 |
| Exploring the Creation of Fictional Worlds with Mercedes Rochelle |
I’m working on my tenth book right now, and
late in the process I concluded something that never occurred to me until now.
The closer we get to the present day in our novel, the more we are locked into
real historical details. Of course, that’s a double-edged sword. On the one
side, I don’t have to worry about concocting a plot. The story line is already
done for me. On the other side, I’m constrained by historical accuracy—or at
least, what passes for accuracy. Unless I’m writing alternative fiction, I
can’t change the course of events.
The way I see it, there are three kinds of
Historical Fiction authors: the first writes about a totally made-up character
in a historical setting, which frees up the author to do anything they like,
within reason. The second type of historical novel centers on a character
related to a historic person, like a spouse, younger brother, favorite comrade,
or servant—that sort of thing. This author will often touch on events, and is
also free to create a totally fabricated parallel story. The third type of
historical novel is more of a biographical fiction, usually about a king or
famous person. This requires a ton of research and dedication to veracity. As
you may have guessed, I ascribe to the third option.
My first four books covered the eleventh century, where we have a maddening dearth of historical information. We have the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, which gave us little paragraphs that left a lot to the imagination. When you consider that the Bayeux Tapestry is our major source about the Battle of Hastings, as well as a chronicle written about fifty years after the fact (Orderic Vitalis), and another written a hundred years later (Wace, Roman de Rou), we—or rather, historians—really have to extrapolate. Everybody seemed to have a different opinion. That gave me a lot of head-scratching, but allowed the creative juices to flow.
My last several books are about Plantagenet
kings starting with Richard II. As expected, the period I am writing about is
much more expansively documented. And now I’m up to Henry V. He reigned six
hundred years ago, still long enough in the past that one would think I’d have
plenty of “blank spaces” to fill in with my imagination. Fat chance! It seems
that Henry couldn’t take a nap without someone making note of it. And there
doesn’t seem to be as much disagreement between historians as to what happened.
Well, OK, I exaggerate a tad. But the point is,
it seems his reign was more closely documented than ever before. And frankly, I
got stuck. Why? Because I’m locked in to a timeline that is not particularly
interesting. I want to write about Henry’s life, since most people know little
about him past the Battle of Agincourt. Alas, much of his later story consisted
of a long series of interminable sieges. And, for the most part, sieges were
boring. We do get an occasional bout of stimulating action, thank goodness. Unfortunately,
there’s a lot of uninteresting stuff tying it all together. If I’m bored with
it, I certainly can’t make it stimulating to my readers.
So what’s an author to do? Can I just jump from one high point to another? It’s very tempting. Can I do that without losing the continuity? Not really. I like to compare my novel-writing to building a human body. The first draft is the skeleton. I concentrate on the historical events, which involves the most extensive research. I don’t spend much time worrying about personalities and storyline. I think of my second draft as the muscles and sinews. The history is in place. I can concentrate on tying the events together, and figuring out why something happened, and how. Connect the dots, I like to say. The third draft is the skin and makeup. I can concentrate on the human interest, and this draft usually lightens things up for me. I can add further dialogue and throw in motivations, giving more dimension to my protagonist’s character. That stuff becomes filler, but I am writing fiction after all. This is what separates us from the historian, who doesn’t have the license to dive into a person’s brain.
This time around, I have yet to get through the
first draft. It’s just dragging for me. One potential solution is yet more
research. I’ve starting buying books that tell the history from the French
point of view, which is definitely a different angle. It doesn’t hurt that the
French civil war and violent rioting in Paris impacts heavily on the English
army’s progress. Those activities got me halfway through the book. I just have
to figure out how to keep it up!
A further potential solution is to give another historical person more prominence than I normally do. The interaction between Henry V and Philip the Good, for instance, is not unimportant. And what about the Dauphin, the future Charles VII who makes such a mess of things when he has John the Fearless murdered? Oh yes, that is pretty juicy. So, perhaps as an author, I need to crawl out of my comfort zone and do something different. Expand the perspective rather than make up more filler. After all, my ultimate goal is to make history more interesting to the reader, and to do so, it has to be entertaining to me. I’m a firm believer that this is possible.
I just hope I
have the skill to do it.
AUTHOR BIO:
Mercedes Rochelle is an ardent lover of medieval history, and has channeled this interest into fiction writing. She believes that good Historical Fiction, is an excellent way to introduce the subject to curious readers. Her first four books cover eleventh-century Britain and events surrounding the Norman Conquest of England. Her new project is called “The Plantagenet Legacy” taking us through the reigns of the last true Plantagenet King, Richard II and his successors, Henry IV, Henry V. She also writes a blog: HistoricalBritainBlog.com to explore the history behind the story. Born in St. Louis, MO, she received by BA in Literature at the Univ. of Missouri St.Louis in 1979 then moved to New York in 1982 while in her mid-20s to "see the world". The search hasn't ended! Today she lives in Sergeantsville, NJ with her husband in a log home they had built themselves.
LINKS:
Website:
https://www.MercedesRochelle.com
Blog:
https://www.HistoricalBritainBlog.com
Facebook:
https://www.MercedesRochelle.net
Twitter/X:
Bluesky:
https://bsky.app/profile/authorrochelle.bsky.social
From the day he was crowned, Henry V was determined to prove the legitimacy of his house. His father's usurpation weighed heavily on his mind. Only a grand gesture would capture the respect of his own countrymen and the rest of Europe. He would follow in his great-grandfather Edward III's footsteps, and recover lost territory in France. Better yet, why not go for the crown? Poor, deranged Charles VI couldn't manage his own barons.
The civil war between the Burgundians and Armagnacs was more of a threat to his country than the English, even after Henry laid siege to Harfleur. But once Harfleur had fallen, the French came to their senses and determined to block his path to Calais and destroy him.
By the time the English reached Agincourt, they were starving, exhausted, and easy pickings. Or so the French thought. Little did they reckon on Henry's leadership and the stout-hearted English archers who proved, once again, that numbers didn't matter when God was on their side.
https://www.amazon.com/Agincourt-King-Plantagenet-Legacy-Book-ebook/dp/B0CXJQ28QJ
 |
| Discover Helen's Books |
