@BCPLibraries Q6. I think it depends on how distant the reader is from the era being described. I don’t think we can accurately know how Charles I felt when overthrown and sentenced #BCPBookChat
@BCPLibraries Q5. It would be those authors that are writing about their own times (Du Maurier or even Wodehouse) that we then read in the 21st century. #BCPBookChat
@BCPLibraries @Joseamey Yes. But this makes me think about our 'sense of the past' and what is historically accurate, and how the two can differ #BCPBookChat
@Joseamey @BCPLibraries So inaccuracy can be a distracting irritation. My friend once noted the incorrect inclusion of Grannie Smith apples in an Austen adaptation #BCPBookChat
@BCPLibraries Q3. Accuracy allows contrast with our own times. There is a moral responsibility, particularly when portraying recent history, to ‘get it right’. I’d segregate alternative history and historical fantasy as they deserve distinction #BCPBookChat
@BCPLibraries Q2. They tend to focus a great deal on hierarchy in society and the fate (and the sometimes futile struggle against it) that follows according to where you are positioned. This is something readers can relate to. Mantel, Hardy, Fellowes, Cookson all write on this. #BCPBookChat
@BCPLibraries Q7. Yes, and there’s plenty to write about – stasis, isolation and futility, economic consequences, learning how to be a teacher…#BCPBookChat
@BCPLibraries Q5. Literary Fiction can take the mundane and use it as a metaphor to point to and illuminate larger events within society. Slice of Life tends to stay within a closed, domestic situation #BCPBookchat