by GGK on Jun.25, 2010, under Guy Gavriel Kay
A genuinely enjoyable morning at Beijing Normal University, where my Chinese publishers (SFW) organized a session of scholarly papers, critics and writers responding to my work in Chinese, and then a ‘response’ from the author (me) with a very hard-working translator at my elbow the whole way. The meeting was chaired, graciously, by Professor Wu of the university literature department. I was touched that academics and other novelists had already read the two books now translated (Tigana and Lions of Al-Rassan) because they just came out a month ago (Song for Arbonne is next month) and found the time to shape thoughts and write about them.
As for Under Heaven, when discussion turned to that (just general, it isn’t in Chinese yet) there was some bemusement expressed as to whether western readers would know enough about the Tang Dynasty to be interested. I fear I pointed out that western readers tend not to know a whole lot about Byzantium in Late Antiquity, or medieval Provence, either. In other words, the ‘strangeness’ has tended not to be an issue with my work. The past is always strange, in a sense - and fascinating for some of us.
There were questions (in Chinese) about Tolkien, about creating vivid female characters, and about how to balance generality of theme with specificity of character – which was amazingly akin to a question two nights ago in “The Bookworm” at the English-language meeting. (No, not the same person.)
Over lunch, about fourteen of us, the steady recurrence of toasts (in a generous, and formal culture) framed discussion that covered which western writers and books have ‘hit’ in China (Twilight is here, too, and for the same teen market. Harry Potter, of course. Scott Card’s Ender books did well…), my own preference as to a director for my work (discretion ruled), views of films like “Red Cliff” and “Raise the Red Lantern” (commercial success for the formal, less-so critically here, thumbs up everywhere for the latter), and a brief digression where I was so pleased to be right about something:
In Under Heaven, I made use of learning that the strong emergence of tea and its rituals in China are associated with the Tang. I have a minor military officer in a border fort inordinately proud of himself for ‘keeping up’ with trends in the capital, because he’s ordered tea and the associated implements. It is the sort of small detail I absolutely love to work with, designed to help shape the character of that secondary figure.
But in “Red Cliff”, set many hundred years before, a major scene (delaying a battle) turns on a woman showing an enemy general the arcane rituals of tea … I thought either the film had to be wrong, or my research was. I asked about it. A roomful of academics and writers and my agents and publishers all agreed the film had ‘shifted history’ a few hundred years for the delay-the-battle scene.
Sometimes you do get it right as an author. Question: how much does it matter? Easy answer is to say ‘of course it does’ but in truth these things register only with a very few readers, taken one by one. My own feeling is that when we do know something about the issue and the writer is way off, it undermines our confidence in other areas. If a novelist has people meeting at the corner of Park and Madison Avenue in New York … they can lose us.
Aside from this, some of us are truly writing for ourselves, for our own sense of shaping something as carefully as we can … and so it had been bothering me that I might have been off on the tea.
I will now reward myself with a drink before dinner (not scotch, too hot) for not being wrong. (What are people’s favourite summer cocktails, by the way. I’m open to ideas. It really is hot here.)
Related posts:
- It is nice when life sets up your blog themes. I’m starting my sojourn here at Babel Clash by posting from Shanghai, where I’ve been for the past week doing a variety of book-related activities, and some tourism. For the next week I’ll be logging in from Beijing, then...
- The China tour ended with visits on the last day to the Lama Temple (Buddhist) and the nearby Confucian Temple in Beijing. Last photo was of the statue of Confucius: I’d try not to be that clichéd in a book, but it was a good last shot (photo of...
- I had a really nice reading and conversation event last night at “The Bookworm” here in Beijing. One of the interesting aspects of doing book-related appearances in other countries is to see what doesn’t change among readers - and what does. So, one woman asked why Under Heaven isn’t...
- Aloha - both hello and goodbye Unfortunately, it’s that time again. Time for us to say goodbye to our current guest, Guy Gavriel Kay. I especially want to say thank you for posting while on tour in China. I found the look into the world of Chinese publishing, interviews and scholary study to be particularly illuminating. ...
- Wednesday morning here in Shanghai, to the airport in 90 minutes. One of the downsides of a long book tour is that you can get jaded, tired, find it hard to be psyched-up for an event. Most of us can put on our ‘game face’ but it can take...
June 25th, 2010 on 5:42 am
I don’t thing that specific accuracy of a scene, which may not ultimately be plot crucial (though the example was), necessarily makes or breaks a book. However, I do think it’s indicative of a good author. One who strives for, if not real world accuracy, a certain internal consistency.
June 25th, 2010 on 8:06 am
I actually think this bounces back to the discussion from earlier about a history primer. As someone who generally is interested in Chinese history (and, in fact, all things Asian), I find myself both surprised and amazed when authors, movies, etc., get the small details correct. It’s almost like an Easter Egg for those readers who are interested in both your book and your command of history. Do I let minor anachronisms bother me? Of course not. Seeing true historical accuracy, though, really makes my eyes light up.
Alex noted, and I have to agree, that accuracy is a sign of a good author. Someone who’s willing to pay that much attention to details is probably an author dedicated to world building and intricate plotting. That’s the type of author I like to read. I want to be able to lose myself in the work. Major anachronisms can be extremely jarring and, on occasion, I’ve put a book down because of them.
Oh, and a favorite summer cocktail? You can’t go wrong with a Mojito, though that’s about as far from scotch as one man can go.
June 25th, 2010 on 8:18 am
I think the amount it matters is entirely dependent on how history is used in shaping the world that is written about. If the author wants the setting to reflect a specific time and/or place, then yes, the historical details matter. Of course, the education of the audience also comes into play - I remember reading an interview with Jacqueline Carey where she regretted having ‘missed’ a reference to fingerling potatoes that would technically be out of place in the medieval European setting her work is based in. Did I catch it? No, and I don’t know that it would have altered my perception of her reality if I had…in my opinion, this is fantasy, and so it doesn’t have to reflect exactly the nature of the time/place on which it is based.
Of course, the more your audience knows about your subject matter, the more critical they will be regarding accuracy. For example, I don’t mind varying interpretations on Arthurian legend - I enjoy reading all of the different ways people interpret the mythology of it - but please don’t break with the basic principles. If you want to break with the traditional cast of characters (Guinivere as some kind of Celtic warrior, anyone?), don’t claim it’s a book about Arthur and his court. Change names, alter setting - use it as a basis, but don’t bring along all of the preconceived notions people have about those specific characters and then try to break them by altering the character into something unrecognizable from the original. For me, it just comes across as ‘wrong.’