Bill’s Comments (group member since Sep 07, 2011)

Bill’s comments from the Q&A with Erastes group.

Erastes wrote: "Oh yes, it wouldn't pass the Historical Novel Society's criteria, but as no-one else had listed gay historicals I had to use criteria which worked for me--and Maurice and The Charioteer are too imp..."

I think they are important for us now in a how was it like to be GLBT in olden days, told by someone who was there. But then most novels are reflect their times. Personally I call these period pieces and love them.

I think a novel written by someone distant from the period being written about is much different. It is a looking back from a contemporary POV. These I call historical fiction if they are done historically.

But, the lumper/splitter debate is ever ongoing.

I love Maurice, the movie and the book, though I don't categorize it as Historical Fiction. When written it was contemporary with the author and lacks real events or real people.

Erastes wrote: "...I really couldn't get on with Kav and Clay - see my review on SIN for that! LOL. But it would be a dull world if we all thought th..."

I think one of the reasons I liked Kav & Clay so much, is that I'm a Golden Age comic freak and grew up with the Superhero comics and my Dad's collection—just wish mom hadn't discarded them. I quite related to these guys and the quasi-history.

I'm glad Ruth is doing better. I have really enjoyed her work. I was expecting standard m/m romance, but got literature!

What is SIN, Erastes. I would like to read your review. Link?

Regarding definitions of HF. Personally, I differentiate between period pieces and 'Hard' HF. By the latter, I mean novelizations of real people and events. I Claudius, The Persian Boy and Julian would be examples.

Historical Period Pieces for me are works that occur in the past and are accurate to the historical period. There may be mention of real people, but they are not really characters in the books. This is a broad area and includes things such a Catch Trap, Jane Eyre..., Dickens and so on. I am especially partial to British period pieces. The Line of Beauty is a great example of Thatcher's UK upper crust—period, but not truly historical in the sense the events didn't really happen and the characters were made up.

I also have an Historical fantasy category aka Mythic fiction which includes novelizations of myths and legends, about people who may have been real or have become real culturally. Arthurian Fiction fits this as do the works of Juliet Marillier, Evangeline Walton and such. A gay related example I like is Stephen Grundy's novel Gilgamesh

Erastes wrote: "Thoroughly agree with you, ASTB is my joint first favourite (along with The Charioteer) - I like Dylan's story a lot too - thank you!"

The Charioteer has been in my TBR mountain range for some time, but I've not got around to reading it. I really like Renault but generally stray away from ~modern~ history (I was born a the end off WW2). I think I will read it next.

One of my favorite Gay books is Catch Trap, though I think it is pushing some to call it historical fiction. I was quite surprised MZB wrote it.

Another HF, I quite enjoyed is The Carnivorous Lamb—Strange family dynamics in Franco's Spain.

Oops—almost forgot The Amazing Adventures of Kavalier and Clay which is certainly compatible with the origin of superhero comics: Real Kavaliers and Clays, q.v.

BTW, if you know Ruth Sims, she has been sick. I have been in email contact with her, but have not heard back for awhile. I hope she's OK.

My favorite GHF so far is At Swim Two Boys. It is an engaging, lyrical novel occurring during the Irish Easter Rebellion—Lovely prose.

Though more period pieces than true historical fiction, other favorites include Hollinghurst's The Line of Beauty and Ruth Sims Counterpoint: Dylan's Story