Since Tolkien made the genre popular with The Lord of the Rings, fantasy has been a staple of fiction. From Narnia to Harry Potter to Percy Jackson and everything in between, fantasy books are written, published, and purchased by thousands of people every single year.
Fiction readers who don’t prefer fantasy will probably tell you they love historical fiction, another mega-genre in the literary world. Books such as Les Misérables, A Tale of Two Cities, or anything in the Dear America series are set against a backdrop of true events while (usually) fictional characters engage, avoid, or tolerate the chaos of history.
To which one am I drawn?
In terms of reading, it depends on a few factors. Deep down in my core, I’d say fantasy. Except that it is hard to find a good fantasy book without the same overused teen romance tropes or horrible writing. (If you don’t believe me, just go peruse the YA fiction section of your library. *Gag*) But if I can find a good fantasy book with lovely writing and original plot, HAND IT OVER. *Ahem Shannon Hale ahem ahem*
That being said, I’ve recently rediscovered my love for historical fiction. From elementary to middle school, this genre was the staple of my reading. Little House on the Prairie, Dear America, The Door in the Wall. But then high school came. Reading books like Uncle Tom’s Cabin and The Dragon and the Raven (sorry Henty fans. I CAN’T.) somehow convinced me that historical fiction was not the same genre I once loved.
But there have been a few historical fiction books that snuck in without me realizing. Les Misérables, a bit of Dickens, The Book Thief, The Last Bookshop in London, A Fall of Marigolds…
Before I knew it, I was responding to writing prompts not with my go-to fantasy series characters, but with historical fiction. When a few days ago my character from these prompts showed up requesting her own story, I was resistant. “No. I’m not a historical fiction writer. You have to research.”
She didn’t go away. I was talking to a friend about my possible idea, and she said something interesting. She mentioned the differences between historical fiction and fantasy. That fantasy is beautiful, but historical fiction requires imagery and distinct attention to setting detail as well as a different brand of character. Historical fiction can still be beautiful.
I asked her to help me brainstorm.
Even so I’ve been thinking about what she said, that there are differences between the two. Because she’s right. For better or worse they are very different. But why? Why do historical fiction and fantasy require contrasting prose and varying types of characters?
First, I think descriptive imagery in historical fiction is different than fantasy because they require different details. For example, how would one go about describing a 1940s kitchen? And how would that be different than describing a fantasy spaceship? The kitchen would require details imagery including colors, appliances, and perhaps the neatness of the room whereas the ship would demand explanations of its shape, size, and primary rooms like the cockpit.
But here’s the biggest difference. If the reader knows the character is in a 1940’s kitchen, they already know what it looks like. They know there is a frigidaire. They know that the floor is tiled. They probably see the standard red table and chairs. When the author mentions these things, the reader has the feeling that he or she is somewhere they have been before. It makes them feel like they are home. But drop them in the cockpit of a spaceship, and they aren’t as sure as themself because there are so many different ways the ship could look. Are they trying to picture the Millennium Falcon, or something from Marvel, or an actual spaceship like Apollo 11?
It’s different.
With characters, the historical fiction author has to be even more acutely aware of reality. Are their goals realistic and in line with how the world is ordered? (Fantasy writers can give their characters much more bizarre goals, depending on the nature of the world.) Do their choices make sense? Are they in tune with their setting? And of course, are the events the character responds to accurate? A good historical fiction book is a researched book. Do the characters react to historical events in similar ways to the rest of humanity? Because if they didn’t, we would have heard about them by now. But they must still be unique!
In the end, I think fantasy has become the dreaded genre full of poorly written books because the authors don’t emulate historical fiction enough. Since historical fiction writers have to fact check and fact check and fact check, fantasy has become known as the genre you don’t have to research. I know that’s one of the reasons it appealed to me in the first place. But in our desire to bring to the world new and fresh books, have fantasy writers cut corners and given their books mediocre descriptions and unrealistic characters? Because while there are some differences in historical fiction and fantasy, there shouldn’t be so many. Every story deserves prose that gives the reader the best possible mental image. Every character deserves as much humanity as the writer can spare.
It’s not about realism of content. It’s about realism of presentation.
I’ll be reading lots of historical fiction (and nonfiction 😬) this summer as I research for my new project. I’ll take note of the differences. And when I begin to write my story, trust me that the imagery will be as descriptive and characters as real as I can possibly make them.
This is really good, Ella! It’s really thought provoking since I’m writing a historical fantasy, a strange mixture of fantasy and historical fiction. Thanks for pointing out these differences and similarities that I’m trying to work through right now!
You’re so welcome! I hope it continues to go well!