Post History
Readers have certain expectations about locations and time periods, things they "know". For example, people "know" that everybody in the Persian Empire was brown-skinned, that houses in Ancient Rom...
#4: Attribution notice removed
by
System
·
2019-12-12T21:57:25Z (almost 5 years ago)
Source: https://writers.stackexchange.com/q/37772 License name: CC BY-SA 3.0 License URL: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/
#3: Attribution notice added
by
System
·
2019-12-08T09:26:27Z (almost 5 years ago)
Source: https://writers.stackexchange.com/q/37772 License name: CC BY-SA 3.0 License URL: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/
#2: Initial revision
Readers have certain expectations about locations and time periods, things they "know". For example, people "know" that everybody in the Persian Empire was brown-skinned, that houses in Ancient Rome were one or two floors high, and that up until the late renaissance people did not use forks for eating. All the above "facts" are untrue. Trouble is, people think they are true. If I write about white Iranians, five-floor Roman apartment buildings and Byzantines using forks, most readers would accuse me of jarring anachronisms. Then again, if I forget the truth, and write what people expect, the experts would accuse me of not doing my research, and what's more, I would be dishonest and perpetuating misinformation. Is there a way out of this conundrum? Can I somehow write what is real and true without being accused of it being unrealistic to the point of breaking the suspension of disbelief?
#1: Imported from external source
by
System
·
2018-07-22T10:47:14Z (over 6 years ago)
Original score: 94