In a post on Threads, an author shared about using “stoolball” in her historical fantasy fiction manuscript, and she received some feedback not to use it. Because it sounded weird and it might be hard for readers to imagine it.
But, stoolball is the real name of a game played in the historic era she is sort of writing about (her manuscript is a fantasy based on the 1400s.) While today we would not recognize it, this is the game many scholars feel eventually evolved into games like cricket and baseball.
To me, changing the name of this ACTUAL GAME is like rewriting history. Even in fiction.
Think of it this way, how would you feel if someone called baseball “batball.” After all, it makes sense: players use a bat to hit a ball. Sometimes, they don’t get to run those bases.
Using historically accurate terms, even in a fantasy novel, is a way of sharing history. It can shed light on how our ancestors really lived and worked, and inspire a reader to learn more about a piece of our past. It is also a way to make a connection between the real world and the fictional world being created.
The opposite can also be true.
When writing historical fiction, how fictional should you get? Especially when dealing with a person who actually lived and that readers would recognize. After all, you don’t know what was actually happening day-to-day with that person. You don’t know that person’s favorite color or favorite food (unless it is written in history books somewhere).
One of my clients (whose first series was a mix of fantasy and historical accuracy) had a modern-day fantasy manuscript that an agent was interested in representing, but she was asked to remove a character who actually existed in our past. She didn’t want to and decided in the end to keep the character and find a publisher that would support that decision. She was using that characters name, and historical accuracies from the life of that person, to create a character who become an immortal being.
So…which way is correct? And how should an editor approach these situations?
I think it all comes down to the project and what the author intends to communicate with it.
In the first case, the author wanted to remain authentic to history, and since the suggestion related to how readers would picture the game, I suggested in a response thread that she describe the game a bit first, then introduce the name of it, that way the reader isn’t confused. She could also add a note page to the end of the book that explained some of the historical accuracies she used in the story. Readers of all ages should enjoy a bit of learning with their entertainment. I know I do.
In the second case, this person from history was still alive in modern day because she had become immortal; I don’t think any reader (the intended audience was adult, trade romance) would think this person was still alive. The author kept this person’s true story accurate until her reported death (which was where she became immortal.) In some ways, this historic figure was not really that historic figure any longer.
What both of these instances come down to is that the AUTHOR made a choice about the story they were writing. They thought about their respective stories and what the impact of changing it would mean, and chose what they thought was best.
I mean, in a world where a book (and a movie) titled Abraham Lincoln, Vampire Hunter exists, and is about Abraham Lincoln (a real historic figure who played a BIG role in our history) is fighting vampires (a being that doesn’t actually exist), how can anyone complain?
Tara Moeller - Editing 