What's wrong with historical fiction? (Circe people)

[SwallowTail]

:iagree:    That whole list was of literary classics, not what we're talking about at all. 

 

Right, which is why I (and another poster as well, I think) are very confused by the entire discussion.

 

This speech captures the idea that the definition ofhistorical fiction is confusing, and perhaps that is the nature of the confusion in this discussion, because the list of books I put down are classics certainly, but are also historical fiction, at least the way I was taught it to be in my education.

 

http://historicalnovelsociety.org/guides/defining-the-genre/defining-the-genre-what-are-the-rules-for-historical-fiction/

 

This discussion touches on the topic as well.

http://www.goodreads.com/topic/show/1180460-classic-literature-as-historical-fiction

 

The distinctions offered in some of those discussions that historical fiction is only that if it is written by someone who did not experience the time period personally is a point of view I had not ever contemplated.  That would certainly change my list and might limit what "historical fiction" we covered under that strict definition.

 

I think now that we have that clarified (or at least we have revealed the muddy waters for what they are), I can agree that choosing specific and possibly poorly written texts, simply to correlate with historical studies for a particular curriculum, is not a choice my family would make.  Even those classics I mentioned do not comprise the entirety of our literary diet.

[Meriwether]

I didn't understand this the first time around, and I guess I don't understand why it is still such a big deal this time around. To me it is like announcing, "I have decided to focus more on my family instead of spending time with my friends." It is setting up a value statement. I imagine very few people would say it is better to spend time with friends than family. But friends are good, too. I don't care if people say that they are ditching historical fiction for good literature. I mean, I don't care if they do it and I don't care if they announce it. Statements like that may have the positive effect of making people think about their choices more deeply. Unfortunately, those kinds of statements also make people defensive or make them doubt themselves, usually without good reason. How much time with family is enough? How much time with friends is too much? How much good literature is enough? How much historical fiction is too much? It is so subjective, especially when each person's starting point is different. I don't understand why people are surprised when people react to statements like that.

We have our literature hour every day. Those books are chosen based on their literary value. Read alouds may or may not match the history time period we are studying, but they are chosen because they are enjoyable. The kids have science and history reading each week. Those books are chosen for content and may be historical fiction, biographies, or other nonfiction. The kids read at bedtime. Dd10 easily reads 300+ books/year. This year she will read over 400. Ds9 is not a great reader. He will probably read more than 50 books this year but not 50 books I would count for school. Most of those are literature or free reading. He reads what history and science books he can fit in, but it isn't much. Ds7 is coming along. He will read about 10 literature books for me this year. His history reading usually consists of 50-100 page books or picture books. His free reading is usually high-quality picture books, Magic Tree House types, or comic books like Calvin and Hobbes.

My kids have read many children's classics. When I say we love and read historical fiction, I mean exactly that. It doesn't mean they don't read anything else. Last week at bedtime, Ds9 said, "Mom, do you have anything else about the Greek gods?" He was thrilled to be handed Black Ships before Troy. Of course, five minutes later, Ds7 was downstairs asking if there was anything interesting for him to read. He happily marched off with some picture books about Gilgamesh. The next night, Dd10 was asking if I had anything else about Shakespeare.

Why type that out? I don't put my homeschool up on a pedestal, but it is one example of a homeschool that uses historical fiction unapologetically.

[momma2three]

Again, I think that you're misreading and overanalyzing what people are actually talking about.

[Erin]

No, I'm not confusing Henty with a genre.   I was simply using him as an example.   And Sonlight is historical fiction heavy.    If you like Sonlight, love it.   I have decided that I don't want to implement so much historical fiction and have decided to be far more discerning in what we spend our time reading.   Why does that bother you?

 

It doesn't bother me in the slightest. 

What bothers me is the snarky comments we tend to see in this type of thread.  

 

Why was Sonlight even mentioned???  It sure wasn't to be positive...  It was brought up as an example of teaching historical fiction as history.  And because I LIKE historical fiction, we use Sonlight because their Lit. component dovetails nicely into history and happens to have a lot of good historical fiction, many of which are classics and/or Newberrys

(Caddie Woodlawn, btw, is a Newberry winner from 1936)

 

And the great irony?  Alte Vista just mentioned 5 "good books" that are all included in Sonlight.  In fact, as an example, of the 23 books used in Core 100's Literature component, 15 are either "classics" or Newberry winners.

 

 

 

I just get really annoyed with the whole snobbish attitude that tends to rear up in this kind of conversation.   Stating what one does for their family, and even the "why", is one thing, but knocking options that others have chosen isn't.

 

...As well as the issue that there are a great many posters making the sweeping statement "historical fiction" and throwing out a whole SLEW of Newberry quality books!  Again I ask-- if the Newberry isn't a mark of a good kid's book, what IS??

[Alte Veste Academy]

It doesn't bother me in the slightest.
What bothers me is the snarky comments we tend to see in this type of thread.

Why was Sonlight even mentioned??? It sure wasn't to be positive... It was brought up as an example of teaching historical fiction as history. And because I LIKE historical fiction, we use Sonlight because their Lit. component happens to have a lot of good historical fiction, many of which are classics and/or Newberrys
(Caddie Woodlawn, btw, is a Newberry winner from 1936)

And the great irony? Alte Vista just mentioned 5 "good books" that are all included in Sonlight!

I just get really annoyed with the whole snobbish attitude that tends to rear up in this kind of conversation. Stating what one does for their family, and even the "why", is one thing, but knocking options that others have chosen isn't.

As well as the issue that there are a great many posters making the sweeping statement "historical fiction" and throwing out a whole SLEW of Newberry quality books! Again I ask-- if the Newberry isn't a mark of a good kid's book, what IS??

That wasn't irony. :lol: I linked the "literature" list from SL Core 100 and said I would personally only consider 5 of the 26 worthy of reading on their own merits separate from history. When asked what those 5 were, I named them. So, yeah, of course they came from Sonlight! :lol:

Whatever you may believe, I didn't mention SL to be negative. I don't think you understand where I'm coming from at all. I am allowed to think that not all Newbery books are of high literary quality. It's OK if you disagree. I don't think it's worth getting angry over, but apparently you feel very strongly about that award. It doesn't bother me that you feel that way. I am not offended by your personal opinion. I didn't say (because I don't believe!) that all Newbery books are trash. We have read lots of them here. And I am well aware that Caddie Woodlawn was a Newbery winner. You're not pointing out anything ironic here. All this righteous indignation is misplaced. And, for the very last time, I LIKE historical fiction too. Seriously, are you reading what I'm writing?

[Erin]

I just get really annoyed with the whole snobbish attitude that tends to rear up in this kind of conversation.   Stating what one does for their family, and even the "why", is one thing, but knocking options that others have chosen isn't.

[8filltheheart]

It doesn't bother me in the slightest.
What bothers me is the snarky comments we tend to see in this type of thread.

Why was Sonlight even mentioned??? It sure wasn't to be positive... It was brought up as an example of teaching historical fiction as history. And because I LIKE historical fiction, we use Sonlight because their Lit. component happens to have a lot of good historical fiction, many of which are classics and/or Newberrys
(Caddie Woodlawn, btw, is a Newberry winner from 1936)

And the great irony? Alte Vista just mentioned 5 "good books" that are all included in Sonlight!



I just get really annoyed with the whole snobbish attitude that tends to rear up in this kind of conversation. Stating what one does for their family, and even the "why", is one thing, but knocking options that others have chosen isn't.

...As well as the issue that there are a great many posters making the sweeping statement "historical fiction" and throwing out a whole SLEW of Newberry quality books! Again I ask-- if the Newberry isn't a mark of a good kid's book, what IS??

You are taking this way too personally. Seriously.

Sonlight is built around historical fiction. Some of it is great. Some of it isn't. Cat of Bubastes which apparently you have never heard of is by Henty and is one of their selections (or at least is in the ed I own). Either way, the approach is built around history. I guess for me, it isn't even just the historical fiction. It is that great literature isn't relished as just great literature w/o the subordination to history.

[Erin]

It is that great literature isn't relished as just great literature w/o the subordination to history.

Excellent example.  

You have no idea what other families are or aren't "relishing," based on nothing more than a sequence chart.  Consequently, that is a judgement statement about others, rather than a statement about personal choices. 

OTOH, if you'd said something like "I don't think I'd be able to relish our literature when it dovetails into history like that", that is a personal choice.  

 

 

Do you see my point?

[8filltheheart]

It is that great literature isn't relished as just great literature w/o the subordination to history.
Excellent example.
You have no idea what other people are or aren't "relishing" based on nothing more than a sequence chart. Consequently, that is a judgement statement about others, rather than a statement about personal choices.

No, it isn't. It is a description of Sonlight methodology. The courses are literally constructed around historical time periods. When I say relished just as literature, it isn't a personal relishing. It is the development of a literature course simply around literature.

Jeepers. I will never send my kids to ps either.

[lorisuewho]

Excellent example.  
You have no idea what other people are or aren't "relishing" based on nothing more than a sequence chart.  Consequently, that is a judgement statement about others, rather than a statement about personal choices. 
OTOH, if you'd said something like "I don't think I'd be able to relish our literature when it dovetails into history like that", that is a personal choice.  
 
 
Do you see my point?

I hope I never reach a point in my life where I have to walk on eggshells in my wording of every statement. This thread IS about giving opinions about historical fiction. If you don't like the idea of opinions, I wouldn't open opinion threads.

Furthermore, I think even Sonlight themselves would say they are history focused in their literature selections.

[8filltheheart]

Excellent example.
You have no idea what other families are or aren't "relishing," based on nothing more than a sequence chart. Consequently, that is a judgement statement about others, rather than a statement about personal choices.
OTOH, if you'd said something like "I don't think I'd be able to relish our literature when it dovetails into history like that", that is a personal choice.


Do you see my point?

You know, I try to be very diplomatic when I post, but this is absurd. Don't read the thread if it is upsetting to you. I've got a life. I type while I am waiting to answer a question or am waiting for someone to finish working a problem. I don't type trying to be hurtful.

I think Sonlight is an approach I do not want to use or replicate. Period. Does it really matter? I won't ever use TT. I think MUS is subpar. What difference does it make?

[Alte Veste Academy]

I hope I never reach a point in my life where I have to walk on eggshells in my wording of every statement. This thread IS about giving opinions about historical fiction. If you don't like the idea of opinions, I wouldn't open opinion threads.

Furthermore, I think even Sonlight themselves would say they are history focused in their literature selections.

:iagree:

I have started and deleted 5 more responses to Erin. I give up because I am just going to dig myself in a deeper metaphorical hole with her.

I bought Core 100. I was attracted to it. I like virtually all of the books, even while feeling that they have varying degrees of literary merit. I am not "knocking options that others have chosen" in this thread so much as weighing my own, out loud.

[Alte Veste Academy]

I would love to read a discussion about this!

Me too! Unfortunately, I am not qualified to lead one. :lol:

I know there is a thread somewhere around here about the best books to prepare kids for reading the Great Books.

[Alte Veste Academy]

I have not taken a good look at these, but a few came up through a Google advanced search.

http://forums.welltrainedmind.com/topic/89373-preparing-our-dc-to-read-the-great-books/

http://forums.welltrainedmind.com/topic/506623-will-wtm-recs-really-prepare-my-kids-for-high-school-lit/

http://forums.welltrainedmind.com/topic/268446-what-authors-stretch-children-to-prepare-for-future-great-books-study/

http://forums.welltrainedmind.com/topic/93913-which-20-books-help-prepare-for-reading-the-great-books/

I think there is more to it than just books though. :D I need to poke around the high school board more.

[justamouse]

Here's the direct link to Lori D's post 

Smith of Wooten Major and Farmer Giles of Ham, LOVE THEM. Just had to say that. 

[thescrappyhomeschooler]

When the Circe thread was was going on, I remember being confused about why it was such a revelation. It took a spin-off thread for me to understand that many people felt enlightened to the fact that they were leaning too far away from great literature—books worth reading in their own right, not merely books which happened to coincide with the historic era being studied. I got the impression that some people had abandoned literature altogether. Thankfully, I had never fallen into that trap myself.

Honestly, IMO, I feel like some people were probably influenced to go too far in the opposite direction and throw the baby out with the bathwater. Historical fiction and narrative nonfiction help bring history alive here. I agree with a PP that there is a great deal of twaddly historical fiction, but there is also lots of good stuff, and I feel no shame in having my kids reading it. When it happens to work out, I read-aloud or assign great literature that coincides with the era. But  apparently some people were skipping some books altogether, missing the "sweet spot" of the right age for reading a particular classic because it wasn't what they were studying in history. If my kids are at the perfect age for a book, it gets read or assigned regardless of where we are in history.

Anyway, for me it is about balance. I personally would not be happy eliminating all historic fiction here, and neither would my kids. Now, if I had to choose one, I would choose classic literature for sure. But thankfully, I do not have to choose.

 

I feel this way, too.  I love historical fiction, and have read some very good examples of it.  I think classic literature is great, and I've read quite a bit of it with my kids, in addition to historical fiction.  I have a problem when people hold classic literature in reverence over contemporary lit.  As I've said before, all classic lit was contemporary lit when it was written.  It became classic by having an enduring message and good writing.  I think there are many modern day books that fit this bill as well.

[thescrappyhomeschooler]

We should each study literature and determine how to measure the worth of books that we introduce to our children. We should formulate our philosophies regarding lit analysis, vocabulary study, writing in response to reading, ALL of that...it takes time, but our children's education is worth our study time. But in the meantime -- just keep reading! Don't be paralyzed by others' values in this area. Develop your own beliefs, and then diligently live by those, for your own family.

Edited to add: I don't say any of this to majorly disagree with the Circe thread people. Not in the slightest. I know from close friends that the decision to jettison historical fiction, in particular, has been a very positive game-changer in their homeschools and families. And why shouldn't it be, when what they are talking about is (IMO) less about cutting out historical fiction and more about pursuing the best children's literature they can find for their dc? Why wouldn't that be positive? So I'm not saying I disagree...But what those home educators did in that instance is what I'm recommending for newer homeschoolers -- they studied, read, pondered, decided, made changes, evaluated the fruit, solidified their philosophy. And the fruit has been good. But nobody can do that for anybody else. We all have to come to those conclusions for ourselves.

 

 

I love you, Tibbie.

[Alte Veste Academy]

Ah core 100.  Thanks Amy.  

 

As always, the hive is overzealous.  Who needs a list? Get some books and see if you like them.  If you like them, read them.  Whatever genre they are in.

 

Arguing over well beloved books with fellow homeschoolers bc you think you have better taste than they do is just in poor taste. ;)

 

Who is Amy? 

 

Sure, but discussing beloved books with fellow homeschoolers—recognizing and accepting that different people will naturally have different taste—is in fine taste. But I guess anyone wanting to enter that conversation should have thick skin, a strong backbone, and a hefty dose of self-confidence. 

[WishboneDawn]

That depends on age, really.
Younger students still have ReadAlouds, which tend to be fiction. So Lit is usually fiction, (as well as the ReadAloud for those ages).
History/geography/biography, OTOH, are almost always non-fiction, particularly the older the student gets.
Again, maybe I just assume too much of people, but I just have this idea most people can tell the difference between fiction and non...

 

I don't think confusing factual events with fictional ones is the big issue.

 

I don't think quality of writing is the big issue.

 

I think the big issue is that many parents and schools) use historical fiction to introduce a time period to a child, give them a sense of what that period was like, what it felt like to live there and most historical fiction does nothing of the sort. Even the very best of it (as the articles Kathryn posted early on in the thread and everyone should have read stated) can make the very big mistake of populating a period with modern thinkers.

 

So how does a child get any sense of the the powerlessness of a children in certain times if the heroine/hero in a novel of great literary quality can display some pluckiness and overcome those restrictions? How are the accomplishments of women like Hildegard of Bingham, Artemisia Gentileschi or Hapshepsut understood and really appreciated if a child's reading fiction, with the expectation that it gives some insight into what living in a particular time was like, where heroines routinely rout social convention? And if one runs up against (to use an example from one of Kathryn's links) a character like Marmee in Little Women, how does someone appreciate the strength and power she had within her context if she's measured against a piece of historical fiction like where a female character seizes full control of her destiny and prevails without social consequences?

 

How do you wrestle the letters of Paul if you don't understand the thinking of the time? How do you understand why the Egyptian empire never grew like the Roman one if you think they were all essentially like us but just clothed differently? Why the Romans had steam power but never used it to any great effect? The different implications of God telling Abraham not to sacrifice Isaac at the end or why the Greeks loathed Ares but the Romans loved Mars?

 

How do you respect the people of the past if you have an idea that they all thought like us but just weren't quite as bright or kind or civilized or not quite, "there" yet?

 

THAT'S the biggest issue with historical fiction. And the biggest issue with using it is that so many of us aren't even aware that's a consideration so we give the books to children with the idea that they'll illuminate something about history without being aware of the ways it could actually cloud a real understanding of history.

[lewelma]

This is an issue that begs the much larger discussion of how to work through progressively more challenging works through the years in order to successfully reach your (own personal) goals as a student/educator combo.

I would love to read a discussion about this!

AVA and Jaderbee, I have started a thread to discuss this. http://forums.welltrainedmind.com/topic/509936-so-how-to-work-through-progressively-more-challenging-works/

Ruth in NZ

[8filltheheart]

I don't think confusing factual events with fictional ones is the big issue.

I don't think quality of writing is the big issue.

I think the big issue is that many parents and schools) use historical fiction to introduce a time period to a child, give them a sense of what that period was like, what it felt like to live there and most historical fiction does nothing of the sort. Even the very best of it (as the articles Kathryn posted early on in the thread and everyone should have read stated) can make the very big mistake of populating a period with modern thinkers.

So how does a child get any sense of the the powerlessness of a children in certain times if the heroine/hero in a novel of great literary quality can display some pluckiness and overcome those restrictions? How are the accomplishments of women like Hildegard of Bingham, Artemisia Gentileschi or Hapshepsut understood and really appreciated if a child's reading fiction, with the expectation that it gives some insight into what living in a particular time was like, where heroines routinely rout social convention? And if one runs up against (to use an example from one of Kathryn's links) a character like Marmee in Little Women, how does someone appreciate the strength and power she had within her context if she's measured against a piece of historical fiction like where a female character seizes full control of her destiny and prevails without social consequences?

How do you wrestle the letters of Paul if you don't understand the thinking of the time? How do you understand why the Egyptian empire never grew like the Roman one if you think they were all essentially like us but just clothed differently? Why the Romans had steam power but never used it to any great effect? The different implications of God telling Abraham not to sacrifice Isaac at the end or why the Greeks loathed Ares but the Romans loved Mars?

How do you respect the people of the past if you have an idea that they all thought like us but just weren't quite as bright or kind or civilized or not quite, "there" yet?

THAT'S the biggest issue with historical fiction. And the biggest issue with using it is that so many of us aren't even aware that's a consideration so we give the books to children with the idea that they'll illuminate something about history without being aware of the ways it could actually cloud a real understanding of history.

Liking this was not enough. You articulated so well many of the thoughts I failed to convey in Dialectica's recent thread about how do you define classical education. http://forums.welltrainedmind.com/topic/508455-define-classical-education/
It is the philosophy that the times are immersed in that permeates how they thought. We can't look back and and understand if all we know is our own times' philosophy. Lewis had his own description for his thoughts "chronological snobbery."

Barfield never made me an Anthroposophist, but his counterattacks destroyed forever two elements in my own thought. In the first place he made short work of what I have called my "chronological snobbery," the uncritical acceptance of the intellectual climate common to our own age and the assumption that whatever has gone out of date is on that account discredited. You must find why it went out of date. Was it ever refuted (and if so by whom, where, and how conclusively) or did it merely die away as fashions do? If the latter, this tells us nothing about its truth or falsehood. From seeing this, one passes to the realization that our own age is also "a period," and certainly has, like all periods, its own characteristic illusions. They are likeliest to lurk in those widespread assumptions which are so ingrained in the age that no one dares to attack or feels it necessary to defend them.
.

The entire conversation is so much more than a simple summation and incredibly hard convey in text posts. But the sum works together to untangle many of my confused thoughts. It was why the Circe thread making me really evaluate what we were doing and why was so beneficial to me personally.

[8filltheheart]

I think it matters very much.  

 

Especially for those who are constantly self flagellating and who hang on your every post.

 

Luckily I am neither type and I loved our SL years, used TT and continue to enjoy the fruits of those labors.

 

I couldn't decide if I should respond to this or not.   Sharing an opinion about a product that you don't like and why you do not like it is what it is--an opinion.   I used Sonlight for 5 yrs, exclusively for 3.   I obviously really liked it at one pt in time.   I now have regrets bc  looking back I recognize the deficits in the curriculum.   If it offends people that I see deficits in the program, the issue with the person offended if they can't understand that people can have different perspectives and POV on any particular program.   I honestly believe my older kids' education lacked a lot compared to what my younger kids are receiving b/c of Sonlight's focus.   It is that simple.

 

And, yes, I will continue to share my experiences, the good and the bad, with various curricula just like the vast majority of the posters on this forum do. 

[8filltheheart]

Hmm, I think that background matters. The context matters. But you left it out before.

Regrets are not productive.

People, including kids, are way too individual to make any sort of rules about genres of literature or modes of education.

No, I didn't. I mention it in posts 77 and 95 in this thread. And I don't know how you make changes about things in your life, but if I regret something, I try not to replicate the very thing I regret. Considering I still have 2 younger kids, one a fairly recently turned 4 yr old, yeah, regrets mean making changes to rectify the very issues I regret.

[ElizabethB]

On the other thread, some people were sharing things that had made THEIR homeschool better. One that many people had in common was using less historical fiction. Other people had a genuine question about why. People that made that change are not trying to be snobby or snooty about their choices, the are trying to explain why and how they have used less historical fiction and more literature.

I am not judging anyone for their choices, although I will state my objections if anyone says that they are using poorly written leveled readers with horrible simple sentences and a bunch of sight words you taught as wholes!!

I have used poorly written books in the past when it was an area of interest. When we had an older cousin working as a medical missionary in Africa for 6 months, I read several missionary books by the Benges aloud. Every other sentence made me cringe, but the children enjoyed the stories, and they were much younger, so well written missionary stories would not have been a good read aloud choice, it would have been too difficult for them to understand.

Everyone is free to read what they like without guilt, people were just trying to share the fruits of good literature in their homeschool.

[texasmama]

I appreciate the collective wisdom and experiences shared. It keeps me from reinventing the wheel, even if my "wheel" looks different from someone else's "wheel".

[ElizabethB]

I appreciate the collective wisdom and experiences shared. It keeps me from reinventing the wheel, even if my "wheel" looks different from someone else's "wheel".

But is it round?? :)

[8filltheheart]

8, my fingers are itching but I should probably not give in :D . Among other things, because this thread has fairly little to do with that thread.

. On the surface, yes. But not for me philosophically. It is all part of the same conversation that runs through my mind as I debate various methodologies and philosophies in my mind.

It is definitely beyond forum discussion, though. It is more like "book length" connections and long days of direct conversation. :)

[texasmama]

But is it round?? :)

Yes - unless you catch me on a day when it has come completely off.  ;)

 

This forum humbles and inspires me.  It is like the Jack Nicholson character in "As Good as It Gets".  It makes me want to be a better (wo)man.  (i.e. homeschooling mom woman)  :)