I finally understand what fiction is, and I feel liberated.

[Link the Writer]

TL;DR: There are no rules in writing, I am free to write whatever the heck I want, in whatever genre I want, however I want. The only thing to worry about is: 'is the writing good'. Otherwise, it's whatever I want.
*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*

I cannot believe it took me this long to get it but... I finally understand what historical fiction is.

It’s fiction… set in a historical time. ‘Pirates of the Caribbean’, ‘Last of the Mohicans’, ‘Shakespeare in Love’ are all historical fiction to a degree, and none of the writers (unless you’re Ridley Scott screaming, ‘Were you there!? Then how do you know it didn’t happen!?’) claim that the events depicted are 100% true to documented history.

They fit in what I would categorize as:

Fantastical historical fiction (Pirates of the Caribbean, Abe Lincoln: Vampire Hunter)

Grounded historical fiction (Last of the Mohicans)

Dramatized historical fiction (Shakespeare in Love) that focuses more on the emotions of the characters, not the overall historical events though it can blend into the grounded historical fiction level

It’s all about the ‘vibes’. Does it make the readers feel like they’re being transported backward to that time period?

Like yes, you operate under what’s known historical fact, but live in the ‘unknown’ as it were if… that makes sense? Like ‘Shakespeare In Love’. It ran on the question of, ‘What if Shakespeare had a romantic fling during his career’ and built a story out of it.

In other words, if I wanted to write a book titled 'Louis Braille in Love' (in the same vein as 'Shakespeare in Love') about his early adulthood as a teacher, and a romance that blossoms between him and a new teacher, mingling in the conflict he faced in his time as a teacher against the conservative elite of his school... Yeah. Yeah, I could write that. I mean, Rosie Sultan wrote 'Helen Keller in Love', so what's stopping me?

The only hard rules I'd need to create is, well, figuring out the key figures of his life, what sort of man he was, people who supported his braille system, others who opposed it and tried to crush it, the general location of the institute he taught/lived in, etc. But beyond that... anything goes.

Like in one camp, you have Dufau, the Institute Director of the 1840s who basically made it his life mission to obstruct Louis' system and isolate him, even going as far as banning braille from being taught. In the other (Louis') camp, you'd have people who supported him, fought for him. I'd have to look into Louis' biography and see what his life was like, the era he grew up in, etc. All that cannot change. It's historical, it's who he was.

I feel so liberated now. Like...Holy shit...I could actually write 'Louis Braille in Love' and there'd literally be no one to stop me from doing that. No00..0 different than 'Shakespeare in Love'.

 

[Naomasa298]

I'm curious as to what you thought it was before now?

I'm not trying to mock you, there is a reason why I ask.

 

[Link the Writer]

Historical fiction, specifically. I created a rule in my head, or well, my history nerd self did, that stated that unless it was documented to a 'T', and I knew the history of everything and anything about the time period, I couldn't write it. Or that someone was gonna be offended.

Take the Louis Braille in Love example in my OP. My history nerd self would think I couldn't write it unless I knew everything down to the floor plan of the institute, or exactly what meals Louis ate (like literally ate with his own mouth) then it would be utterly unrealistic. I mean, granted, I'd need to know the basics of Parisian history in the 1830s and roughly what meals they ate, etc. but beyond that? Well, fiction lives in in the unknown, right? In that example, it lives in the plausibility, the 'what if Louis had a fling with another teacher?'

I know I'm not making myself as clear as I'd hope. I think what I'm trying to say is that while historical fiction doesn't mean I can just pretend history didn't happen, or have Louis use a telephone or suddenly parkour under carriages, I have room to play in what's plausible. Like yeah, could it have been plausible he had a crush even though he never wrote down in his braille system: 'Today I met a pretty lady named Clem. Will ask her out tomorrow'? Sure. Within the confines of actual history and historical figures, I can still play with it in what's 'plausible'.

Well, my brain told me I couldn't do it because it thought unless it was documented, people would find it unrealistic.

 

[Louanne Learning]

TL;DR: There are no rules in writing, I am free to write whatever the heck I want, in whatever genre I want, however I want. The only thing to worry about is: 'is the writing good'. Otherwise, it's whatever I want.

I think the only guidelines necessary are that it must make sense to at least you, as the writer, and it must be interesting.

I feel so liberated now. Like...Holy shit...I could actually write 'Louis Braille in Love' and there'd literally be no one to stop me from doing that. No00..0 different than 'Shakespeare in Love'.

yes, write it! Sometimes writing the absurd is very satisfying. As long as you are saying something that matters.