Does this bug you, too?

[corina]

OK, I think I have started enough threads for a newbie today (three) and maybe it's me but it really annoys me when authors put fictional characters into real life events. Historical is OK, I guess, but I am specifically thinking of "The Hour I First Believed" by Wally Lamb. That event (Columbine) is too recent in my opinion to start throwing fictional characters into it.

 

Your thoughts?

[Freewheeling Andy]

Actually, no. I really quite like having fiction where the events are real, and the author imagines stuff that happens around the event.

 

The trouble comes when the fictional character influences real-life events: then I have a problem with it, because it takes liberties with history which is something that begins to bug and rile me.

 

If, though, a fictional character is an observer to major events, and is influenced by them, and is close to them, I think that often makes for very good fiction.

[chesilbeach]

I've read a few very good fictionalised accounts of history, my two favourites being The Master by Colm Toibin and Arthur & George by Julian Barnes. I think they require so much research but are more entertaining than a straight historical account of the people and events.

[ned]

It doesn't really bother me. As for the Columbine thing, books have been centred around 9/11 and the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and they are more recent.

[Echo]

I don't really like it either. It doesn't bother me if it's historical, or even as recent as, say, the Vietnam War, but anything too recent just doesn't sit right with me.

[DanC_84]

The only types of books I have read like that have been historical fiction, and I have enjoyed those to be honest.

[I'mRose]

I would say it bothers me more when they make movies out of very recent events. Books feel kinder, like they not just writing it to make a ton of money. I have to agree about not liking when the character changes actual events. But just living through the is okay with me.

[poppyshake]

I've read a few very good fictionalised accounts of history, my two favourites being The Master by Colm Toibin and Arthur & George by Julian Barnes. I think they require so much research but are more entertaining than a straight historical account of the people and events.

 

I'm just reading 'Arthur & George' and I love it, I think as long as the main events of the story are accurately portrayed then I've no problem with fictional dialogue etc.

 

Some movie adaptations of real life events are terrible though .. 'Titanic' for instance ... I had no problem with the fictionalised lovers but lots of problems with how they portrayed real life characters such as William Murdoch .. accounts of his valour had been confirmed by historians .. he has a plaque in his hometown for showing great heroism in his final hours but in the movie he is shown shooting down passengers, trying to board lifeboats and then turning the gun on himself .. that is an absolute outrage and a disgrace.

[Kylie]

I have a funny kind of worry that in centuries to come, people might read these books and think they are fact. Otherwise, it doesn't bug me. But then again, I don't think I've actually read any yet.

[Vladd]

I'm just reading 'Arthur & George' and I love it, I think as long as the main events of the story are accurately portrayed then I've no problem with fictional dialogue etc.

 

Some movie adaptations of real life events are terrible though .. 'Titanic' for instance ... I had no problem with the fictionalised lovers but lots of problems with how they portrayed real life characters such as William Murdoch .. accounts of his valour had been confirmed by historians .. he has a plaque in his hometown for showing great heroism in his final hours but in the movie he is shown shooting down passengers, trying to board lifeboats and then turning the gun on himself .. that is an absolute outrage and a disgrace.

 

Oh you should hear my wife get started on Titanic. Her maiden name was Boxall and the Fourth Officer Joseph Boxall is an ancestor so she rather took offence at the portrayal of the officers in Titanic, of course it was in keeping with the recent anti English slant that seem to simmers in Hollywood at times.

[poppyshake]

Oh you should hear my wife get started on Titanic. Her maiden name was Boxall and the Fourth Officer Joseph Boxall is an ancestor so she rather took offence at the portrayal of the officers in Titanic, of course it was in keeping with the recent anti English slant that seem to simmers in Hollywood at times.

 

I can't imagine how incensed I'd be if it was one of my ancestors .. I'm angry enough about it as it is.

 

I read that William Murdoch's family received $8,000 in compensation .. $8,000 for a man's reputation!!! .. Kate Winslet received

[Ruth]

Oh, I love it when fictional characters are written into historical fact. Although I agree with Kylie that it does worry me that some of these books might be taken as being factual. Other than that, it doesn't bother me at all. As long as the era or event in question is portrayed historically, I actually think it's a good way of getting people interested. (The Queen's Fool, by Philippa Gregory is a prime example - it really piqued my interest in The Tudors, and led to me reading more non-fiction about the period).