About This Hysterical Accuracy
January 5, 2008
What’s all this fuss I keep hearing about hysterical accuracy? Now why do readers want this hysterical accuracy in their romance novels? Why, I thought the wailing maidens were just so tiresome. Now, if they use hysterical accuracy in these novels I will never be able to read another one. Who are these hysterical experts anyway and why are there so many on the Internets? Do you actually go to school for hysteria? Obviously being a hysterical expert does not include holding down a day job or they would not be posting all this crap about hysterical accuracy in romance. Can you imagine some character going around weeping because he has an emotional boo boo? Why, they’ll end up wanting to kill themselves from all the angst. And go to France and join these Emo rock outfits. And they wont drink milk! (Slams fist on desk.) I say there should be less hysterical accuracy! I say no more weepy wussy characters of either sex! Its terrible! The way they…what, what, what do you want?!
…Never mind
PS… You will always be missed Emily Litella.
Ah…the good ole days of SNL.
But seriously…did you see the comment by Laura Vivanco:
“What I find most interesting about those comments is the assumptions they make about historical accuracy:”
and this…
“I can’t help but conclude that some people’s view of historical accuracy is just a little bit skewed in favour of their favourite fantasies.”
Iz she sayin’ we bes a bunch of idiots?
Nah, honestly I never put myself into the position of arguing over historical accuracy.
I could have gone off on the movie 300 for it’s total lack of representing the overwhelming homosexuality of that culture. Then I stopped and realized the fucking movie had CGI monsters in it. What the hell was I thinking?
My rule of thumb is… If it does not work in the story, then it does not work, no matter how accurate it is.
Period, end of Teddypig statement.
For example if you use the term “truck farm” in a pioneer age romance.
Even if the term “might” have been used or “loosely” accurate for it’s day…
Does using the term or situation in your story mess the reader up?
It is all about perceptions when reading, even if the perception of the reader is invalid, even if you are a historical guru of that particular era, the fact you kicked their suspension of disbelief to the curb by writing that way will not impress me. It is unfair but in the end it really is all about the story and how you tell it.
Iz she sayin’ we bes a bunch of idiots?
No, I’m saying it’s fine for people to want to read about particular scenarios in their historical romances, but it doesn’t seem very logical for them to defend those choices on the grounds of “historical accuracy” unless they (a) know a lot about the history and what they’re asking for really is historically accurate and (b) they want historical accuracy in all parts of the book.
Which I think is the point Teddy’s making. Except that he’s being funnier than I am.
It is all about perceptions when reading, even if the perception of the reader is invalid
That’s true, but of course different readers have different perceptions, which is how, not that long ago, the Great Champagne Flute controversy erupted in romance blog-land.
What no more champagne flute wars? pfft.
It is sad when you think about how good SNL use to be compared to what it is now.
Your post is too funny! I remember the great old days of SNL. No one ever topped the original cast.
I’ve just seen this! I’ve only just noticed that recent posts are flagged a bit further down the page….
Love the post: ‘hysterical accuracy’ - v. apt.
[…] apologies to Gilda and Emily …and Teddypig who recently reminded us what […]