Post History
On another site, I wrote a critical review of a book that featured a "King Frederic II" of France who reigned between 1777-1819. I pointed out that this was a particularly unfortunate time to confu...
#3: Attribution notice added
by
System
·
2019-12-08T08:38:36Z (about 5 years ago)
Source: https://writers.stackexchange.com/q/35616 License name: CC BY-SA 3.0 License URL: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/
#2: Initial revision
by
Tom Au
·
2019-12-08T08:38:36Z (about 5 years ago)
On another site, I wrote a critical review of a book that featured a "King Frederic II" of France who reigned between 1777-1819. I pointed out that this was a particularly unfortunate time to confuse the facts because the actual events of the time were so dramatic and well-known (the overthrow of Louis XVI and the rise of Napoleon. I was taught (30 years ago), that in a historical novel, you should not "rewrite history." That is, your historical facts should be reasonably accurate (not necessarily letter-perfect), and the only thing that should be "fictitious" is the fact that your characters should be doing the heavy lifting. Was I right, or at least with my rights to find this "disconcerting?" Under what circumstances is this kind of alternate history desirable, or at least acceptable?
#1: Imported from external source
by
System
·
2018-04-27T10:06:43Z (over 6 years ago)
Original score: 7