<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	
	>
<channel>
	<title>
	Comments on: Dunstan by Conn Iggulden &#8211; a review	</title>
	<atom:link href="https://thesupercargo.com/dunstan-conn-iggulden-review/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://thesupercargo.com/dunstan-conn-iggulden-review/</link>
	<description>Words, Images, Speech</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 17 Sep 2019 10:12:29 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>
	hourly	</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>
	1	</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>https://wordpress.org/?v=6.9.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>
		By: TheSupercargo		</title>
		<link>https://thesupercargo.com/dunstan-conn-iggulden-review/#comment-6883</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[TheSupercargo]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 23 Jul 2018 19:17:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://thesupercargo.com/?p=8514#comment-6883</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Aha! So he does write fantasy as well. Good to know (and to avoid).

&quot;Perhaps historical fiction is fanfiction, of sorts.&quot; That&#039;s an idea worth examining. 

Wikipedia says fan fiction is &quot;fiction about characters or settings from an original work of fiction, created by fans of that work rather than by its creator&quot;. The top definition on the Urban Dictionary says it&#039;s &quot;when someone takes either the story or characters (or both) of a certain piece of work, whether it be a novel, tv show, movie, etc, and create[s] their own story based on it.&quot;  So historical fiction is not fan fiction by either of those definitions. Historical events and historical personalities are not &quot;original works of fiction&quot; nor do they originate in novels, TV shows or films. 

However...

It&#039;s certainly true that many historical fictions use (reuse) characters who really existed and left a trace in the historical record. These characters are given things to do and say that may be based on historical facts - but more often are based on probability. Characters in fan fiction are similarly plucked from their original context and given new actions and words. 

In historical fiction, how close the actions and expressions given to the fictional characters are to the historical truth varies enormously from one fiction to another. This is also true of fan fiction. (I&#039;m sure there&#039;s well-written fan fiction out there, but there&#039;s an awful lot of dross. The same is true of historical fiction - though I&#039;d argue, to a lesser extent. But then I&#039;ve read far more historical fiction than fan fiction.)

And then there are certain characters and certain periods that are immensely attractive to authors/fans. (I&#039;m thinking of British history in the 1500s here. The Tudors - both the period and the people.) So immensely attractive, so worked over, that it&#039;s likely many fictions do derive at least some characters from novels, tv shows or films rather than from the historical record. 

So, yes, I&#039;m inclined to agree. At least some historical fiction probably is a sort of fan fiction. 

I don&#039;t think Iggulden&#039;s Dunstan falls into that category though.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Aha! So he does write fantasy as well. Good to know (and to avoid).</p>
<p>&#8220;Perhaps historical fiction is fanfiction, of sorts.&#8221; That&#8217;s an idea worth examining. </p>
<p>Wikipedia says fan fiction is &#8220;fiction about characters or settings from an original work of fiction, created by fans of that work rather than by its creator&#8221;. The top definition on the Urban Dictionary says it&#8217;s &#8220;when someone takes either the story or characters (or both) of a certain piece of work, whether it be a novel, tv show, movie, etc, and create[s] their own story based on it.&#8221;  So historical fiction is not fan fiction by either of those definitions. Historical events and historical personalities are not &#8220;original works of fiction&#8221; nor do they originate in novels, TV shows or films. </p>
<p>However&#8230;</p>
<p>It&#8217;s certainly true that many historical fictions use (reuse) characters who really existed and left a trace in the historical record. These characters are given things to do and say that may be based on historical facts &#8211; but more often are based on probability. Characters in fan fiction are similarly plucked from their original context and given new actions and words. </p>
<p>In historical fiction, how close the actions and expressions given to the fictional characters are to the historical truth varies enormously from one fiction to another. This is also true of fan fiction. (I&#8217;m sure there&#8217;s well-written fan fiction out there, but there&#8217;s an awful lot of dross. The same is true of historical fiction &#8211; though I&#8217;d argue, to a lesser extent. But then I&#8217;ve read far more historical fiction than fan fiction.)</p>
<p>And then there are certain characters and certain periods that are immensely attractive to authors/fans. (I&#8217;m thinking of British history in the 1500s here. The Tudors &#8211; both the period and the people.) So immensely attractive, so worked over, that it&#8217;s likely many fictions do derive at least some characters from novels, tv shows or films rather than from the historical record. </p>
<p>So, yes, I&#8217;m inclined to agree. At least some historical fiction probably is a sort of fan fiction. </p>
<p>I don&#8217;t think Iggulden&#8217;s Dunstan falls into that category though.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Stamphers		</title>
		<link>https://thesupercargo.com/dunstan-conn-iggulden-review/#comment-6882</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Stamphers]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 23 Jul 2018 14:46:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://thesupercargo.com/?p=8514#comment-6882</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[I&#039;m glad you enjoyed it. I&#039;ve read Conn Iggulden&#039;s latests fantasy and I must say it is horrible! The writing is excellent, as usual, but the story is clinche and the characters bland. His mind works best with something to already base his imagination on, that&#039;s for sure. Which makes me wonder if he&#039;s ever done a fanfiction... I think he would be good at it.

Perhaps historical fiction is fanfiction, of sorts.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;m glad you enjoyed it. I&#8217;ve read Conn Iggulden&#8217;s latests fantasy and I must say it is horrible! The writing is excellent, as usual, but the story is clinche and the characters bland. His mind works best with something to already base his imagination on, that&#8217;s for sure. Which makes me wonder if he&#8217;s ever done a fanfiction&#8230; I think he would be good at it.</p>
<p>Perhaps historical fiction is fanfiction, of sorts.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
