Home » #WriteTip

Tag: #WriteTip

When does contemporary fiction become historical fiction?

Historical vs Contemporary Fiction (An #AuthorToolboxBlogHop Post)

This post is part of the monthly Author ToolBox Blog Hop, organised by Raimey Gallant.

We now have over 40 blogs participating. To find more Blog Hop posts:

When does historical fiction become contemporary fiction (or vice versa)?

This question came up in a Facebook group recently. How do we classify historical vs contemporary fiction? Is a novel set in 1979 historical fiction? Or contemporary fiction? That got me thinking … and searching.

When do you think a contemporary novel becomes historical fiction (or vice versa)? Who decides? #WritersLife #AuthorToolBoxBlogHop Share on X

Who gets to decide whether a novel is historical or contemporary fiction? It could be:

  • Libraries (if they classify by genre)
  • Bookstores (who usually classify by genre)
  • Writing organisations (especially those with genre-based contests)
  • Authors (especially when they’re self-publishing)
  • Readers

Most libraries I’ve visited organise fiction by author surname, not by genre, so that’s no help.

Bookstores often classify by genre.

But each store has different classifications, and it’s not always easy to tell what’s what. It doesn’t help that bigger stores usually classify a Christian historical romance as Religious rather than Historical (and if a book featured an African-American character or was written by an African-American author, it might be classified as African-American fiction, not Religious or Historical).

I checked Amazon, but couldn’t find any definition of historical.

That’s not to say it doesn’t exist. I just says I couldn’t find it. If you know where Amazon has a definition of contemporary vs. historical, please add it in the comments!

Amazon use the BISAC (Book Industry Standards and Communications) codes, and I couldn’t find any definition of historical on their site either.

Amazon also isn’t helpful in that publishers self-classify—which is how we find novels in the nonfiction categories, and The Tattooist of Auschwitz in the Australia and Oceania category. (I can only assume someone mixed up Austria and Australia …)

How do writing organisations classify historical vs contemporary fiction?

American Christian Fiction Writers have Contemporary and Historical categories in their Genesis and Carol Awards. They define Historical as “up to and including the Vietnam era”. The Vietnam war ended in 1975, so I guess that’s ACFW’s current definition of “historical”.

In contrast, the Romance Writers of America RITA Award and Romance Writers of Australia Ruby Award both classify “historical” as set before 1950. If you’d asked me, I think this is what I would have said—but I’m equally happy with a 1975 or even 1980 date.

With more recent historical fiction, I expect the time setting to be deliberate. For example, Pamela Binnings Ewen has written several legal thrillers set in the late 1970s and early 1980s. She’s writing about things like women’s rights and women in the workplace, so the time setting is important. They would be different stories if they were set in the 1990s or 2010s—no matter whether the stories were labelled “historical” or “contemporary”.

In general, I expect contemporary stories to be set today—this year (or last year).

I expect characters in contemporary novels to have smartphones and Facebook and GPS and the Uber app (unless they’re philosophically opposed to smartphones and Facebook and GPS and Uber … which could make for a fascinating story).

If the novel is “contemporary” and doesn’t have these things, then I need to be clued in pretty quickly that the novel isn’t set today.

When does historical fiction become contemporary fiction? Is there a fixed date? Or is it up to the publisher (or reader)? #HistoricalFiction #ContemporaryFiction Share on X

I’ve recently reviewed West of Famous by Joni M Fisher, which was set in 2010. That worked for the story, but also worked because the opening made it clear the story was set in 2010. (And yes, there were a couple of plot points that wouldn’t have worked as well in 2019). In that respect, the story was actually historical … even though 2010 is hardly a long time ago.

But what about a story written and published in 2010 that I’m only reading today? Personally, I say that’s a contemporary story. Why? Because it was contemporary when it was written and published.

Using that same logic, Jane Austen was a contemporary novelist, because she was writing about the issues of her day. So were Charles Dickens and Agatha Christie.

So I consider a contemporary story as one that is written and published in the time in which it is set (whether that’s today or two hundred years ago). And a historical story is any story where the author is consciously looking back in time by at least a couple of decades.

What about you? When do you think historical fiction becomes contemporary fiction (Or vice versa)?

 

When does contemporary fiction become historical fiction?
Show, Don't Tell

Show, Don’t Tell (#AuthorToolBoxBlogHop)

Show, Don’t Tell is part of the September #AuthorToolBoxBlogHop, hosted by Raimey Gallant. Click here to find other blogs participating in the Hop and read some great writing advice! Or follow the #AuthorToolBoxBlogHop on Twitter, or visit our Pinterest board.

Over the last couple of weeks I’ve discussed two oft-quoted pieces of writing advice (or bad writing advice, depending on who you ask):

I’ve covered what each phrase means, and how you can apply it to editing your manuscript. Today I’m going to cover another common writing tip: Show, Don’t Tell, which is one of the major rules of modern fiction (whether contemporary or historical, genre or literary).

But what does ‘Show Don’t Tell’ Mean?

Telling a story is the classic way of structuring a novel—think Jane Austen, Agatha Christie, or Charles Dickens. They told their stories as the narrator, able to see into the minds of all the characters at once.

But telling is now considered outdated by publishers, and readers. Modern readers don’t need pages describing a jungle, a panther, and how a panther moves through the jungle. We’ve seen that on the Discovery Channel.

Modern fiction writing relies on showing the story through a series of scenes. We need to show our reader the scene, rather than telling them about the scene. We need to allow readers to watch and experience the story for themselves.

This isn’t new. Sol Stein said this in 1999:

A writer who wants to be read by contemporary audiences … will find it useful to study through example the differences between narrative summary and immediate scene. Keep in mind that narrative summary is telling and immediate scene is showing.

So instead of telling the reader she was frightened at the noise in the dark basement, let us hear the noise and show us her reactions—her conscious actions, her unconscious visceral reactions, and her internal monologue:

There was a thump in the basement, a pause, then scrapes and scratches as though something—or someone—was moving furniture across the wooden floor. Then steps. Footsteps. Climbing the stairs. She froze in place as her heart beat in time to the heavy footsteps, da-dum, da-dum, he-is com-ing. Where could she hide?

As Renni Browne and Dave King say:

You want to draw your readers into the world you’ve created, make them feel a part of it, make them forget where they are. And you can’t do this effectively if you tell your readers about your world secondhand. You have to take them there.

We need to show the action (and reaction) that relates to the main plot and subplots. We need to show the action and reaction that impacts on the character’s goals, motivations, and conflicts—their character arc.

But we don’t need to show everything.

I’ve yet to read a novel where a character visits the bathroom (to use the American euphemism). This is a good thing. We know the characters must need to visit the bathroom on occasion. But it’s detail we rarely need.

Narrative summary has its uses, the main one being to vary the rhythm and texture of your writing … Just make sure you don’t use it when you should be showing rather than telling.

We can tell the transitions between scenes. If scene A takes place at home, and scene B takes place in the office, we don’t need to show every detail of how our character gets from A to B—unless it’s directly relevant to the plot, or to the character’s personal arc.

This comes back to the principle of Chekov’s gun, which I touched on last week:

If there is a rifle on the mantelpiece in the first act, it needs to be fired in the third act.

Readers know and understand this principle, even if they can’t articulate it:

  • We know that if a novel shows character scrabbling for her car keys in the dark of the parking garage, there will be someone waiting behind her car (or in the car).
  • We know that if the novel shows character using her car key to open the car remotely, there will be a bomb in the car.
  • We know that if the character is shown squeezing toothpaste onto a toothbrush and cleaning her teeth, that there’s either something nasty in the tube of toothpaste, or someone has cleaned the toilet with the toothbrush.

There has to be a reason for any detail. If there is no reason to show the detail, that’s when you tell. We don’t want to disappoint our readers by leading them to believe something is important when it isn’t.

Next week I’m going to share three ways authors tell when they should be showing, and how to fix those “tells”.

What questions do you have about Show, Don’t Tell?