Bittercon: Historical Eras and Genre
This is off Readercon's Saturday panel list. I don't know how much interest this one will raise--but.
Their title and info is: Why Don't We Do It in the Reformation? Underutilized Historical Eras in Spec Fic. Oooh! A conflated version of their descriptor: There have been many alternate histories of WW II and the Civil War, but almost none of Vietnam or WW I. The Napoleonic Wars have been [used a lot], but the Enlightenment has arguably been less fertile ground. What makes one historical era more compelling than another as a model, reference, or outright setting for spec fic? Are the underutilized eras ripe for exploration, or have they been neglected for good reason?
Here are some thoughts.
First, the Reformation era has actually been used a lot--but the focus has stayed on Tudor England. There's of course the inspiration of Shakespeare and his magic, which reflects the deliberate way that Elizabeth Tudor relied on magical symbolism in her projection of her Astraea persona. She needed all the power publicity she could get, and she made it work. There is also the great shadow of Dorothy Dunnett over many genre writers. Just look at all the historical Scotland stories she touched off.
So why not the continent, which was full of equally fascinating people? I think partly because Christianity is so unpopular among most spec fic writers, it's hard to care about the split between the Protestants and the Roman Catholic world, even though at the time the notion of different types of Christianity was of enormous importance to most. When you look at figures of the time, for instance Philip Melancthon, Martin Luther's successor, and realize that when he (like many others of that era) was trying to come up with a unified field theory that combined theology, science, and magic, one has to set aside the superior modern notion that they were all superstitious, anti-tech idiots. Not even. But very few can imagine Martin Luther as a hero, much less quiet, geeky Melancthon. Or Erasmus, who was a staunch Catholic, and who wrote brilliant (and amusing, and insightful) tracts on education, how (boys) learn, and many other subjects of his time. I can so see Erasmus being a popular blogger, the man is not only erudite, but funny; though he was respected by all the smart people of the day (and corresponded with most of them) he refused posts, preferring a quiet life that permitted him intellectual freedom. He pretty much invented humanism, but a secular humanist in the determinist sense, he was not.
I also think that writers will often choose eras of interest because of the thousands of details they soak in through early reading. I personally have a lot of trouble with some of the Napoleonic era fiction because so many stories are a mishmosh of Georgette Heyer's secondary universe and bits of other books, with an overlay of some research, but not nearly enough for my tastes. Not that my tastes are superior, the problem is familiarity with the literature of the time. Don't you find, not just in history, but in any area of life, if you have read hundreds of primary texts, the changes and bits of language used by various writers to twist the time to fit their story show up when employed in someone else's story?
WW I...well, it's been done, and profoundly done, by J.R.R. Tolkien. I wonder if other writers, in reading deeply of the time, can't find a hook for magic. As for AU, part of the powerful effect of literature, letters, essays, diaries, even boarding school stories for boys and girls (which absolutely soared in popularity at that time, far as I can tell, with their safety and pretty settings and above all their sense of tradition and the comfort of the fictive promise that things will not change) reflect the anxiety--like the Reformation--caused by that sense of the known world not just changing, but forever ending.
Their title and info is: Why Don't We Do It in the Reformation? Underutilized Historical Eras in Spec Fic. Oooh! A conflated version of their descriptor: There have been many alternate histories of WW II and the Civil War, but almost none of Vietnam or WW I. The Napoleonic Wars have been [used a lot], but the Enlightenment has arguably been less fertile ground. What makes one historical era more compelling than another as a model, reference, or outright setting for spec fic? Are the underutilized eras ripe for exploration, or have they been neglected for good reason?
Here are some thoughts.
First, the Reformation era has actually been used a lot--but the focus has stayed on Tudor England. There's of course the inspiration of Shakespeare and his magic, which reflects the deliberate way that Elizabeth Tudor relied on magical symbolism in her projection of her Astraea persona. She needed all the power publicity she could get, and she made it work. There is also the great shadow of Dorothy Dunnett over many genre writers. Just look at all the historical Scotland stories she touched off.
So why not the continent, which was full of equally fascinating people? I think partly because Christianity is so unpopular among most spec fic writers, it's hard to care about the split between the Protestants and the Roman Catholic world, even though at the time the notion of different types of Christianity was of enormous importance to most. When you look at figures of the time, for instance Philip Melancthon, Martin Luther's successor, and realize that when he (like many others of that era) was trying to come up with a unified field theory that combined theology, science, and magic, one has to set aside the superior modern notion that they were all superstitious, anti-tech idiots. Not even. But very few can imagine Martin Luther as a hero, much less quiet, geeky Melancthon. Or Erasmus, who was a staunch Catholic, and who wrote brilliant (and amusing, and insightful) tracts on education, how (boys) learn, and many other subjects of his time. I can so see Erasmus being a popular blogger, the man is not only erudite, but funny; though he was respected by all the smart people of the day (and corresponded with most of them) he refused posts, preferring a quiet life that permitted him intellectual freedom. He pretty much invented humanism, but a secular humanist in the determinist sense, he was not.
I also think that writers will often choose eras of interest because of the thousands of details they soak in through early reading. I personally have a lot of trouble with some of the Napoleonic era fiction because so many stories are a mishmosh of Georgette Heyer's secondary universe and bits of other books, with an overlay of some research, but not nearly enough for my tastes. Not that my tastes are superior, the problem is familiarity with the literature of the time. Don't you find, not just in history, but in any area of life, if you have read hundreds of primary texts, the changes and bits of language used by various writers to twist the time to fit their story show up when employed in someone else's story?
WW I...well, it's been done, and profoundly done, by J.R.R. Tolkien. I wonder if other writers, in reading deeply of the time, can't find a hook for magic. As for AU, part of the powerful effect of literature, letters, essays, diaries, even boarding school stories for boys and girls (which absolutely soared in popularity at that time, far as I can tell, with their safety and pretty settings and above all their sense of tradition and the comfort of the fictive promise that things will not change) reflect the anxiety--like the Reformation--caused by that sense of the known world not just changing, but forever ending.