« basic definitions, the issue of spoilers - oh, and genre | Main | contemplating contemplation »
historians, grumbling, mythology
In addition to describing the setting and the crowd (which required a lot of research), the music and the dancing (more research), it's necessary to keep track of the three or four main characters who are threaded throughout the place.
Other scenes like this that caused me a lot of heartache were: the fight between the butcher and the farmer in the Montreal market place (Distant Shore); Elizabeth's arrival at Good Pasture (Into the Wilderness); the Nut Island garrison departure (Fire Along the Sky); the parade in Manhattan (Lake in the Clouds).
So I've spent some time reading traveler's reports on New Orleans in the first quarter of the 19th century, which are usually hard to interpret, as they often contradict each other and sometimes are fraught with obvious overstatements. Then there's the problem of things people think they know about New Orleans which are partially or entirely factually suspect. There's a huge gulf between academic historians and what might be called folk historians. The latter group tend to romanticize the history of the quadroon balls, and the idea of placage -- where rich white men arranged a second, left-handed relationship with a beautiful young free woman of color, which required him to buy her a house, slaves, and a lavish lifestyle, as well as to support and educate children born of the relationship. Historians seem to think that an early traveler exaggerated grandly when reporting on all this, and that novelists took it from there. The result, of course, is that many people state with great certainty a lot of doubtful facts, and the poor historical novelist is left with a choice: go with the mythology, or try to forge new ground by using the work of the historians instead?
I'm trying to strike a middle ground -- that is, I have no wish to outrage those people who subscribe wholeheartedly to the mythology, but neither do I want to give the historians more to grumble about. So I'm avoiding using all the standard terminology, from placee to quadroon. I'm sure I'll catch hell from both sides, anyway.
May 10, 2005 08:50 AM
Trackback Pings
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.tiedtothetracks.com/cgi-bin/mt/mt-t.cgi/435
Comments
I loved the butcher vs farmer fight, but one of my favourite 'crowd' scenes (not sure if you would call it that) is Elizabeth's visit to the Hauptmann's store when she is trying to persuade the villagers to send their children to her school. It introduced so many characters to us as well as introducing Elizabeth to most of the village. I just thought it was so well done and must have been difficult.
Posted by: Alison at May 10, 2005 06:01 PM
I think about this every ANZAC Day - the clash between history and mythology - and have yet to find a middle ground. Somewhat ironically, the best line I've ever heard to describe this clash comes from a poem about Gallipoli: "At the core of the myth the truth is curled like a snake". So true - in the context of Gallipoli, and your work.
Sometimes, when I'm reading, I like to chase the snake out of the scrub by researching the events of the novel - if it bites me, well, it's my own fault (and it does, on occasion). Sometimes I see the snake but decide to leave well enough alone. Other times, I am happy to blunder about in blissful ignorance to its presence.
BTW, I generally take one of the first two approaches when reading your novels!
Posted by: Meredith at May 10, 2005 06:26 PM
I would write what comes to you in setting the tone, a lot of LiFe comes from myth, I loved the historical facts that you have brought up through out the books that you have written.
The wife/husband team Sharon and Tom Curtis through their work WINDFLOWER blew away certain myths circulating about pirates that i thought were a hoot.
I just finished a wonderful read by Cheryl Sawyer, about Jean Laffite, she painted an vera colourful picture of New Orleans, the Carribean and Cuba.
It was interesting to read that the Jean Laffite Historical Society of Galveston Texas still spends a lot of their time now still, debunking myth from history. Apparently Jean was quiet a Tales-spinner...
Posted by: joanna at May 11, 2005 04:28 PM
I also meant to add, that i have been amazed at how history has been written, from when i first started my education in the 50's compared to my two children's one graduating in 1999 and the other last year.
When i read history, i always try to keep in mind that someone in the past is putting their spin on things, whether it comes through the viewpoint of a religious scribe, or military and most from the early 1900's on back were penned through the male veiwpoint. A lot of them religious or military... especially late 1700's and earlier.
A LOT of food for thought there...
Posted by: joanna at May 11, 2005 04:34 PM
joanna said: "When i read history, i always try to keep in mind that someone in the past is putting their spin on things"
which makes me want to recommend Frances FitzGerald's book "America Revised: History Schoolbooks in the Twentieth Century"
http://isbn.nu/0316284246
Very well-written tour through ways that textbooks in different decades have treated the same events, reflecting cultural POVs.
Posted by: robyn at May 11, 2005 06:34 PM