Double Standard?
Question: Why is there a double
standard for historical fiction and contemporary fiction?
That is to say, why is it lauded to
include details, even obscure details, which date a story in
historical fiction, while in contemporary fiction it is often frowned
upon? For example, this year's Newbery honoree, Turtle in Paradise,
is flavored with Turtle's dislike of child actress Shirley Temple and
her love of the comic strip Little Orphan Annie—but if you were to
create a contemporary character who can't stand Justin Bieber and is
obsessed with, let's say, the TV show Psych, your critique
group/editor would probably tell you to tone down the specifics.
Since the contemporary fiction of today will be the historical
fiction of tomorrow (in a way), perhaps more details should be
encouraged?
I've always been a fan of the
“timeless” contemporary story—but then I dislike historical
works that seem too bland...as if they could be set in the present if
you threw in a few cell phones. So I'm as guilty as anyone of setting
this double standard, but I am starting to rethink the whole issue.
What do you think?
Interesting point. I think that's one of my frustrations with contemporary YA in the current marketplace. It's getting more and more generic all the time in hopes of "reaching a wide audience." What's sacrificed in losing specificity is a sense of real rootedness, of "what I do now matters."
ReplyDeleteIntriguing thoughts here. I hadn't considered it before. Maybe it's because Shirley and Annie are classic parts of the past's pop culture, while nothing right now is considered a classic yet. As a writer, I'm careful about including contemporary details because in the future it may seem silly. I don't know what's going to last from this generation's pop culture. There may be future classics from today but there may be one-hit wonders no one remembers, too.
ReplyDeleteSuch a good point. In a scene an editor read from my wip she asked why the MC was listening to the radio vs an iPod. Maybe what "they" say doesn't really apply to all, like we may think.
ReplyDeleteI guess all we can do is add the things that make the character and the story stronger and leave it up to the editors to sweat the small stuff.
After all, it's okay to break the rules if the story warrants it, or so "they" (ahem) say.
Wonderful points! Of course specific details work well in historical fiction, as they support the setting. But specific details in contemporary fiction work well, too. When I read a novel written in the 70's, I can tell it was not recently published. There is no getting around this. And so what? A good story with great characters is the bottom line for me.
ReplyDeleteEnjoyed your comments on my blog, Faith. Thanks for visiting.
ReplyDeleteWe KNOW the everyday here and now. When I read historical fiction, I need more info. and WANT to be taken into that time :D
ReplyDeleteBut yeah, I HATE too much descrip in books, so either way, it's a hard line.