tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5502671101756463249.post3000764166898556057..comments2024-03-23T12:38:46.260+00:00Comments on The History Girls: 'To Thee or Not to Thee: Writing Historical Voices' by A L BerridgeMary Hoffmanhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06241989732624913706noreply@blogger.comBlogger21125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5502671101756463249.post-74695156720026695722012-08-24T23:12:07.283+01:002012-08-24T23:12:07.283+01:00The difference between Remarque and Leslie's c...The difference between Remarque and Leslie's critic is that Remarque had been on the Western front. For a complete guide to to just how sweary our immediate ancestors were in extremis (ie while being shot at) the unexpurgated version of Federick Manning's 'Her Privates We' can't be bettered. Very modern.<br />The use of 'sad' is interesting. Of course Jane Austen, Remarque and Manning are not historical novelists. We'd have to replace them with Edgeworth, Sebastian Faulks and ... oh you get the picture. It's like the difference between direct and indirect evidence. I find myself trawling through low culture and ephemera (Pierce Egan, for example) trying to pick up the voices. But sometimes of course even the naturalistic period stuff is too far and sounds false.<br /><br />By the way I can't believe I quoted 'her privates we' on a female sponsored blogsite. Soldiers' jokes, eh?Tom Bowlinghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13802615723487842195noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5502671101756463249.post-28742748245554647202012-08-23T12:10:05.461+01:002012-08-23T12:10:05.461+01:00'Verily, Mistress Sharon' might be OK in B...'Verily, Mistress Sharon' might be OK in Blackadder, though.. Great post, and of course an issue that we all have to deal with and struggle with. I do think Hilary M gets it right, though. When I was writing about young people in end of war Germany, I faced the issue of whether to make them speak like modern kids, or whether to try and replicate the speech patterns of the time, in dialogue which I often had to translate from German which I heard in my head. I went for the 'modern' option, but was criticised by a teenage pundit in the Independent for using 'scared shitless'. The German equivalent, which was certainly contemporaneous, was 'hat in die Hose gemacht,' ie, 'filled his pants.' I still feel that the modern equivalent gave the sense of the German. Mind, the young lad thought swearing took away from the sense of the desperate moments in which these things occurred. Had he read 'All Quiet on the Western Front' in the original, he might have changed his mind. People DID swear in the past, and they used contractions, too - they're in Jane Austen! Odd how people think language in the past was so formal. Mary Crawford scolds Fanny: 'Sad, sad girl!' Curiously, that slang has come back onto fashion, meaning more or less what Mary C meant.Leslie Wilsonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15105465949970430998noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5502671101756463249.post-41767209016088930152012-08-21T18:10:11.712+01:002012-08-21T18:10:11.712+01:00Thanks so much, Mark. 'Goddamns' - yes, ab...Thanks so much, Mark. 'Goddamns' - yes, absolutely. Religious cursing has been there forever, which is why I use 'bloody' so much - since 'by our lady' has been around so long it can hardly be anachronistic. What's a lot harder to work out is when sexual words began to be considered swearing, rather than 'ordinary' if 'vulgar' speech. I find court records really useful for this.<br /><br />Hi, Tom, and great to see you here. Yes, basically I agree - and your 'Antigallican' is a great example of how easy and natural the approach can sound.<br />Thanks so much for commenting - and do come back! We need to hear more from the History Boys here.alberridgehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15986443240923520466noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5502671101756463249.post-76270671047029643772012-08-21T16:05:34.073+01:002012-08-21T16:05:34.073+01:00What a great blog and a really interesting piece b...What a great blog and a really interesting piece by Louise fetched me to it. I think plain declarative English <br />with a few period hints is ample to get us into the period. Most of it happens in our heads. And period is so precise... there's nothing worse than watching one of those Jane Austen adaptations on tv and hearing the actresses speak with a voice which comes from 1970s Camden Girls' School. Novelists have to avoid the same error.<br />Tom Bowlinghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13802615723487842195noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5502671101756463249.post-74425478341488167392012-08-21T09:59:51.320+01:002012-08-21T09:59:51.320+01:00Lovely post, Louise. On swearing, I believe that t...Lovely post, Louise. On swearing, I believe that the English troops of the 1430s were called 'Goddams' by the French from their fondness for oaths.<br />And I thought your last comment very Blackadder!Mark Burgesshttp://www.markburgess.co.uknoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5502671101756463249.post-22416620021148034082012-08-21T00:25:19.642+01:002012-08-21T00:25:19.642+01:00Hi, SA, and thanks so much for dropping by. A conv...Hi, SA, and thanks so much for dropping by. A conversation between a 400 year-old and a 200 year-old?? Now THAT I would really love to read.<br /><br />Cathering, thanks so much for commenting. I suspect you're right to put the bar at 1600 rather than 1700, and I rather ducked that in my post. 1600-1700 British history is probably the very hardest to do linguistically without serious danger of all the prithees etc we most dread. I don't think I'll ever be up to tackling it myself!<br /><br />And thanks for the link to the book too - that looks fascinating.alberridgehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15986443240923520466noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5502671101756463249.post-60360204472944096432012-08-21T00:20:51.063+01:002012-08-21T00:20:51.063+01:00Hi, Beth, and thanks so much for commenting. That ...Hi, Beth, and thanks so much for commenting. That spotlight image is just beyond imagination awful. And thank you SO MUCH for 'gadzookery'. I've been trying to remember that word all day...<br /><br />And Juliette - yes, you nail it absolutely. Even if there are arguments for using a modern word, they should all go out of the window if it just feels or sounds wrong. 'Socks' on Romans conjures up a wonderfully ludicrous image!alberridgehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15986443240923520466noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5502671101756463249.post-5078218528939618962012-08-20T23:24:25.593+01:002012-08-20T23:24:25.593+01:00Excellent post, and I agree with pretty much all y...Excellent post, and I agree with pretty much all your observations! I think there's a point - somewhere round about 1600 - where the historical writer's problems change their nature. After that date it becomes possible to offer readers an approximation of authentic period speech. Go much earlier, and that would be incomprehensible - or at least too much effort - for the general reader, and some kind of substitute simply has to be developed. <br /><br />It's a fascinating issue, anyway. (We devoted a large chunk of a chapter to it in <a href="http://www.amazon.co.uk/Reading-History-Childrens-Catherine-Butler/dp/0230278086" rel="nofollow">this book</a>, by the way, if I can be forgiven a plug.)Catherine Butlerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17693526864905868829noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5502671101756463249.post-49241601994822388262012-08-20T23:08:21.693+01:002012-08-20T23:08:21.693+01:00I had the opposite problem with my vampires - put ...I had the opposite problem with my vampires - put a 400-year-old and a 200-year-old in a room and see how they speak differently. Totally agree, and you do a wonderful job with it, Louise.<br /><br />Stroppy Authorhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16560035800075465845noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5502671101756463249.post-32007024100598396642012-08-20T17:41:19.291+01:002012-08-20T17:41:19.291+01:00I totally agree that anything 18th century onwards...I totally agree that anything 18th century onwards should be in the 'correct' language - Jane Austen and Henry Fielding are both more readable than some modern authors!<br /><br />Great post on a tricky subject. I find I can be put off by the oddest things if they sounds false - over use of 'babe' instead of 'baby' is one that drives me mad, and anything that implies Romans wore 'socks' (regardless of what woollen coverings they may or may not have put on their feet!)Juliettehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00203399623895589924noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5502671101756463249.post-37050039101537915332012-08-20T16:57:42.462+01:002012-08-20T16:57:42.462+01:00Adele - yes, exactly. Hilary Mantel nails it exact...Adele - yes, exactly. Hilary Mantel nails it exactly, I feel. To be honest, I think most writers handle it well, but there are a small minority out there who can really set one's teeth on edge. They also seem to be the ones most vocal on online Hist Fic fora...<br /><br />Anne - I actually thought of your Quakers when I posted this, but failed completely to think of an alternative title. :(<br />But yes, in your case there'd be absolutely no choice about it - an example of when it's spot-on right.alberridgehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15986443240923520466noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5502671101756463249.post-86821187091307359392012-08-20T16:57:30.466+01:002012-08-20T16:57:30.466+01:00Great post. Anachronistic words along the 'gal...Great post. Anachronistic words along the 'galvanised' lines drive me mad - I was about ready to start gnawing the screen when I read a piece set in the Iron Age which described people being lit up as if under 'a spotlight'. But certainly there are some words and phrases that are so common and 'ordinary' nowadays we don't even question them. (Though spotlights evidently wouldn't be in that category for me.)<br /><br />The cant in 'Into the Valley of Death' really does bring some extra colour to the period that would have been lacking if everyone had spoken in the same way. I liked the way the characters had their own distinctive 'idiom' in more than just their dialogue, as well.<br /><br />'Tushery' - love it. Rosemary Sutcliff called it 'gadzookery', I believe, which I rather like too.Bethhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05976355211484202185noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5502671101756463249.post-75905335546387727402012-08-20T15:13:38.380+01:002012-08-20T15:13:38.380+01:00"To thee or not to thee"... That's w..."To thee or not to thee"... That's what I was faced with when planning No Shame, No Fear. I soon realised I had no choice. My Quaker characters would be obliged to "thee and thou" in order to differentiate them from everyone else. It's never easy finding the right compromise, as you make so clear, Louise. The important thing is to maintain the illusion of reality. <br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br />Ann Turnbullhttp://www.annturnbull.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5502671101756463249.post-58447328436305078012012-08-20T12:43:53.254+01:002012-08-20T12:43:53.254+01:00I completely agree! With Downton Abbey, it's M...I completely agree! With Downton Abbey, it's MAD to have anachronisms because they are unnecessary. We all understand Edwardian English perfectly well. "As if" made me cringe too. When something is really far back, ie classical Greece etc. I do have modern speech, but not obviously any refs to cars, machines, galvanizing etc. But teenage vandals have scrawled "Poseidon Rules" on the wall of a tavern. With Victorian etc I try to keep the language simple and yes, to differentiate between characters and make the characters individual. You can always tell when it's done badly but most historical novelists I've read seem to strike a good balance. Hilary Mantel is exemplary in this regard as in many others.adelehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15826710558292792068noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5502671101756463249.post-64526953377860117302012-08-20T10:23:41.906+01:002012-08-20T10:23:41.906+01:00Thanks, Kath - and ooh, I'd forgotten 'tus...Thanks, Kath - and ooh, I'd forgotten 'tushery'! A brilliant word for an ugly thing.<br /><br />And 'galvanised' et al. An even worse horror of that kind is inappropriate imagery. I once had a copy editor suggest that my 17th century simile about a cog-wheel dropping into place might be more simply expressed by a comparison to 'clicking a switch'....alberridgehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15986443240923520466noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5502671101756463249.post-63362465081258151772012-08-20T10:15:53.816+01:002012-08-20T10:15:53.816+01:00Sue - thank you so much. You'll notice, howeve...Sue - thank you so much. You'll notice, however, that I've been really cowardly and ducked the most difficult periods of 15th-17th century English history altogether...<br /><br />And thank you, Mary. That's a really good point about the spoof element too, which I can remember way back from Monty Python and even the 'Carry-On' films. The very fact that it's funny ought to be enough to keep it out of serious fiction, but alas...alberridgehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15986443240923520466noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5502671101756463249.post-5395125064353546772012-08-20T10:03:41.677+01:002012-08-20T10:03:41.677+01:00Excellent post! I've always liked RLS's t...Excellent post! I've always liked RLS's term for faux-historical speech: 'tushery'. As in 'Tush, tush, false knave!' He used it himself in 'The Black Arrow', but nowhere else. <br /><br />And I totally agree about employing words like 'galvanised' out of their period.Katherine Langrishhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12529700103932422873noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5502671101756463249.post-39104109700685549982012-08-20T09:36:56.311+01:002012-08-20T09:36:56.311+01:00Fascinating, Louise! You could have that sentence ...Fascinating, Louise! You could have that sentence in the Radio 4 medieval spoof series, The Castle, which plays with these ideas, sometimes very amusingly. <br /><br />(I winced at "As if!" in Downton too!)Mary Hoffmanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06241989732624913706noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5502671101756463249.post-22960028836138970752012-08-20T07:57:03.330+01:002012-08-20T07:57:03.330+01:00This must be the definitive post on language in hi...This must be the definitive post on language in historical fiction - great stuff, by my troth!Sue Purkisshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09084528571944803477noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5502671101756463249.post-53496490427978977472012-08-20T03:35:51.984+01:002012-08-20T03:35:51.984+01:00Thanks, Jessica - I totally agree. There are also ...Thanks, Jessica - I totally agree. There are also so many more factors there wasn't space to include here (eg the fact that contractions don't stay the same in every period) that it really can be a nightmare choosing which way to go for a particular book.alberridgehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15986443240923520466noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5502671101756463249.post-17648674443821828502012-08-20T03:05:47.085+01:002012-08-20T03:05:47.085+01:00Thanks for these thoughts. It's not easy to de...Thanks for these thoughts. It's not easy to decide how to approach this, but consistency is key.Jessica Knausshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07049731983377756203noreply@blogger.com