Yes, I sat down with my wife and binged Bridgerton. Yes, me, who is the most anti-Austen viewer and reader you could ever meet. But couldn't tear my eyes away from it. Why? Because all I could think about was how different it's approach to period culture was to my approach in The Ruby Files.
So, let's talk about that for our new roundtable.
Let's get your thoughts on what I'm calling the "Bridgerton model" or "alternate past model" of period culture -- the idea of ignoring historical racial and/or societal truths (though not necessarily altogether) to create an integrated world period. (This is not to say it's a bad thing, just a way of approaching fiction.) Is it effective? Does it have its drawbacks?
Bobby Nash: History is history, both good and bad. When I write a period piece, I sometimes play with those societal truths. When Domino Lady meets The Woman in Red, for example, I make it a point to showcase the obvious “boys club” mentality of the police officers Peggy Allen works with and how they view her as less of a cop than they are, even though she’s a better detective than anyone around her. When she teams up with a detective who recognizes her analytical mind, he is quick to partner up with her and solve murders. He takes the ribbing from “the guys” for it, but to him, it’s worth it to close cases and get justice for the villains. As for Peggy, she knows that her male partner will get all of the credit, all of the promotions, and all of the attaboys, but she accepts it because it allows her to do the job she wants to do. She’ll change their minds about her, hopefully, with each case they solve. In that case, the societal norms of that time period play into it. With Lance Star, it is not as prevalent because we’re focused on the weird and wacky action going on around them and less at the real world of that era. I say, do whatever works for the story you want to tell.
Nancy Hansen: I don't mind watching or reading something that sort of transcends actual historical fact as long as it's done well and believably, because I consider it a altiverse version.
Bill Craig: As a writer who has been complemented for using an authentic voice for a rough period in the 1960's and the early days of civil rights. I used old terms that are highly offensive today, but were period-accurate for the time. Ignoring history does nothing to improve the story.
Sean Taylor: I can certainly see the appeal of that, particularly in something that's clearly a fantasy (like Carnival Row, for example), but for something that the historical setting is vital to the plot and story, I prefer to start with the history and work from there. The biggest drawbacks I can see are when a creator is trying to create a historically accurate work and then muddles up the cultures because of a need to be diverse and gets called out by astute readers or critics. But, it still doesn't make it wrong, but it does create a sort of fantasy world or an alternate history in my eyes.
Let's look at the other side, the "true to history model" -- the idea of using the racial, social, etc. truths to create the plots and subplots based on actual history. For arguments sake, we'll even loop time travel stories in with this, such as Antebellum. Is it effective? Does it have its drawbacks.
Nancy Hansen: When I write something that has a historical backdrop, I want it to reflect the times it was set in. So I will work in the prejudices and the disparaging language and attitudes of the era. That doesn't mean that a character of what would be considered an underclass can't succeed in a starring role, it just makes it more of a challenge and shapes that individual's life. I don't shy away from the social/racial/sexual slurs either. These are terrible things to have to live with and to me it adds another depth of reality to the story. I'm not preachy, nor am I apologetic. I'm just writing what I have found in my research and hoping it's striking enough to move the reader to rooting for the characters they actually like.
Bill Craig: No matter how you handle it, some folks just are not going to be happy. IMHO you have to let the story speak for itself.
Sean Taylor: This is definitely my preferred method. I'll use the Rick Ruby stories as an example. I was so tired of writing "white guy" stories in my 30s pulp stuff, and when Bobby Nash and I created The Ruby Files books, I saw that as a wonderful opportunity to really touch on the racial issues of the 1930s. Even the story bible calls out the fact that Rick is a white man living in a black man's world, but he has the freedom because of his skin to interact in the white world as he wishes. All of my stories have come out of that tension between Rick's two worlds and his love for Evelyn, his lover that they both know can never really have each other in that "to have and to hold" way.
The drawbacks of this approach is that it can limit your story. If you want to tell a story that would be better served in a more progressive era, then your plots and characters from a time period may not be the way to proceed with that particular story.
Kay Iscah: I think there's a lot of history we could unwhite wash, and would almost rather see that than ignoring the historical demographics completely. I would love to see some efforts at historical dramas from different cultures. No reason you couldn't set a court drama in an African castle (yes they had/have castles). Cleopatra was ethnically Greek, but we have plenty of Egyptian history to pull from. Aztecs weren't great neighbors, but they had great cities, which could make for interesting backdrops, etc.
There are/were black cowboys and other heroic characters.
Bobby Nash: If that works for your story, do it. If it doesn’t, that’s okay too. As the writer, I get to decide what kind of story I want to tell. Is it effective? That, I leave up to the readers to decide.
Which method is your preferred way of approaching period culture when writing? Or is it something that changes based on the theme and tone of your story?
Bobby Nash: It all depends on the story I’m writing, the plot, the characters, and sometimes even the publisher. You have to take all of these things into account. Maybe your publisher isn’t interested in getting away from the action for social commentary. Maybe they want the social commentary. It also depends on me as the writer. What kind of story do I want to write? Once I answer that question, then I decide how to proceed.
Sean Taylor: I tend to look into the actual history to find compelling tales that highlight gender or race issues. But I like to begin from history first and not just paint a different time period with our modern ideals. Of course, if I'm writing a future sci-fi, or even a fantasy, then the sky is the limit in terms of cultural diversity. I get to be god (small g) for that particular universe.
Bill Craig: I do my best to try and accurately portray the time period in an accurate fashion because my job as a writer is not to gloss over the bad, but to tell the story in a fashion that is as historically accurate as possible.
No comments:
Post a Comment