erastes: (Default)
[personal profile] erastes

This was posted on one of my Historical Fiction yahoo groups, so I'm quoting the poster here. I knew this sort of thing went on in children's fiction, but .... really!!! There are no words.

"An author friend of mine writes medieval romances set in Scotland, She is half Scottish herself and knew her history very well, however, her editors wanted a lot of historical facts taken out of the story and she was told to dumb the book down. Why? Because the publisher ( a large mass market publisher in New York) said that the American public don't want too much history in their historical romances!

"So, she had to take out the real medieval words, like destrier and replace it with words the general public would know, like war horse. To me, this is disgusting. I know when I read a book and there is a word I don't know, then I'll look it up and feel better for knowing a new word.


"So, sometimes the lack of historical detail isn't the authors' fault. Sometimes, it's the publisher, who thinks the public don't want to be educated even in a slight way."

I have to praise my publisher mightily in this respect. My novel is pretty hard to catagorize, being a historical homoerotic romantic fiction, but she never once said to me "Do you really have to bang on about Linnaeus?" The editors did question my use of "big words" once or twice but I was firm and said that if they didn't know what words like "bursary" meant then they could go and look 'em up.

But really. I've ranted about this in Harry Potter fandom, where they changed the books to suit the American market and had the kids eating Jello and Fries instead of Jelly and chips, but dumbing down in historical novels? I learned a lot of my history from Jean Plaidy, and if I didn't know a word I looked it up. It's almost as if there's some conspiracy to keep people stupid. How is one supposed to improved one's vocabularly if you are never presented with a word you don't know? Call My Bluff is the best game EVER. Rant ranty rant rant.

Rant.

Date: 2006-09-28 04:15 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] vashtan.livejournal.com
But really. I've ranted about this in Harry Potter fandom, where they changed the books to suit the American market and had the kids eating Jello and Fries instead of Jelly and chips, but dumbing down in historical novels? I learned a lot of my history from Jean Plaidy, and if I didn't know a word I looked it up. It's almost as if there's some conspiracy to keep people stupid. How is one supposed to improved one's vocabularly if you are never presented with a word you don't know? Call My Bluff is the best game EVER. Rant ranty rant rant.

But romance has the target group of: "lower to middle education women, housewifes, or low qualification women, such as shop assistants and cashiers, who read stuff on the way from work and largely as a form of escapism".

Historical romance is seen as "romance in historical costumes/in a historical setting".

And if you think that is really horrible of me to say this, as it's demeaning, beside the point and dowright arrogant

...

that is what an editor at the biggest German publish house told mew on the phone. With not a hint of guilt or hesitation.

That is, what they perceive as the "target group".

Date: 2006-09-28 04:51 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] kethlenda.livejournal.com
How annoying of them. Not all romance readers are houswives and shopgirls--and not all housewives and shopgirls have the vocabulary of a grade-school student. I've never been a housewife, but I have been a shopgirl, and I could assure them, I know big words. :)

Date: 2006-09-28 05:35 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] semioticwarrior.livejournal.com
Well said. I suppose I'm technically a housewife right now, but I do have a master's degree, speak three languages, and have been chair of an academic department at a college...and I like big words.

/soapbox

That being said, there's plenty of literature out there for people who don't like big words...there's no need to make it all for them. UGH.

*nods*

Date: 2006-09-28 06:20 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] vashtan.livejournal.com
... let alone that their "target group" looks more like the average TV addict than book person. But that's just me. :)

Date: 2006-09-28 04:49 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] kethlenda.livejournal.com
*gags*

No wonder I find many historical romances to be written on roughly the third-grade level. They're like...they could be kiddie lit if it weren't for the smut, because there are no big words.

When I find a historical romance that makes me think, I adore it and cling to it. Unfortunately, they are few and far between. Now I know why.

Yeesh. I'm with you--I learned a lot of history from novels, and from being inspired by novels to look up the real history of a time period.

Date: 2006-09-28 05:32 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] semioticwarrior.livejournal.com
Oh for crying out loud!

That being said, when I told a friend of mine about my latest sale, she said, "You didn't use a lot of big words like you did in the last one, did you?"

::SIGH::

There's plenty of stuff for the intellectually lazy reader. How about the rest of us?!

Date: 2006-09-28 05:42 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] sm-malfoys.livejournal.com
Americans don't want history in their romance???
Ok why was Braveheart such a big hit?

I wish they would look at trends and ask what do people want.

These things must give you headachs....

Date: 2006-09-28 07:12 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] anderyn.livejournal.com
Snicker. They should read my favorite romance site, which keeps having wild comments from posters that "we want REAL history in our romances -- and not just stupid English Regency -- for God's sake, there's a whole WORLD and several millenia out there for the taking!" -- not all romance readers care for wallpaper history and easy-to-read bits.

Besides, she says, "destrier" is a perfectly fine word, and one I knew when I was six. So there. PFFFT. (Okay, okay, I admit, I'm an anomaly, since I was reading H. Rider Haggard's "Cleopatra" when I was four, and Tennyson when I was seven, but sheesh. SOME of us like our words and our history just fine, thankyewverymuch, even if we do happen to have the misfortune of being American.)

Date: 2006-09-28 07:31 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] erastes.livejournal.com
Oooo What site is that, hun?

And yes, I agree. I remember reading Prince Caspian and his horse was called Destrier and I knew it must mean something so I went and looked it up!

It's these sweeping generalisations that drive me BONKERS.

Date: 2006-09-28 07:49 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] anderyn.livejournal.com
The site is "All about Romance" and the url is http://www.likesbooks.com/

I particularly like the forums -- there is usually at least one convo at all times about wallpaper history or historical accuracy, and sometimes the author comes in and defends herself against charges of innaccuracy, and it's all very fascinating. In a "feeding the tigers at the zoo" way, if you don't mind seeing people savaged. Actually, that part is pretty rare. Mostly, people just state their own preferences. It's very true that most of the people who are readers there like more variety and more history in their novels.

Date: 2006-09-28 11:14 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] iulia_linnea.livejournal.com
That is exactly how I learned that word---when I was ten! I agree with your rant in every respect; I despise it when books are dumbed down. *growls*

Date: 2006-10-01 01:29 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] valarltd.livejournal.com
My kids learned it singing "Hotspur."
Squire bring my armor, my sword and my destrier,
I've raised an army to break Hanry's power.
South from the Humber, we'll march to the Severn,
With Douglas of Scotland, to join with Glendower.



What can I say, we're Irish. We get all our history (and our Shakespeare) from songs and poetry.

(I once had to sing the whole first verse of "Song of the Shield Wall" under my breath to remember the names of a couple kings in order to make the argument that calling Celts "Anglos" was offensive.)
http://calontir.sca.org/artsci/ferds-songs.html
Lyrics to both there

Date: 2006-09-28 07:15 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] anderyn.livejournal.com
Err, not that people don't LIKE the English Regency, it's just that it seems like it and Victorian London are about the only historicals some romance houses will publish. And while I myself am a huge Georgette Heyer fan, and have been since I was, what, twelve, and found them at the library, it would be nice to have more variety in the romance history of the world. (Myself, I'm gone for Georgian fashion, for men. MMMM. All that lace!)

Date: 2006-09-28 07:33 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] erastes.livejournal.com
Damn. I should have done more clothes description in Standish. I did very very little. I suppose it's coz i don't like clothes much, that it never occured to me that others would!!

Oops!

Date: 2006-09-28 07:42 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] rwday.livejournal.com
You could have described the clothing as it comes off. Clothes off is much more interesting than clothes on. Nudge, nudge, wink, wink.

Date: 2006-09-28 07:49 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] erastes.livejournal.com
I can't remember where I saw a sporking of a scene which did exactly that it literally was something like

"He undid the coral buttons held on with the black oiled silk, then slid the watered silk blouse from her shoulders before moving on to the calico undervest..." only far far more detail than that it was about 2 pages of uber description!

Date: 2006-09-28 07:46 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] anderyn.livejournal.com
I do not care a whit for current fashions, per se, and certainly not for my own self, but I adore reading/visualizing men in those lovely long coats and waistcoats and the shirts dripping in lace, and the kneebreeches. Best if they're pirates or highwaymen so they can have *swoon* the kneehigh or higher boots. Yes, yes, I do have a specific "hardon" for those clothes. MMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM.

Date: 2006-09-28 07:49 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] andsaca369.livejournal.com
Buttons! It's very important that whatever the era, the mens' clothes have lots and lots of buttons. Imperative, even!


~off in her own little button-filled world...~

Date: 2006-09-28 07:50 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] erastes.livejournal.com
giggling at the icon!

Date: 2006-09-28 07:51 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] andsaca369.livejournal.com
I'm v. much a fan of buttons. ~purr~ And the lovely Commodore, but that's a whole other shipful of seamen.

Date: 2006-09-29 04:13 am (UTC)
julesjones: (Spindrift cover art)
From: [personal profile] julesjones
Button porn! Yes!
[remembers that there are not one but two deadlines to be met, and reaches for plot bunny stake]

And people wonder where authors get their ideas from...

Date: 2006-09-28 07:51 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] anderyn.livejournal.com
Mmmm buttons. Though they must be shiny and textured.... oh dear, I *am* supposed to be working here!

(goes off and tralala's her way into thinkng about buttons and lace and more lace and buttons and how those kneebreeches fit so nicely around ....)

Date: 2006-09-28 07:53 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] andsaca369.livejournal.com
oh dear, I *am* supposed to be working here!

Me, too. *wg* Although I am supposed to be writing smut, so I suppose I can justify this as helping to create the proper mood...

Date: 2006-09-28 07:55 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] anderyn.livejournal.com
Alas, I am copyediting mathematics and NOT writing smut. Sigh....

And I do so want to take my time and envision my boys. MMMMM mmmm mmmm mmmmm mmm.

Oh God that icon! Bwah hah hah! I love it! (Goes off to listen to some more Holmes/Watson on the otr podcast.... perhaps I can sate myself with that.)

Date: 2006-09-28 07:57 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] andsaca369.livejournal.com
*g* Holmes was my first crush, and I giggle every damn time I read/watch/listen to The Devil's Foot. My god! The slash!

Eet maketh me happy.

Date: 2006-09-28 07:54 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] erastes.livejournal.com
Actually I often wondered about CS Forester - he seemed to bang on about knee breeches and Hornblowers stockings far more than seemed normal...

Date: 2006-09-28 08:01 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] anderyn.livejournal.com
But that's why I loved reading it. Smut my dear, smut in my little impressionable mind. (Though to be fair, what really got me was Sabatini and -- oh, who IS that writer? ah -- Frank Yerby, who wrote the Golden Hawk... and his descriptions of the hero's clothes.)

Date: 2006-09-28 07:31 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] andsaca369.livejournal.com
That's infuriating. There is no other word for it.

Date: 2006-09-28 07:45 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] erastes.livejournal.com
and insulting too! Ok there's nothing wrong with a good bodice ripper and heaving bosom (if you are into that kind of thing) but don't talk down to me!!

*grr*

Date: 2006-09-28 07:47 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] andsaca369.livejournal.com
Do they think intelligent people don't like interesting sex as well as the mouth-breathers who apparently do all the breeding?

I'm being horribly arrogant and offensive; my apologies.

Date: 2006-09-28 07:51 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] erastes.livejournal.com
Hey... this is my LJ, you are safe here - be as insulting as you like.

As long as you keep up the button porn.

*G*

Date: 2006-09-28 07:56 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] andsaca369.livejournal.com
I have to live with the subnormal idiots; I'm in the middle of the American South and there are so many people who don't bother to think for themselves, and don't read anything more difficult than a road sign...!

~froth~

This is not to say that sort of person doesn't exist outside the Mason-Dixon line, but they do seem to be more highly concentrated here. The stereotype is unfortunate, but far too often accurate. ~sob~

But. Buttons. ~lingers lovingly~

Date: 2006-09-28 08:18 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] anderyn.livejournal.com
They live up here in the Midwest too. (I'm related to far too many of 'em. GRRRRR.)

Date: 2006-09-28 08:19 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] andsaca369.livejournal.com
Ze redneck, eet ees efferywhere, no?

Date: 2006-09-28 08:25 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] rwday.livejournal.com
I lived in Ohio till I was 36, Virginia for the last 8 years, and I haven't noticed any real difference. They're everwhere. Even in the liberal hippie college town I grew up in had its share.

:(

Date: 2006-09-28 08:29 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] andsaca369.livejournal.com
~sigh~ Nothing for it but the tinfoil helmets and library-card machetes, ladies.

Once more unto the breach!

Date: 2006-09-28 09:53 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] themostepotente.livejournal.com
Okay, this just gets a big ol' WTF from me.

If I don't recognise a word, I look it up. On occasion I've had to do. I don't look at it feeling stupid/silly so much as 'hey, I learned something new today.'

The dumbing down bullshit really aggravats the fuck out of. As someone whose had 9 years of higher education and speaks 3 languages rather fluently, this offends me greatly.

Speaking of HP, do you know why they didn't call the American version of Philosopher's Stone that?

Because they didn't think the word 'Philosopher' would go over as well.

Being American does not equate to being uncultured or unintelligent.

Date: 2006-09-29 04:40 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] spacetweenears.livejournal.com
Oh, Rant allowed!! That's why I have a really big dictionary so I can look that stuff up. I feel smarter when I learn something new. :D

Profile

erastes: (Default)
erastes

December 2012

S M T W T F S
      1
2345678
91011 12131415
16 171819202122
23242526272829
3031     

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Jun. 29th, 2025 08:31 pm
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios