Spyderz
11-05-1998, 09:51 AM
>I was a double major, English Lit. & History, in school so my take on
history is often colored by my literary interpretations of events and vice
versa. To me, the best Lit has historical or real world significance, and
>the best history is a really good read. I think it's important, however,
not to confuse the two. Literature is not meant to be factual and history
is not supposed to be invented. Sometimes literature has a factual
>basis, and sometimes historians inject dialogue and narrative into their
work that is their own interpretation of the facts. These things are done,
however, for thematic reasons and a good writer would never tell you that
>he was telling "the real story" any more than a good historian would tell
you that his narrative/dialogue were the absolute facts.
I think you should read H.G. Wells' "The Outline of History"...it is history
written by someone who can write...
history is often colored by my literary interpretations of events and vice
versa. To me, the best Lit has historical or real world significance, and
>the best history is a really good read. I think it's important, however,
not to confuse the two. Literature is not meant to be factual and history
is not supposed to be invented. Sometimes literature has a factual
>basis, and sometimes historians inject dialogue and narrative into their
work that is their own interpretation of the facts. These things are done,
however, for thematic reasons and a good writer would never tell you that
>he was telling "the real story" any more than a good historian would tell
you that his narrative/dialogue were the absolute facts.
I think you should read H.G. Wells' "The Outline of History"...it is history
written by someone who can write...