I don't really think it, I mean if you think in terms of literary fiction,
that there's anything particularly different about historical fiction
because the range of what we call historical fiction is so wide.
>> I'm thinking of somebody like Francisco Goldman who,
when he talks about history he says, the more he looked into history,
the more he became convinced that it was a fantastical place.
And, you know, you couldn't make this stuff up, is essentially, you know,
one way of looking at historical fiction.
And then there's historical fiction that has only imaginary characters in it, and
it's set in a past,
recognizably place and time, which right now property would be in that.
But there's no reference to any particular historical moment or personage.
And then there's a lot of historical fiction these days, and
I've done it myself, which has some characters who we know were living.
>> Did exist.
>> And might have entered into some relationship with an imaginary character.
I mean I think in a general way,
the genre of historical fiction embraces a lot of different kinds of fiction but
the one thing they all have in common is that it's set in a recognizable past.
>> Okay.
All right.
Great. So when you are writing historical
fiction, or something set in the past, what are the challenges?
What are the joys and sorrows of setting your work in the past?
>> I mean it's just hell.
You have to do enormous amount of research even to go a little ways into the past.
I wrote a book recently that's not really historical fiction.
It's about actors in New York in the 70's and I can remember that period but
I still wound up having to do a great deal of research just about the everyday life
of a young and ambitious actor during that period, and
also about the history of Manhattan and theatre and all of that.
There's always research.
But when I do historical fiction it really,