Often when I read - or watch TV/movies - I think about how I would act if I were in a similar situation. Or I make opinions about how a character acts/thinks. But I realize that I’m so locked into my personal headspace as a 20th-century American middle class white guy, that it really impairs my ability to do so.
Right now I’m reading a book written and set in England in the mid 1800s. And I’m making my usual opinions about which characters I like and which I don’t, and which choices I respect or don’t. But unless I was born into a society with such rigid concepts of class, primogeniture, and women excluded from so many endeavors, it is hard to judge why a character thinks or acts as they do?
Does this make any sense? It is one reason I prefer (generally) reading books written at the time they portray than modern “historical” fiction, because I feel at least that removes one possible layer of “interpretation.”
I imagine the same issues if I read something set in a culture different than mine. And, if written by a non-English writer, there is the issue of translation.
Tho I’ve spoken of fiction, I often wonder the same about nonfiction. How able am I to really understand what motivated people whose society was so different than mine.
I guess I’m blathering with no real point. Any of you have thoughts at all similar?
With fiction, and to a certain extent, things that try to be non-fiction, you are seeing the world through the lens of the writer. Even with the best factual writings.
Their own personal prejudices and modern views become an influence. They are influenced by the things they too have read that they think are true and probably wrong, written by people in the past who don’t know what they are talking about.
Digging down to find real factual history is almost impossible. Just like trying to imagine what the lives of the fictional characters were like.
It took me a while reading 19th century literature, but eventually I felt like I “got it” in terms of culture and what sorts of concerns different characters would have.
Writers of narratives set in other times (and/or places) don’t always do a good job of portraying how the people who lived in those times and places actually thought.
So the opposite is a bug bear of mine. When you have a modern piece of fiction, set in some distant era. And it’s well researched and period accurate except the characters behave exactly like 21st century people. The way they behave towards each other, the way they speak (not their accent or language, which will inevitably be British English ), their general attitude to life and society, is solidly what you would expect from a person born and brought up in a 21st century liberal democracy not a medieval monarchy or ancient imperium.
The HBO show Rome was a good example of this, really well researched, period accurate. But the main characters are written like they are an Hollywood “buddy” cop movie.
I really liked Game of Thrones because (in the first few seasons at least) it didn’t do that. Despite having dragons, zombies and magic, the way the characters act and speak really has the feel of how actual medieval people acted and speak (as far as a I, a non historian without access to a time machine can tell at least )
It’s even worse when you read some of the classic Science Fiction from the 40s and 50s set in the future. When I read that stuff now, the characters I picture in my head look, sound, and act like the cast of The Sands of Iwo Jima.
I’m certainly not an expert on Japanese cinema or history, but I’ve found it pretty easy to enjoy a lot of samurai movies even if I don’t always understand the significance of a particular scene. Usually I don’t have any problems figuring out what motivates one particular character or another, but sometimes I don’t fully understand the significance of some dialogue or actions and have to figure it out. I find that kind of fun actually.
There’s a scene in Seven Samurai where one of the samurai shaves his head so he can disguise himself as a monk to rescue a hostage. As he’s shaving his head, a nearby peasant stares at him in disbelief because he’s shocked to see a samurai removing a clear indication of his status. i.e. He’s debasing himself. And this serves to establish the character is more interested in saving the life of a baby than he is in protecting his own pride. From our point of view this is a bit weird. Obviously you’d shave your head if it would lead to saving the life of a child. Even if you didn’t understand the significance of shaving his head, you’d still understand the samurai was concerned enough about saving the life of a peasant child he was willing to risk his life to do so.
Pretty sure those were written in the mid 1900s, describing a period 2 centuries earlier. I’m dubious as to how well a 1950 writer can understand and represent the inner thoughts of someone living 2 centuries earlier. I just suspect the times in which one is raised strongly influences one’s mindset and perceptions.
The book I’m reading goes on at great length about the characters’ inner thoughts. And I may read what one is thinking and think myself, “That is stupid/unreasonable…” But what might seem unreasonable for me - a man born in 1960, might be entirely reasonable for someone born in 1800.
So, what you are saying is that without being familiar with the context you find it hard to judge whether a historical fiction is well-written or has, e.g., 1960s characters in a fake historical setting?
What is the answer, though? I suppose I could try to read as much (non-fiction) about late-18th-century Cornwall as I can. But, for example, one of the characters thinks to herself, apologies if I am recalling this incorrectly, that it is OK if a man beats a woman as long as he loves her, love is the most important thing and conquers all. Maybe it is just she thinking things like that, but, in that case, how would you go about finding out whether this was a common attitude in that time and place and social class? Sounds like a bit of a research project.
Sorry I’m so unclear. And I’m not sure I’m making any really momentous point.
When I read a book written 100-200 yrs ago in a country other than mine, I often think, “How would I act if I were in that situation?” But I’m really not able to tell how I would act, because to be in that situation, I would be a completely different person, with different experiences and values. As a 20th-21st century man, I’m constrained to think as a 20th-21st century American man would think. I don’t know that I CAN think - or judge - how an 18th-19th century English man would think or act.
But yeah, there is the issue you raise. Which is why I said I prefer books written in the past, than modern books written ABOUT the past. And as griffin observed, it is often jarring when I see films of - say - Austen novels, and actors - say Kiera Knightly - are speaking and bahaving in manners I believe would be extremely inappropriate for 19th century persons in their social position.
Related: Modern idioms. One of the streaming series taking place in the 1800s–possibly Bridgerton–had someone saying “Can you give us the room”. Google Ngram shows this is very recent. Took me right out of the show.
It could happen. Willing suspension of disbelief can be fragile, and I imagine some people are more aware of and sensitive to anachronism than others.
BTW, this is an indirect example of what the OP is about: your response tells me you think that @phs3’s thoughts aren’t credible because they are different from yours. And that’s not even across the gulf of time.
Yeah, there are a bunch of movies and shows set in the Middle Ages where the hero is very concerned with individual freedom and rights and all that - concepts that would have been pretty alien to people at the time who wouldn’t be familiar with the same French philosophers we know today.
Of course, I’m not sure how interested we would be in more realistic historical fiction, where everyone is absolutely OBSESSED with God and religion, bringing Jesus up every other sentence. Kingdom Come: Deliverance is an RPG video game that did some of that, which led to memes focused around the phrase ‘Jesus Christ be praised, Henry’s come to see us!’
Perhaps you’re referring to the fact that the whole Bridgerton series is a bit bizarre in the way race is ignored. That admittedly took me a while, but it’s kind of like watching science fiction: after a few minutes you just take the strange thing as axiomatic. The rest of the language, manners, etc. are [some form of] archaic, so yes, that line made me go “Whoa”.
Why? “Give us this place” is idiomatic English at least as far back as Shakespeare, so “give us the room” seems like a logical extrapolation that would have been intelligible in almost any era.
Personally, I think it often makes sense to use modern slang and colloquialisms in historical fiction, assuming the characters are in a situation where they would be using their version of colloquial speech. To me, “translating” these things into modern English is no different than having a movie set in France where the actors are speaking English. I find it a lot more disruptive when the screenwriters attempt period English but clearly have no idea what they’re doing.(I gave up on Green Knight after about fifteen minutes for this reason. It’s one thing not to know the social nuances inherent in the choice of “you” vs. “thou,” but if you don’t know the grammatical difference between “thou” and “thy,” or that “queefed” doesn’t mean “gave birth to” in any era, you don’t have any business using any of those words in a script!)
I mean it’s pretty unapologetically a modern romance show set in the 18th century (from the little I’ve seen of it.) I am about as upset as it not portraying 18th society accurately as I am at General Hospital not portraying modern medical practice.
I think that’s a tad harsh, but think what you wish.
I kinda enjoyed the first season. My wife watched the next couple. I was merely commenting that there was so much that was anachronistic, that I was surprised one turn of phrase would do it for anyone. Once you get past the multiracial cast, dancing to 21st century music, behaving in manners NO ONE would/did in 19th century England, I’m not sure how much I even noticed a particular turn of phrase.
But I. guess I’ve been there. Like when we’ve watched Star Trek, and I’ll say, “I don’t buy THAT!” My wife will say, “Oh you accept all the OTHER completely made up stuff, but that one thing…”
), their general attitude to life and society, is solidly what you would expect from a person born and brought up in a 21st century liberal democracy not a medieval monarchy or ancient imperium.
)