variety of sources written by different people since history is often written with a lot of political bias, even if it's unintentional. So I was researching a story on Russia once, and more specifically the time period surrounding Fabrege Eggs. And while there's a lot of content about that era, since I'm American, I have to be careful that it's not content written during the Red Scare when people were just making up stuff. So, when I researched, I went to the library to get multiple educated sources to get a better vibe of the time period (preferably sources that had a background studying Russian history full-time). I could not in anyway rely on the internet or just once source to have a more accurate idea of that time period.

[violin]

All else aside... oml @NickRowler those are some pretty epic outfits

[darthmongoose]

Being from the UK, which has history that tends to be seen as a goldmine for historical fiction, I've had to endure a lot of bloody awful historical fiction made by people who really don't even know the first thing about my country in the modern day, never mind the past. Here's my advice:

• Vocab and grammar is a dead giveaway that the person didn't do enough research. For example, in modern English, we use "quite" to mean "a little", but in the past, "quite" tended to mean "very". Read novels and letters written by people living in the period in which you're setting the story to get a feel for what kinds of words and grammar were typical at the time. Also oh my god, if you're setting your story in Britain, study the dialect of the area you're setting the story in. Dialects are not as strong nowadays because of TV and radio, but in the past, they were much stronger, and there was a really pronounced difference in manner of speech between different classes too.

• Your character probably shouldn't have completely modern understanding of social issues just completely out of nowhere and in contrast to everything they've ever been taught. Some people were probably forward thinking in the past, but it's a bit unrealistic for all the people in the story who are "good" to randomly have developed very modern understanding of sexuality, gender and racial equality, democracy etc. just on their own by being good. In most cases somebody was maybe forward thinking in some areas, ie. "yes, I see no reason why women shouldn't go to university" but very typical for their time in others, "Oh no, the king is appointed by God, you can't get rid of him and put any old person voted for by the unwashed masses in charge! It'd be sacrilege!"

• Pay attention to the hairstyles and clothing. NO, your proper Victorian lady does NOT wear "panties", they're a garment that needs elastic and wasn't invented yet, and she probably doesn't have her hair loose, blowing in the wind either. Also she definitely doesn't go to church without a hat or bonnet or similar.

• Fact check that things you think you know about a time or country are actually true and not based on stereotypes and propaganda. Like in London during WW2, were all the British people all "Keep Calm and Carry On" and "Blitz Spirit!" ....actually, no. There was looting, hoarding, complaining and people actually HATED that "Keep Calm and Carry On" poster at the time, they thought it was patronising, it got filed away and only became popular when rediscovered decades later. The people who endured the bombing in the war were brave and a lot of them did stick together and stuff... but they weren't as great or as cheerful as a lot of rose-tinted nostalgia makes out.

BBC costume dramas are always fantastic for the depth of research they put into the costuming, hairstyles and speech. Gentleman Jack was a great recent one based on the life of a real woman. The Yorkshire dialects were absolutely perfect, and it was a good example of a "forward thinking" character (a lesbian businesswoman) who was in other ways very much of her time (she had a very conservative attitude about class and landed gentry, for example). Their dramas based on fictional stories are great too. Worth a watch. In fact, I think as a general rule, if you can watch or read historical stuff from the country you want to set your story. Diaries can be an amazing resource, like Sei Shonagon's Pillow Book, The Geisha of Gion or Nella Last's War.

[DokiDokiTsuna]

For example, in modern English, we use "quite" to mean "a little", but in the past, "quite" tended to mean "very".

I hate to go off topic after such a great reply, but this is going to bother me for the rest of my life if I don't get some kind of confirmation:

So you're telling me if someone says "he was quite rude" that means he was A LITTLE rude, not A LOT?? Because I always understood it the other way around (the 'past' way) and that's the way I use 'quite' when I write. O_O

Like, is this definition specific to British English? Does it extend to related phrases like "quite a bit"??

[darthmongoose]

So you're telling me if someone says "he was quite rude" that means he was A LITTLE rude, not A LOT?? Because I always understood it the other way around (the 'past' way) and that's the way I use 'quite' when I write. O_O

Like, is this definition specific to British English? Does it extend to related phrases like "quite a bit"??

"Quite" is a weird word because depending on the context, in British English especially, it can mean...er... either?

It's complicated and hard to explain, because for me British English is my first language so I use it instinctively without being able to spell out exactly what the rules are, so here's what the Cambridge Dictionary has to say on the matter of how British people use "quite":

Quite - English Grammar Today - Cambridge Dictionary

[NickRowler]

I am also going to state that despite it not happening that long ago, the 1950s fashion seems to always be depicted in an inaccurate way. I am going to blame this in part on 1950s propaganda films which depicted a very limited view on what the 50s were like. I think this has also lead to later depictions which depict the 50s as an extreme ideal or an extreme oppression, continues to push false history.

Yes women dressed like this

However, when it comes to casual wear, sporting events, summer vacations, etc. it is far more common to have them dressed like this

Same with men, yes some men dressed like this

However, they also wore stuff like this

Also, can we stop with the black/white 50s cliche. Color film was very common during that time. However low production film, like for TV, 50s propaganda films, and newsprint were still in black and white. The fact that people are shocked that there are color photos of Martin Luther King Jr baffles me.