Over at the Historical Novel Society discussion list, a lively debate is again raging over historical accuracy vs. the elements of story in historical fiction. The basic question is: How far can writers of historical fiction bend the truth before they've overstepped the bounds of writing responsibly? The topic was stirred up recently when someone posted a link to a Publishers Weekly article by Peter Mandel, which raises the question of whether or not we over-analyze fiction (both books and movies) in regards to their accuracy, rather than just allowing ourselves to enjoy them.
I have an opinion, but I'm interested in hearing from others, readers and writers.
Meanwhile, I'm thinking of writing fantasy.
Until later,
Gemi
