ext_6150 ([identity profile] gehayi.livejournal.com) wrote in [personal profile] charliesmum 2010-07-08 05:12 pm (UTC)

I think that both are important. There are far too many people out there who think that history is just the present day in funny clothes. And I think that you have to understand what was wrong so that you can start thinking about how far we've come and how far we still have to go.

I wrote a whole post about the importance of historical accuracy here, but I'll quote the bit that I feel is most relevant to your question:

I do think that if we are going to write historical novels, it's better for the book, for the public and for ourselves if we strive to be accurate as well as entertaining. There is more than enough ignorance and confusion out there already. And painting a picture of the past as an innocent politically correct paradise where racial prejudice, sexism, ableism, classism and homophobia have no place not only falsifies history and minimizes what people endured, it makes it impossible for readers to understand why women, blacks, Native Americans, LGBTQ people and the disabled (and others who have been despised and rejected) ever needed to demand their rights in the first place. Indeed, it gives some readers the impression that the rights such minorities want so badly are nothing more than demands for special privileges.

Short stories and novels are very small places to start educating people, even in a palatable way. But I think it's important for writers to do so. Our obligation is not to present a view of the world that readers find comfortable and agreeable, but to tell the truth as we see it, and in the best way possible for the story. That truth may not be what readers expect to hear...but judging by the bewildered ignorance out there, truth and accuracy are what many of them desperately need.

Post a comment in response:

This account has disabled anonymous posting.
If you don't have an account you can create one now.
HTML doesn't work in the subject.
More info about formatting