". . . But the past does not exist independently from the present. Indeed, the past is only past because there is a present, just as I can point to something over there only because I am here. But nothing is inherently over there or here. In that sense, the past has no content. The past -- or more accurately, pastness -- is a position. Thus, in no way can we identify the past as past." p. 15

". . . But we may want to keep in mind that deeds and words are not as distinguishable as often we presume. History does not belong only to its narrators, professional or amateur. While some of us debate what history is or was, others take it into their own hands." p. 153

Silencing the Past: Power and the Production of History (1995) by Michel-Rolph Trouillot

Tuesday, October 11, 2011

The Romantic Armchair Traveller

Mi amiga, who analyzes in depth new historical fiction, with an emphasis on romantic historical fiction though not always, on her blog, Romantic Armchair Traveller, last month posted a thoughtful entry titled, "On the Matter of Historical Accuracy in Fiction."

She makes a strong argument as to why twisting history, getting the culture as well as the historical facts wrong, matters.

No comments: