• Welcome to the Fantasy Writing Forums. Register Now to join us!

Can you tweak real world events to suit a plot?

Part of the story I'm currently planning takes place partly in our world. During these few chapters my characters come into contact with certain characters of historical importance. To help you fully understand I feel I should explain further:

John Dee (1527-1609) was a consultant the Queen Elizabeth the First. He was also a mathematician, astronomer and occultist, among other things. And cording to his partner and him, he was spoken to by God and told to take note of the language of angels: Enochian. And also to take note of the rituals and magical spells that came with this language. My characters come into contact with this man while he is on his death bed, where he tells them how to progress along their journey, etc.

Of course in real life he was talking a load of nonsense and he never met 8 half-demons that needed his help, and obviously everyone knows this. But do you think it's okay that I've changed history like that?

And I suppose that kind of brings me onto another question that is relatively similar...

Can I take a term that is commonly used to describe one thing, and have it describe another? In my book I have creatures called Nightwalkers/Vampyr (depending on who says it.) but they're kind of like a mix between Zombies AND Vampires, so can I really call them Vampyr? Whereas my main characters are the children of fallen angels and mortals, so I've called their species Nephilim, which is true to the mythos of Nephilim.

I realise these questions (or similar) have already been posted, but I can't seem to find any threads like this, and its really bugging me.

Thanks for all the help in advance!

Nathan. :D
 

GeekDavid

Auror
Part of the story I'm currently planning takes place partly in our world. During these few chapters my characters come into contact with certain characters of historical importance. To help you fully understand I feel I should explain further:

John Dee (1527-1609) was a consultant the Queen Elizabeth the First. He was also a mathematician, astronomer and occultist, among other things. And cording to his partner and him, he was spoken to by God and told to take note of the language of angels: Enochian. And also to take note of the rituals and magical spells that came with this language. My characters come into contact with this man while he is on his death bed, where he tells them how to progress along their journey, etc.

Of course in real life he was talking a load of nonsense and he never met 8 half-demons that needed his help, and obviously everyone knows this. But do you think it's okay that I've changed history like that?

Of course you can, it's actually fairly common. Sometimes it's called alternate history, sometimes it's not.

Three quick examples:

The Alchemist's Apprentice
The Alchemist's Code
The Alchemist's Pursuit

These books use a fictional version of the famous Nostradamus to solve mysteries in ancient Venice using, of course, magic and divination. :)
 

Queshire

Auror
if you're working with that long ago then there's no problem. You'd likely find more difficulty with more modern events such as 9/11 or or WWII. As for the vampires, well, first off I'm not a fan of using ys in place of is to make a word look kool, but that's just a matter of taste I suppose. The original vampires, before even Dracula were far different from modern depictions of vampires. This page might help: OurVampiresAreDifferent/Mythology - Television Tropes & Idioms If your vampires are significantly different from baseline vampires then it would likely be a good idea to address that in story. Talking about how different the first vampire myths were from the draculas and twilights can be suitable justification.
 

Devor

Fiery Keeper of the Hat
Moderator
I think, generally, the story would be stronger if you can find a way to do it with secret history instead of alternate history. That is, this person existed, but behind what we know in real life, here's an explanation that we missed.

Of course sometimes that's just not possible, or compatible with what you want to do. And that's okay. And few people would notice a few fudged details. But if you can, I think getting closer to Secret History would have a bigger impact on readers.

Here's a discussion about it that might help.
 

sarasvati

Acolyte
Ah! Interesting that you mention John Dee specifically. I just finished reading Midnight Come Never, a fantasy story about faeries in Queen Elizabeth's court, where John Dee plays a significant role. Spoiler: for most of the book, faeries are actually the ones speaking to him in order to manipulate the court through his "visions". The story doesn't actually change any recorded historical events (courtiers have the same political careers, date of death, etc.), but the book provides a sort of "behind the scenes" imagining of how these known events could be the product of faerie influence. A secret history, the way Devor describes. The author, Marie Brennan, describes in an interview that she enjoyed writing her story in the cracks and gaps left by history.

There's certainly room for more "secret histories" of pivotal moments in the past. Alternate histories are also enjoyable, often starting with a jumping-off point such as, "What if Germany won WWII" or "What if Napoleon had dragons". But I think your story is more the secret history style of "we know what John Dee said, but what if the real story behind this was he was helping half-demons".

Whatever you choose to do, your story sounds interesting. I love this time period, and John Dee in particular was a fascinating person.
 

Eagle

Scribe
There's plenty of twisting history in fiction. Just look at any Hollywood historical blockbuster. The same with the Assassin's Creed game series. Pope Alexander VI never actually went round with an alien relic for a staff, but it makes the story that much more interesting.

I like it when people do take slight liberties with historical figures as long as they do suggest that it is fiction, which of course yours would if it involved vampires. It does help to not restrict any historical figures that you would intend to be present in the context of your narrative.

What I hate is when books and films purport to be historical and are anything but. That's when people start believing the wrong thing about past events, and can completely destroy a real person's legacy. Take Braveheart for example. A love affair between the leader of the rebellion and the future Queen of England? Please!
 

GeekDavid

Auror
What I hate is when books and films purport to be historical and are anything but. That's when people start believing the wrong thing about past events, and can completely destroy a real person's legacy. Take Braveheart for example. A love affair between the leader of the rebellion and the future Queen of England? Please!

But... but... but... it was in the movie! You mean to tell me that a guy can't put on blue tights and a red cape and fly? ;)
 

Dragev

Scribe
A very good example of changing historical facts to suit a fantasy tale would be Jonathan Strange and Mr. Norrell which completely changed major parts of 19th century history and quite a bit of medieval English history too. And in my opinion, it was great! :D
 

Kn'Trac

Minstrel
As for the vampires, well, first off I'm not a fan of using ys in place of is to make a word look kool, but that's just a matter of taste I suppose.

As far as I know, the word vampyr has Slavic roots. As such, the y isn't there to make it look kool, it's there because it's written like that in Slavic literature.
 

Sam Evren

Troubadour
There are some other things to remember when you talk about altering history or the desire to do so.

History can be wrong. For many years, Troy was thought a myth, a fantasy, a fictional city. Ancient peoples stumbled across the bones of an elephant and discovered the cyclops---or at least so the theory goes.

I'm not saying, by far, that all history is wrong, but it is malleable. Take for instance the phrase, "History is written by the victors." It's generally true. There are all sorts of things that get swept under carpets when a history-writing power finds them inconvenient.

If nothing else, that idea alone---that to the victor goes the narrative---can give you right to play with Mr. Dee's past. So long as we're talking fiction.

A prophetic manuscript can be found, an eyewitness diary uncovered, a cryptic symbol can lead to a chase through the pages of lesser known histories---all of these can grant you limited license to unleash your imagination on the past.
 

Jabrosky

Banned
I have faced similar issues with historical accuracy myself. In fact part of the reason I probably got into the fantasy genre in the first place is because the fantasy label allows me to work with historical settings and characters without confining myself within the limits of accuracy. Strictly historical fiction doesn't give me that kind of creative wiggle room.

Real history can definitely provide a treasure trove of ideas, but I have found it can often disappoint as well. For example, I might want to write about a historical figure I find really inspiring when I first hear about them, yet upon doing research on that figure I learn they were not nearly as heroic, noble, or beautiful as I initially imagined them. Genuine good guys are few and far between in the historical record of any culture. For that matter, the same problem applies to historical cultures and civilizations. They might leave behind some wondrous art, architecture, and technology, but almost all the great empires of the past had their foundations built on bloody military conquests and the autocratic repression of whole populations.

Of course none of that may bother you if you want to write gritty and morally gray historical fiction, but it can be disheartening to idealists like myself.
 
Top