Philippa’s answer to “For some reason, your books draw more controversy than most other historical fiction books. I hav…” > Likes and Comments
351 likes · Like
I think a lot of it comes from the history traditionalists take a lot of offense to things that don't have a firm basis in written historical documents. They don't understand how ethnocentric this makes them though. You write about women, even as the wealthiest and most powerful of their time, and because of their gender they're largely absent from the predominant historical record. One of my undergrad degrees is in history and I made a point to focus on the minority account of events (the Victorian period through colonial mistresses of color or the 1960s through working class black women, etc.) and always found this obtuseness frustrating.
Her books are not well researched at all. As someone who actually researches this time period she messes up all the time. For example in the Red Queen she makes Margaret Beaufort Cecily of York's godmother after her marriage to Thomas Stanley. But Cecily of York was born 1469, but Margaret Beaufort doesn't marry Thomas Stanley till 1472, 3 years after Cecily's birth. This is one of the many times she's inaccurate.
Her books are filled with inaccuracies and a simply fact check can tell you that.
Wow amazingcat -- you just a great job of proving the point.
I can't tell if that's an insult or not? Is fact checking Gregory's work wrong. She's inaccurate, and gets little things wrong, like Cecily's birth year or like the fact that the Duke of Buckingham had a daughter by 1484.
If she's gets these tiny facts wrong how accurate could she possibly be on larger one.
Also I take issue with the idea that she's claiming that people who fact check her aren'y historians. I'm not she's correct, I'm currently in school and still am decided what masters program I want. Mrs. Gregory has no degrees in history either, and yet she goes around calling herself a historian.
An observation. And I believe Ms. Gregory calls herself a writer, not a historian.
No this is from her facebook page "Philippa Gregory was an established historian and writer"
If she just called herself a writer I'd be fine with her. If she was just like "This is my story it's not accurate of course." I'd be fine. My problem is that she claims that she's accurate, that she claims that her books is how it happened. When she can't even get Cecily of York's birth date right. Let alone all the other mistakes she makes.
Thanks for taking the time to answer my question. I have never understood why you get attacked personally so much and this helps. I know some people who get really angry when you are discussed. It is exactly like some of their family members are being smeared. They take it way too personally.
The amazingcat... they are works of historical fiction.. They are based on facts but some of it is her thoughts on what SHE thinks may have happened. You are preciesly why I asked this question.
How is she a historian? She has no degrees in history? She studied 18th century English Literature.
She is not a historian. She has no academic record to indicate she is one.
Her work isn't based on facts, nearly everything she writes about TWOTRs (At least, not a fan of the 16th century) I can debunk and give evidence that the opposite is true.
If she just wrote fiction and said "This is fiction and this is my story" I'd be fine with her. But a few questions up she said she never diverging from facts. While making Henry VII have a mistress is a pretty big divergent from facts, ignoring the Portuguese marriages which Richard III was making at the time of his death is diverging from facts, hell making Anne Boleyn the eldest sister is a divergence from the facts, and wiping clean Mary Boleyn's sexual history is a divergence.
It's not about the fiction, it's about the fact that her books aren't accurate and never have been.
why is that some people just have to gripe about everything, just enjoy the novels and if you don't like them don't read them , simple as that.
oh for petes sake. Anyone who is interested in history IS a historian. It is as simple as that. Having some kind of degree is not a requirement in my opinion.
There really is no need to defend a successful novelist, is there? Fiction is fiction, and I love reading it. Critics are critics, and I do not love reading their opinions.
No I'm sorry A historians an expert in history; authority on history. An expect implies higher education. Just like every other job on this planet it has qualifications. A historian is a job title, we wouldn't call someone who's just studied medical books a "doctor" now would we. For history it's the same thing.
And for the last time I'm not even going into her novels (Personally I think Ken Follett writes historical fiction better) I'm going into Gregory's own claim that she is "accurate" and that she "never diverges from the facts" she literally said this a few comments above.
That has nothing to do with her fiction. My problem with her has always been those statements, nothing more. If she said "This is my story and I take liberates, you can look at the proper sources and decide what's real" I'd be fine with her.
But she's lying to you and your fools for buying into her. She's doing this for profit plain and simple. She wants to make her books seem more accurate then they are and therefore reach a larger audience.
So then, I'm a historian I guess...
No, sorry, it is a profession.
I just wish Ms. gregory would admit that she is a novelist (she is a best selling one and that is quite admirable in of itself) and not a professional/ academic historian and also that she takes many liberties in her books and is not 100 percent accurate. She is misleading the public in a way. I feel the same as theamazingcat.
Guys… it says here that Philippa actually does have a degree in history, from the University of Sussex: http://www.philippagregory.com/biography
(as well as a PhD from Edinburgh on the 18th-century novel)
Why is it such a big deal what she has? she's an excellent writer just enjoy her books, give her credit for sharing her creativity,and her stories! my goodness!
LC and theamazingcat are commenting to each of these questions to try and derail discussion of what the question was actually about in favour of attacking this author for her (granted sometimes very obvious) use of artistic license.
Which as a novelist she has every right to employ. She doesn't need to say this is her take on things and that she takes liberties because it's *obvious*. And LC, if you want accuracy, I'll say this again: stay away from fiction and read biographies on the personages instead.
WELL said. Excellent response, perfect really. Bravo.
I meant this to the author... not to those who have made comments :D
Perfect response to the question. I appreciate the way you wrap fiction around the facts that you research so well. You bring life and personality to each character. Your books The White Queen and The Red Queen are perfect examples of your talent to enlighten us about two women with the same objective but with different influences on their behavior. Well done, as in all of your books which are in my opinion a "literary" treasure.
She writes vividly but as you have pointed out, there are a lot of inaccuracies and some inventions to make story more colourful e.g. Anne Boleyn committing incest with her brother for which there is no evidence and a lot of evidence against it.
I now block users who have clearly only joined Goodreads to abuse authors they do not like. I no longer have to read their inappropriate comments and they can continue to be the trolls that they are :)
Well said Malia! It's called Historical FICTION!
Well I have started The Taming of the Queen and am enjoying. Katherine's story is such a tragic one, but I've never really investigated her life....This I think will be the first step in discovering this rather mysterious queen who survived a tyrant.
This is the best thing about historical FICTION, it leads the reader on a journey to find out more about these historical people who lived in such perilous times.
You're response is so measured, informative, and thoughtful, more than ranters deserve.
It's fiction and fiction always fills in the gaps of what we yet to know. I disagree with some of the inferences in the cousins' war series (and I have said in my reviews why) but I also enjoyed your books and don't hold it against anyone who enjoys them as well. I am very vocal when it comes to what I agree and what I don't, at the same time there are things I don't know and will say it. And if some people are encouraged to read more on Tudor and wars of the roses history thanks to fiction than that is great. I was introduced to this period in an awkward way. I was three and super terrified after my mom showed me a horror movie and my dad calmed me down by telling me about King Arthur from Sir Thomas Mallory's death of king Arthur. As I got older one history teacher told us it was written during the wars of the roses so I said 'okay I want to know about this and the Tudors that took over after the Plantagenets' and the first book I read was a fiction one: Jean Plaidy's In the shadow of the crown. And from there I started reading bios, and being more of a bookworm. I read your book The Other Boleyn Girl and loved the descriptions and the clothes. I didn't like the way Anne came out, but it was written from her sister's point of view so I guess that was why she came off that way (it's like one episode of South Park where Cartman tells his side of the story and is similar to what other people say, but also different). And when your book came out, I was in middle high, and that peaked my interest in the Tudors even more. I got some of my friends who weren't big history fans, to listen to my ramblings and read some lines of your books, and other fiction books, and bios as well.
When I was burned last year (and I am still recovering from my severe burns) I would cringe, flinch, and bite my lips, the pillow, and whatever to stop myself from screaming. While I was at therapy, the only thing that gave me comfort was history: I read your books and shut part of the pain, I read Amy Licence's Six Wives and the many mistresses of Henry VIII/In Bed with the Tudors again, and listened to the audio book of Claire Ridgway's Anne Boleyn Collection, Peter Ackroyd's The Tudors, Guy's Mary Queen of Scots bio, re-read Plaidy's Queen of this realm, Meyer's Young Royal series and of course went back to King Arthur and other fantasies which started my interest in that. So books are always very special for me.
And regardless of what other people think, or if they disagree, keep writing because it peaks people's interests and that is great because history is an important subject that is still very relevant, and in my case an amazing one that helped me through tough moments -and still is- in my life.
I've got to say I first heard of her work because of the film The Other Boleyn Girl - the film was terrible! ... some years later I read the book (as part of my love for all things Tudor) and found it was very, very different to the movie - I've heard of a lot of people who hated that film and it gave them a bad opinion of Philippa's work.
A piece of paper and a formal classroom amount to one way of becoming "expert" in anything. If one has made a profession out of a subject in some other way, such as an authoress focusing on certain periods in her oeuvres; that too equates an expert. I take particular issue with those who fail to recognize that even making a personal study of something, without a profession or formal classroom, can also most certainly make experts of us. In fact I find that being personally passionate about a subject on our own time makes the best kind of expertise. We LIVE it.
I contribute as someone formally educated but who has absorbed personal studies far better than classroom ones time and time again. I am also a fledgling authoress. I guarantee, I have never felt fatigued by research more than for fiction! Finally, I back-up many who said here that one might use history to weave fiction around it. What makes us love books? You can anchor every date down to the day but is it well-written? Is it exciting? FICTIONAL stories are set in history, by this successful woman.
The books are so much better thoroughly researched
Intelligent reading
Just finished the last of the Tudor books...The Virgins's Lover...I am sad...in a state of depression. I am stuck in the 1500's in England etc and can't get unstuck in my mind. I have no more of your Cousins or Tudor books to read, I have read them all ...:(...These are the best of the best in historical fiction. Dare I say it...please write another. I don't know who it should be about but you will find someone! Thank you for hours of great reading and escape!
Your books always set me off to learn more about the history. You are correct, it’s important to remember the books are fiction and enjoy. Once I have finished a book I feel close to the characters and then want to learn more about them and theIr historical time. Thank you for so much enjoyment.
why goodreads will not let me create my own topic of discussion?
Yes absolutely. I believe passionately that novelists observe they do not make judgments or present their own subjective views but seek enlightenment for themselves and others. Historical fiction provides a viewpoint in order to suggest a possible truth but that viewpoint does not belong to the author. I am an aspiring author of historical fiction myself and hope one day I can produce a novel half as good as one of those you have worked on diligently with such dedicated research. Thank you for all that you do to make history come alive it is much appreciated, your books are a treasure and thoroughly enjoyable.
Thank you for your long answer.
Listening to Normal Women now. Because I'm new to your works, and so affected by the facts I did a search on you to see if I could trust what you were saying. I’ve heard a few of those facts before but there’s something chilling in hearing them brought together and presented in such a clear, overview that doesn’t focus on one pod at a time but describes the continuity of the hundreds of years that took away common land, took away the ability of people to support themselves on the land, and especially took away women’s power. This is the same thing that we’re allowing to happen to animals. Land and rights are being stolen one at a time for business.
This has been life changing in how I see myself. I’m 72, and it’s the first time I'm hearing of women in history apart from the famous few. I always fought against the mould, realise through reading your book, how I've been shaped by these omissions.
I also couldn’t believe that one of your critics – a woman judged you by a work of fiction because her perception of the personality of one of your famous characters was different from yours (or, as I realise from having read your ‘long’ answer, your protagonist). I was gobsmacked and can’t wait to read the book.
Well said and exciting! The art of bringing the reader into the character's head, to see the world through the character's eyes, is truly captivating.
back to top
date
newest »
newest »
message 1:
by
[deleted user]
(new)
Aug 07, 2015 09:29AM
Are you kidding me? Your books are well researched. I have enjoyed all of your books. I suppose we all receive nasty remarks about our writing. Know you are an awesome writer!
reply
|
flag
I think a lot of it comes from the history traditionalists take a lot of offense to things that don't have a firm basis in written historical documents. They don't understand how ethnocentric this makes them though. You write about women, even as the wealthiest and most powerful of their time, and because of their gender they're largely absent from the predominant historical record. One of my undergrad degrees is in history and I made a point to focus on the minority account of events (the Victorian period through colonial mistresses of color or the 1960s through working class black women, etc.) and always found this obtuseness frustrating.
Her books are not well researched at all. As someone who actually researches this time period she messes up all the time. For example in the Red Queen she makes Margaret Beaufort Cecily of York's godmother after her marriage to Thomas Stanley. But Cecily of York was born 1469, but Margaret Beaufort doesn't marry Thomas Stanley till 1472, 3 years after Cecily's birth. This is one of the many times she's inaccurate. Her books are filled with inaccuracies and a simply fact check can tell you that.
Wow amazingcat -- you just a great job of proving the point.
I can't tell if that's an insult or not? Is fact checking Gregory's work wrong. She's inaccurate, and gets little things wrong, like Cecily's birth year or like the fact that the Duke of Buckingham had a daughter by 1484. If she's gets these tiny facts wrong how accurate could she possibly be on larger one.
Also I take issue with the idea that she's claiming that people who fact check her aren'y historians. I'm not she's correct, I'm currently in school and still am decided what masters program I want. Mrs. Gregory has no degrees in history either, and yet she goes around calling herself a historian.
An observation. And I believe Ms. Gregory calls herself a writer, not a historian.
No this is from her facebook page "Philippa Gregory was an established historian and writer" If she just called herself a writer I'd be fine with her. If she was just like "This is my story it's not accurate of course." I'd be fine. My problem is that she claims that she's accurate, that she claims that her books is how it happened. When she can't even get Cecily of York's birth date right. Let alone all the other mistakes she makes.
Thanks for taking the time to answer my question. I have never understood why you get attacked personally so much and this helps. I know some people who get really angry when you are discussed. It is exactly like some of their family members are being smeared. They take it way too personally.
The amazingcat... they are works of historical fiction.. They are based on facts but some of it is her thoughts on what SHE thinks may have happened. You are preciesly why I asked this question.
How is she a historian? She has no degrees in history? She studied 18th century English Literature. She is not a historian. She has no academic record to indicate she is one.
Her work isn't based on facts, nearly everything she writes about TWOTRs (At least, not a fan of the 16th century) I can debunk and give evidence that the opposite is true.
If she just wrote fiction and said "This is fiction and this is my story" I'd be fine with her. But a few questions up she said she never diverging from facts. While making Henry VII have a mistress is a pretty big divergent from facts, ignoring the Portuguese marriages which Richard III was making at the time of his death is diverging from facts, hell making Anne Boleyn the eldest sister is a divergence from the facts, and wiping clean Mary Boleyn's sexual history is a divergence.
It's not about the fiction, it's about the fact that her books aren't accurate and never have been.
why is that some people just have to gripe about everything, just enjoy the novels and if you don't like them don't read them , simple as that.
oh for petes sake. Anyone who is interested in history IS a historian. It is as simple as that. Having some kind of degree is not a requirement in my opinion.
There really is no need to defend a successful novelist, is there? Fiction is fiction, and I love reading it. Critics are critics, and I do not love reading their opinions.
No I'm sorry A historians an expert in history; authority on history. An expect implies higher education. Just like every other job on this planet it has qualifications. A historian is a job title, we wouldn't call someone who's just studied medical books a "doctor" now would we. For history it's the same thing. And for the last time I'm not even going into her novels (Personally I think Ken Follett writes historical fiction better) I'm going into Gregory's own claim that she is "accurate" and that she "never diverges from the facts" she literally said this a few comments above.
That has nothing to do with her fiction. My problem with her has always been those statements, nothing more. If she said "This is my story and I take liberates, you can look at the proper sources and decide what's real" I'd be fine with her.
But she's lying to you and your fools for buying into her. She's doing this for profit plain and simple. She wants to make her books seem more accurate then they are and therefore reach a larger audience.
So then, I'm a historian I guess...No, sorry, it is a profession.
I just wish Ms. gregory would admit that she is a novelist (she is a best selling one and that is quite admirable in of itself) and not a professional/ academic historian and also that she takes many liberties in her books and is not 100 percent accurate. She is misleading the public in a way. I feel the same as theamazingcat.
Guys… it says here that Philippa actually does have a degree in history, from the University of Sussex: http://www.philippagregory.com/biography(as well as a PhD from Edinburgh on the 18th-century novel)
Why is it such a big deal what she has? she's an excellent writer just enjoy her books, give her credit for sharing her creativity,and her stories! my goodness!
LC and theamazingcat are commenting to each of these questions to try and derail discussion of what the question was actually about in favour of attacking this author for her (granted sometimes very obvious) use of artistic license. Which as a novelist she has every right to employ. She doesn't need to say this is her take on things and that she takes liberties because it's *obvious*. And LC, if you want accuracy, I'll say this again: stay away from fiction and read biographies on the personages instead.
WELL said. Excellent response, perfect really. Bravo.
I meant this to the author... not to those who have made comments :D
Perfect response to the question. I appreciate the way you wrap fiction around the facts that you research so well. You bring life and personality to each character. Your books The White Queen and The Red Queen are perfect examples of your talent to enlighten us about two women with the same objective but with different influences on their behavior. Well done, as in all of your books which are in my opinion a "literary" treasure.
She writes vividly but as you have pointed out, there are a lot of inaccuracies and some inventions to make story more colourful e.g. Anne Boleyn committing incest with her brother for which there is no evidence and a lot of evidence against it.
I now block users who have clearly only joined Goodreads to abuse authors they do not like. I no longer have to read their inappropriate comments and they can continue to be the trolls that they are :)
Well said Malia! It's called Historical FICTION!
Well I have started The Taming of the Queen and am enjoying. Katherine's story is such a tragic one, but I've never really investigated her life....This I think will be the first step in discovering this rather mysterious queen who survived a tyrant.This is the best thing about historical FICTION, it leads the reader on a journey to find out more about these historical people who lived in such perilous times.
You're response is so measured, informative, and thoughtful, more than ranters deserve.
It's fiction and fiction always fills in the gaps of what we yet to know. I disagree with some of the inferences in the cousins' war series (and I have said in my reviews why) but I also enjoyed your books and don't hold it against anyone who enjoys them as well. I am very vocal when it comes to what I agree and what I don't, at the same time there are things I don't know and will say it. And if some people are encouraged to read more on Tudor and wars of the roses history thanks to fiction than that is great. I was introduced to this period in an awkward way. I was three and super terrified after my mom showed me a horror movie and my dad calmed me down by telling me about King Arthur from Sir Thomas Mallory's death of king Arthur. As I got older one history teacher told us it was written during the wars of the roses so I said 'okay I want to know about this and the Tudors that took over after the Plantagenets' and the first book I read was a fiction one: Jean Plaidy's In the shadow of the crown. And from there I started reading bios, and being more of a bookworm. I read your book The Other Boleyn Girl and loved the descriptions and the clothes. I didn't like the way Anne came out, but it was written from her sister's point of view so I guess that was why she came off that way (it's like one episode of South Park where Cartman tells his side of the story and is similar to what other people say, but also different). And when your book came out, I was in middle high, and that peaked my interest in the Tudors even more. I got some of my friends who weren't big history fans, to listen to my ramblings and read some lines of your books, and other fiction books, and bios as well.When I was burned last year (and I am still recovering from my severe burns) I would cringe, flinch, and bite my lips, the pillow, and whatever to stop myself from screaming. While I was at therapy, the only thing that gave me comfort was history: I read your books and shut part of the pain, I read Amy Licence's Six Wives and the many mistresses of Henry VIII/In Bed with the Tudors again, and listened to the audio book of Claire Ridgway's Anne Boleyn Collection, Peter Ackroyd's The Tudors, Guy's Mary Queen of Scots bio, re-read Plaidy's Queen of this realm, Meyer's Young Royal series and of course went back to King Arthur and other fantasies which started my interest in that. So books are always very special for me.
And regardless of what other people think, or if they disagree, keep writing because it peaks people's interests and that is great because history is an important subject that is still very relevant, and in my case an amazing one that helped me through tough moments -and still is- in my life.
I've got to say I first heard of her work because of the film The Other Boleyn Girl - the film was terrible! ... some years later I read the book (as part of my love for all things Tudor) and found it was very, very different to the movie - I've heard of a lot of people who hated that film and it gave them a bad opinion of Philippa's work.
A piece of paper and a formal classroom amount to one way of becoming "expert" in anything. If one has made a profession out of a subject in some other way, such as an authoress focusing on certain periods in her oeuvres; that too equates an expert. I take particular issue with those who fail to recognize that even making a personal study of something, without a profession or formal classroom, can also most certainly make experts of us. In fact I find that being personally passionate about a subject on our own time makes the best kind of expertise. We LIVE it. I contribute as someone formally educated but who has absorbed personal studies far better than classroom ones time and time again. I am also a fledgling authoress. I guarantee, I have never felt fatigued by research more than for fiction! Finally, I back-up many who said here that one might use history to weave fiction around it. What makes us love books? You can anchor every date down to the day but is it well-written? Is it exciting? FICTIONAL stories are set in history, by this successful woman.
The books are so much better thoroughly researchedIntelligent reading
Just finished the last of the Tudor books...The Virgins's Lover...I am sad...in a state of depression. I am stuck in the 1500's in England etc and can't get unstuck in my mind. I have no more of your Cousins or Tudor books to read, I have read them all ...:(...These are the best of the best in historical fiction. Dare I say it...please write another. I don't know who it should be about but you will find someone! Thank you for hours of great reading and escape!
Your books always set me off to learn more about the history. You are correct, it’s important to remember the books are fiction and enjoy. Once I have finished a book I feel close to the characters and then want to learn more about them and theIr historical time. Thank you for so much enjoyment.
why goodreads will not let me create my own topic of discussion?
Yes absolutely. I believe passionately that novelists observe they do not make judgments or present their own subjective views but seek enlightenment for themselves and others. Historical fiction provides a viewpoint in order to suggest a possible truth but that viewpoint does not belong to the author. I am an aspiring author of historical fiction myself and hope one day I can produce a novel half as good as one of those you have worked on diligently with such dedicated research. Thank you for all that you do to make history come alive it is much appreciated, your books are a treasure and thoroughly enjoyable.
Thank you for your long answer.Listening to Normal Women now. Because I'm new to your works, and so affected by the facts I did a search on you to see if I could trust what you were saying. I’ve heard a few of those facts before but there’s something chilling in hearing them brought together and presented in such a clear, overview that doesn’t focus on one pod at a time but describes the continuity of the hundreds of years that took away common land, took away the ability of people to support themselves on the land, and especially took away women’s power. This is the same thing that we’re allowing to happen to animals. Land and rights are being stolen one at a time for business.
This has been life changing in how I see myself. I’m 72, and it’s the first time I'm hearing of women in history apart from the famous few. I always fought against the mould, realise through reading your book, how I've been shaped by these omissions.
I also couldn’t believe that one of your critics – a woman judged you by a work of fiction because her perception of the personality of one of your famous characters was different from yours (or, as I realise from having read your ‘long’ answer, your protagonist). I was gobsmacked and can’t wait to read the book.
Well said and exciting! The art of bringing the reader into the character's head, to see the world through the character's eyes, is truly captivating.
