Poetic licence
May 18, 2009 8:49 AM   Subscribe

Am I stretching the bounds of poetic licence?

I am writing an historical novel set during a conflict. I am quite concerned about making it as historically accurate as possible but I have come to one part in my story where I might need to stretch the bounds of poetic licence more than what is acceptable. I am wondering if I am being too pedantic about accuracy and would like your opinion.

This part of my story concerns a bomber pilot shot down over enemy territory, parachuting to escape, then being captured killed by local villagers. Although not the main event in the story, it is an integral part.

Firstly, pilots being shot down then subsequently killed by locals in this particular conflict is true, and indeed, there was a bombing raid in the particular place where story is based. However, my problem is that there were no instances of pilots being shot down when this particular raid took place.

The real bombing raid in question is not very well known but in my opinion still fairly significant, which is why I am so concerned about the historical accuracy.

At the moment I am thinking to do either one of two things:
1) completely fictionalise it by setting the bombing raid in a neighbouring village (this would have no adverse affect on the story)
2) go with the actual village and actual bombing raid, making up the story of the downed pilot.

In any case, since it is an historical novel I plan to write an afterword about what was true and what was not, so of course I would write something in that about this particular event.

Opinions?
posted by thesailor to Writing & Language (10 answers total)
 
Don't sweat it. Historical fiction is full of things like this.
posted by paultopia at 8:51 AM on May 18, 2009


If you're character is fictional, why should his story be anything but?
posted by Think_Long at 8:56 AM on May 18, 2009


What paultopia said. Don't worry about it.
posted by languagehat at 9:03 AM on May 18, 2009


Best answer: Is your concern that you are going to introduce a fairly unknown historical event to an audience who probably hasn't heard of the event before, but you are somehow going to tarnish that introduction by inserting some fictionalization?

FWIW, you are still in some fashion performing a 'service' (for lack of a better term) by bringing this historical event to a broader audience even if you are meshing two true events together thereby forming a fiction. Readers whose interest is piqued by the event you are describing may go on to do their own non-fiction reading on the matter and understand the license you took without feeling duped IMHO. As said above, this is a fairly common device in historical fiction; in conjunction with your afterword, you seem to be completely in the realm of accepted literary practices.

I think people would only be offended if you tried to pull off the event as true a la James Frey, but that's not what you're doing here.
posted by December at 9:20 AM on May 18, 2009


It's perfectly standard to cut-and-paste series of events/actions which closely resemble those actually occurred in the period in question, to form your narrative. In your example, yes, there was a bombing run on this village during this phase of the war. Yes, pilots were shot down, parachuted safely to the ground, and were killed or otherwise brutalized by angry locals. So your narrative is entirely historically plausible. If you want to cleave more closely to accuracy, you will be forced to write a biography of an actual pilot rather than a plausible tale about a fictional pilot.

As long as your pilot does not do something more baldly anachronistic or otherwise at odds with real-world circumstance (like get back to England through the Chunnel) your departures from the actual record will be lost in the clutter of historical trivia.
posted by BigLankyBastard at 9:23 AM on May 18, 2009 [1 favorite]


Since you're writing fiction and not a history book, I think the thing to keep in mind is you are writing about a universe that is similar to, but not identical to, the real one. The scope of these differences have a lot to do with which genre of fiction your work fits into.

Pilot who didn't really exist, gets shot down where no one really did? Historical fiction.

Pilots are flying jet planes in early WWII? Alternate history fiction.

Pilot shot down by aliens? Science fiction.
posted by FishBike at 9:35 AM on May 18, 2009 [1 favorite]


Response by poster: Thanks for all your very quick answers everyone. I will rest assured that I will not be committing any literary crime in writing about this event!
posted by thesailor at 10:04 AM on May 18, 2009


Firstly, pilots being shot down then subsequently killed by locals in this particular conflict is true, and indeed, there was a bombing raid in the particular place where story is based. However, my problem is that there were no instances of pilots being shot down when this particular raid took place.

You mean, the official historic record does not show that there were instances of pilots being shot down during this raid. That actually gives you a lot of leeway -- because the official historic record sometimes isn't 100% accurate itself, because it depends on accounts that can be a bit muddied.

In other words -- maybe there were no official instances of pilots being shot down during this raid, but there may be instances of pilots crashing during this raid, pilots going missing during this raid, etc. It is entirely plausible that one of those pilots who crashed or went missing WAS shot down after all, and we just didn't hear about it because then the villagers killed him so there was no one there to report back and say "hey, I got shot down!"

It's plausible enough for a reader to buy it, anyway. If you're still concerned, you could also just fudge the source of the crash (i.e., his plane was shot AT, but in the heat of battle it was a little too confusing to tell whether it was shot DOWN as such or if it was friendly fire or WHAT the hell happened).
posted by EmpressCallipygos at 10:04 AM on May 18, 2009


I think you shouldn't worry. Your readers will understand that your novel is a piece of fiction, that it falls into a different category from truth and untruth. Either one of your options seems fine to me.
posted by Kattullus at 10:07 AM on May 18, 2009


As a (fiction) editor, I think that you're okay writing about someone being shot down in that raid. I'd probably suggest putting a note at the front of the book--something along the lines of "based on a historic event, but the characters and their circumstances are products of the author's imagination".
posted by MeghanC at 10:32 AM on May 18, 2009


« Older Looking for good books on wood   |   Help me organize my to-do list when every task is... Newer »
This thread is closed to new comments.