LogoWomen's History Month Title

Medieval Women in Modern Fiction

Introduction, Getting to know the penmanreview/opening
 
Wendy Z
Posted: 08 Feb - 09:03 am  


PenmanReview


Group: Discussion Leaders
Posts: 27
Member No.: 5
Joined: 21-February 03



My name is Wendy Zollo, and I'm the listowner of the penmanreview. The list is made up of people of diverse backgrounds and a range of distinctive knowledge. We *adore* the Middle Ages - last year we talked about Medieval Women, and this year we will look at how they are drawn in modern historical fiction.

I don't know where this topic will lead us - last year we covered everything from occupations to contraception. As a group we believe in freewheeling discussion and exploring new places, sp please join us in our exploration of women in historical fiction!

I'd like to open this thread by talking about one of my favorite women in history, in one of my new favorite novels - the woman, Anne Boleyn, the novel, Dear Heart, How Like You This by Wendy J. Dunn. To keep this introduction short (unlikely - we're a rambling group!) and allow the list and others to expand on it later I'll just point out some items wherein Anne Boleyn is not portrayed as the typical, social-climbing, high-strung female of most novels.

She is viewed though the eyes of the poet Thomas Wyatt, her (possible/probable?) childhood friend and as a adult male who was in love with her soley for her being and not her influence. This is an important point as it removes the stigma's attached to Anne's persona. He doesn't see her as hysterical and agitated but simply as someone who has become trapped by her own gender and foolishness to a powerful man (Henry VIII) and loses control of the most important thing a female *can* have, the mastery and direction of her own life - rare in the Middle Ages but not unheard of. This lose of control unnerves and chafes at her and she does what she can to exerciser her influence to get it back.

It is important to remember how different this POV is form other portrayals of Anne. Though it still shows her cunning and intelligence it presents her humanity and frailty as other novels haven't thus far.

Wendy Z.
 
     Top
Tamara Mazzei
Posted: 02 Mar - 10:17 am  


Discussion Leader


Group: Admin
Posts: 28
Member No.: 1
Joined: 16-February 03



Alas, I haven't read Wendy J Dunn's book (yet), but Anne is a fascinating character, if for no other reason than the many ways she's been portrayed in both fiction and non-fiction.

QUOTE
He doesn't see her as hysterical and agitated but simply as someone who has become trapped by her own gender and foolishness to a powerful man (Henry VIII)

As you suggest, Wendy, Anne has often been presented as hysterical and agitated. I shouldn't wonder that a person would become a bit agitated in Anne's precarious situation! On the other hand, I find it hard to believe that was her general nature before her danger became apparent. She was familiar with her millieu and must have known at least some of what she was getting into.

I've seen Anne portrayed as an innocent victim, a sly witch, and various things in between. I admit to not knowing that much about her, but I can also envision her as a non-hysterical, non-agitated, non-foolish woman who played for high stakes and lost.

~Tamara
 
      Top
Wendy A Zollo
Posted: 02 Mar - 05:09 pm  


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 9
Member No.: 77
Joined: 2-March 04



<<[QUOTE] I shouldn't wonder that a person would become a bit agitated in Anne's precarious situation! On the other hand, I find it hard to believe that was her general nature before her danger became apparent. She was familiar with her millieu and must have known at least some of what she was getting into.>> Tamara

Which brings up an interesting point about *all* historical females and how they are portrayed by authors. How much reality do we want to see in our fiction?
Do we want to read a textbook or do we want to read a feathery, flowery, romance? Or do we as discerning readers want as much of the *real* Anne Boleyn, Eleanor, Maude with just a pinch of flavor to make them readable?

Wendy A Zollo (Wendy Z)
 
     Top
Elizabeth
Posted: 02 Mar - 06:48 pm  


Discussion Leader


Group: Discussion Leaders
Posts: 7
Member No.: 63
Joined: 13-February 04



I haven't read Wendy Dunn's novel either so can't comment on it specifically.
I think that as readers we need to be able to believe in the characters we read about in historical fiction. An author can strive by detailed research to get close to a historical personality, but 'strive' is the operative word. How well do we actually know the depths of our own friends and family, let along someone hundreds of years removed from us? The author provides us with an interpretation, but perhaps some interpretations are more realistic than others. Of course, what is realistic, again depends on the mindset of the individual reader. I found it hard to believe in the Anne Boleyn of Philipa Gregory's The Other Boleyn Girl. To me Anne's bright and brittle nervousness was overplayed and her fearsome intellect underplayed, but others may have viewed it as a spot on rendition in their mind's eye.
I think too, the amount of historical awareness that a reader brings to a novel will colour his/her ability to believe or not believe in the characters. The more one knows (or thinks one knows <g>) the more demanding of 'veracity' one becomes.

Best
Susan - member of Penman Review and historical fiction author in the day job.
 
     Top
Lesley
Posted: 02 Mar - 10:27 pm  


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 2
Member No.: 78
Joined: 2-March 04



QUOTE (Wendy A Zollo @ 02 Mar - 05:09 pm)
Wendy said:
Which brings up an interesting point about *all* historical females and how they are portrayed by authors.  How much reality do we want to see in our fiction?
Do we want to read a textbook or do we want to read a feathery, flowery, romance?  Or do we as discerning readers want as much of the *real* Anne Boleyn, Eleanor, Maude with just a pinch of flavor to make them readable?

That must be a huge issue of authors of historical fiction, especially in dealing with a "normal" woman. Eleanor of Aquitane was exciting and independent - but would a more typical woman of earlier times be an interesting protagonist? Victorian upper class women, with their incredibly constrained lives, would probably bore us all silly. And as much as we all dislike fiction which has a woman with a modern mind dressed up in period costume, would we be able to relate the what many women felt their role in life was?

Lesley
 
     Top
Wendy A Zollo
Posted: 04 Mar - 06:15 am  


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 9
Member No.: 77
Joined: 2-March 04



I found it hard to believe in the Anne Boleyn of Philipa Gregory's The Other Boleyn Girl. To me Anne's bright and brittle nervousness was overplayed and her fearsome intellect underplayed, but others may have viewed it as a spot on rendition in their mind's eye.
I think too, the amount of historical awareness that a reader brings to a novel will colour his/her ability to believe or not believe in the characters. The more one knows (or thinks one knows <g>) the more demanding of 'veracity' one becomes.>> Elizabeth

I couldn't agree more! When does an author's take on a character become *too* much of an individual reflection of their own thoughts (this being when they have the research readily available to back up medieval reality?)
Also true the more one knows the more difficult it is going to be for *that* one reader to buy into another person's (author's) vision - though that is why they call it historical fiction.
How many of us would readily read a book about a weepy, weak, Catherine of Aragon, I wonder?
Eleanor of Aquitane has rarely been portrayed as such, most recently by S.K.Penman in Time and Chance where admittedly she took a back role to Henry and Becket's never-ending squabbling. Hopefully the strenght of this remarkable women will abound in SKP's follow up novel.

Wendy Z
 
     Top
Wendy A Zollo
Posted: 06 Mar - 07:21 am  


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 9
Member No.: 77
Joined: 2-March 04



And as much as we all dislike fiction which has a woman with a modern mind dressed up in period costume, would we be able to relate the what many women felt their role in life was?

Lesley

(Yup, someday I'll figure out how to use that nice 'quote' box! sad.gif )

Isn't it up to the author to draw us into the characters, make them believable so we *can* relate to the roles that women held during a certain era?

I know from running the penmanreview, we're a rather spoiled crowd having been subjected to the best of the best in this regard (Penman, Chadwick, Dunnett, Lawhead, Dunn, etc) - and what we don't like we debate and as Elizabeth says we wall bang the truly offensive.

We expect the author's research and style to be believable and accurate and rarely settle for less. But historical fiction isn't where one expects to find the truth about history and medieval women, only the major pieces of the puzzle so one can debate an author's reality.

Wendy Z
 
     Top
Taminator
Posted: 10 Mar - 06:58 pm  


PenmanReview


Group: Members
Posts: 3
Member No.: 73
Joined: 1-March 04



I had major issues with The Other Boleyn Girl when I first began reading it because of the background knowledge I had of Anne Boleyn. Gregory's Anne did not click at all with me (nor did Mary,her sister, for that matter) because I brought my preconceived notions to the mix. But because I enjoy reading about the era so much, I stayed with it and ended up liking the story a great deal. I found that I had to set aside my own issues and enjoy the story for what it was--just that, a story based on Gregory's own ideas of Anne and Mary. I still don't accept her theories as truth, but I *can* appreciate her different stance. I can do this because I enjoyed her style of storytelling and her characters' actions rang true enough to her storytelling (meaning that they acted in character for the way she wrote them) to make it an enjoyable read for me. I still don't agree with her perception of either sister, and her story didn't and won't change that. But I can appreciate it. I sometimes think I don't allow for alternate opinions of facts because I am so convinced my own version is the correct one. But I've opened myself up to the possibility that there might be more than one interpretation, and I have Gregory's book to thank for that.

Tammy

 
     Top
Taminator
Posted: 10 Mar - 07:03 pm  


PenmanReview


Group: Members
Posts: 3
Member No.: 73
Joined: 1-March 04



So what is the responsibility of the author in staying strictly to the facts? All authors make creative choices to make the story flow. Most of the time it's perfectly acceptable and only true scholars of the era would know the difference (and it wouldn't change the overall outcome of the story written either way). But what of those casual historical readers who might pick up a book such as The Other Boleyn Girl and take it as gospel truth? Is it all right to twist the facts or place a spin on them without explanation because most people will never know the difference? Is it acceptable because it is fiction? I suppose what bothers me most about playing loosely with the facts is that most history is so interesting that it really doesn't *need* embellishment! When I think of Eleanor of Aquitaine, Anne Boleyn, or Empress Maud, there's no way I could come up with additional tales that could make them more impressive. I want the casual reader to understand that. Most respected authors (Sharon Kay Penman and Elizabeth Chadwick to name two) do add the "Author's Note" and make the explanations. I wish all authors had such integrity.

Tammy
 
     Top
mnewton56
Posted: 13 Mar - 09:20 pm  


PenmanReview


Group: Members
Posts: 17
Member No.: 27
Joined: 1-March 03



Tammy said:
Most respected authors (Sharon Kay Penman and Elizabeth Chadwick to name two) do add the "Author's Note" and make the explanations. I wish all authors had such integrity.

I agree. A writer of historical fiction does have latitiude, because he/she can invent motivations to explain their characters' actions, and if the (historic) person's motivations aren't known (e.g. Elizabeth Woodville, Anne Neville, Mary Boleyn, or Margaret Lennox, to give a few examples), the author can direct the story to tell the same tale in many different ways. OTOH, just as Tammy mentioned, for the casual reader who isn't familiar with the period in question, one can come away with a very distorted view. I'm in favor of the HF author writing the characters to suit the story in their minds, but if it is about historic personages, I think they should not stray too far from known reality. And an author's note explaining the view taken and any discrepancies, shows respect for the readers.

Mary N.
 
     Top
Elizabeth
Posted: 14 Mar - 05:10 am  


Discussion Leader


Group: Discussion Leaders
Posts: 7
Member No.: 63
Joined: 13-February 04



Mary said:
I'm in favor of the HF author writing the characters to suit the story in their minds, but if it is about historic personages, I think they should not stray too far from known reality.

I agree...although it can be difficult when the known reality leaves huge gaps. That's when the author has to try to reconstruct or invent the story whilst trying to stay true to the character. As you know, I'm engaged in writing the story of William Marshal and although I am provided with a lot of 'reality' via a couple of sources, there are still huge areas where there are only the vaguest of hints to act as guides - notably in his relationships with women. Two historians I've researched have different notions of how those relationships functioned and I've gone for the historian who seems more well rounded in his assessment and who (coincidentally <vbg>) fits my own notions and additional research of William's attitudes towards women. However it's not cut and dried. I am well aware that there are 2 scenarios, both plausible, concerning his realationship with his lord's young wife. He might have slept with her, he might not. She might have been Guinevere to his Lancelot, she might not. Without a time machine, no one will ever know for absolute certain. I know what I think and what I'm going to write, but an author of historical ficiton will often stand at a crossroads of disputed opinion and have to make a choice. Obviously that choice will colour the readers' opinion of the characters in the novel. I do agree that an author's note is invaluable in these cases and adds to a novel's integrity (speaking as a reader here as much as a writer. I do enjoy reading the additional notes at the back of a novel. I think that they are the next step in leading you to want to find out more).

Susan
 
     Top
mnewton56
Posted: 14 Mar - 09:07 pm  


PenmanReview


Group: Members
Posts: 17
Member No.: 27
Joined: 1-March 03



Susan said:
...although it can be difficult when the known reality leaves huge gaps. That's when the author has to try to reconstruct or invent the story whilst trying to stay true to the character.

Exactly -- that's where the HF writer has a scope that the biographer lacks. He/she can invent motivations, fill out the known outlines of a life. I enjoy reading the different POVs that two novelists can bring to a story about the same historic personage, and feel stimulated to investigate further. But when the HF writer fills out those outlines and invents/elaborates on details; or chooses one version when there are several opposing accounts -- that's when I feel an author's note is in order (and you always porovide one). I just feel it's important, if one chooses to write a story featuring a historic personage istead of a fully invented character, to align the story with the "facts" as fully as possible -- possible being the operative word :-).

May N.
 
     Top
Wendy A Zollo
Posted: 23 Mar - 06:50 am  


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 9
Member No.: 77
Joined: 2-March 04


I just feel it's important, if one chooses to write a story featuring a historic personage istead of a fully invented character, to align the story with the "facts" as fully as possible -- possible being the operative word :-).

May N. >>

Do you think this is more important when dealing with female historical figures since they were so often looked over in the recording of history (not always, but as a general rule - they were given more of an outline instead of *say* an essay?)

Wendy Z
 
     Top
mnewton56
Posted: 04 Apr - 09:23 pm  


PenmanReview


Group: Members
Posts: 17
Member No.: 27
Joined: 1-March 03



Wendy, I know the month is over, but I am going to try to reply to your question -- last weekend I was in Bowling Green, KY at the KY High School Speech Tournament and my daughter was on Spring Break this past week, so I was kind of out of comission for this discussion.

I do think it's important for HF authors to stick as close as *possible* to recorded history when writing about historical persons, including women - even, or especially, since women were less well-documented. OTOH, the documentation that is available may be from the POV of one chronicler, who may not have even known the woman in question. So *his* POV may have as little validity as that of a modern writer. I like to see a writer's POV supported by something concrete - historical research into the era, the clothing, social mores, food, religion as a powerful force in people's everyday lives (if it was - and it does seem to have been so in the medieval period). How likely are the characters' actions and motivations, given their era and social customs? That is where Susan and SKP shine. As far as I can tell, their characters act in ways that are believable within their time period, and the authors explain the social mores that cause their characters to view the world, and act in ways that may differ from the way we would today.
I hope I have explained this better than I have before :-).

Best,
Mary N.

 
     Top
 

<< Back to Medieval Women in Modern Fiction

Copyright © 2004. All rights reserved. Privacy Policy.
Web Hosting & Design: Tamara Mazzei - Trivium Publishing LLC.

W3C HTML 4.01 Validador Icon