The Lure of History - Cecilia Peartree
I vaguely
remember a time, itself now quite a lot of years in the past, when I briefly considered
the idea of taking up history as a career. It was soon after I had acquired a
degree in the subject, and I couldn’t imagine taking much interest in anything
else, although neither could I identify many realistic career opportunities for
a history graduate. I did attempt to become a history teacher just after that,
but fortunately I realised in time that trying to teach history to teenagers
would involve quite a bit of crowd control and not very much actual history.
So, after a few desultory attempts to get a job at the Imperial War Museum – I had
specialised in modern European history – I went into computer programming
instead. You could do that in those days.
Even after
all this time there is something that lures me back to history. This is the
same siren call that makes me spend hours in a fruitless quest for ancestors
who are lost in the mists of time and who, if I could ask their opinions, would
probably prefer to stay lost. It’s the same urge that causes me to write
fiction set in the past even although many of my readers wish I wouldn’t
bother. And above all, it’s what makes me spend far longer on research than I need
to when preparing to write these unwanted stories.
There’s
something tantalising about historical research. No matter how much of it you
do, it’s never enough. And yet in the context of writing fiction, it can still
be too much.
Most fiction
readers don’t want to plough through absolutely everything you’ve learned about
the administration of the Festival of Britain, the history of the Communist Party
in Berlin in the 1940s and 1950s, or exactly how Brighton Pavilion was
constructed, to name but a few of the topics I’ve looked at recently. On the
other hand, even if you’ve studied these things from every possible angle and
scrutinised every available source, online and offline, there’s always
something missing. It’s usually some small prosaic detail that turns out to be
pivotal to the plot of your novel. Whether the door to the Mathematical
Laboratory at Cambridge opened inwards or outwards, for instance, or the
opening hours for exhibitions around the Funkturm in Berlin in 1954, or what
people wore when travelling on the Brighton to Dieppe packet boat in the 1800s.
I don’t
stress as much over this kind of thing as I did when I first wrote a piece of
historical fiction, but at the same time I still have an aversion to writing
something completely inaccurate. So if I really can’t find out what I need to
know, I either leave it out and circumvent that part of the story somehow, or I
make my best guess at the truth based on what I do know, and soldier on.
I don’t
think a ‘real’ historian would choose the latter option, but this is fiction,
after all, and because I’m the kind of person who likes to take an overview and
not get bogged down in too many details, I feel that the context and atmosphere
conveyed in the book are actually more vital than the minutiae. In many cases I
find it’s best to keep on writing anyway, and if necessary to spend a bit more
time on research once the first draft is complete. So in July I will be trying
to get to the end of my unfinished novel set in Brighton in 1814 – 1815, and
only after I’ve finished the first draft will I allow myself to go to Brighton
and fill in the gaps. Which will be a real treat in itself, I must admit.
This is in
contrast to my methodology when I wrote my first historical novel, an epic of
the English Civil War now lost somewhere in the garden shed. I must have spent
a couple of years researching, and about a year writing it, and the finished
thing contained whole chapters of exquisitely researched domestic trivia and very little about the
conflict itself. Occasionally I wonder if I should excavate it from the shed
and read it to see if it’s as bad as it seemed, but fortunately there’s a pile
of hamster cages in the way and I don’t want to disturb them in case they’ve
been colonised by spiders.
That’s a
case where it’s probably better to leave the past undisturbed and to tell
myself I’ve moved on since then.
Comments