The line between history and historical fiction
As our class explores the intersections of public history and the digital humanities, I am noticing the dividing line between history and historical fiction. This week I listened to historian Edward O’Donnell’s podcast In the Past Lane, episode 89. It was a fascinating podcast interviewing Dr. James. E Lewis Jr. , Professor of history at Kalamazoo College about a book he wrote titled The Burr Conspiracy Uncovering the Story of An Early American Crisis. At first sight, it appears that this could be historical fiction but the book and the podcast were about the actual crisis in early America surrounding what early Americans believed about Aaron Burr.
In the podcast, Dr Lewis makes the distinction between what the facts of history show and compares and contrasts it to what citizens of the early American republic believed about Aaron Burr. As we search to tell stories of the past, many times we will find gaps. When we find these gaps it is tempting to fill them in, but what is the appropriate way to deal with these? I see three distinct ways that I have observed friends dealing with these historical gaps. The first way which I believe is most common recently is to fill in the gap with speculation and creative license. This is the realm of historical fiction and can be fun and entertaining but not history. The second way is to cover the gap up, as to pretend that there is no gap. This is a simplistic way to deal with history and something that I think is common as well. A third option is to continue researching and challenging what we think we know.
How does history relate to present day?
My interest in history tugs between the tactics of guesswork and storytelling and the research and discovery of new perspectives that challenge what we can know about the past and appreciating what we can’t know. As I have been discussing the study of history with friends, often topics that are currently in the news come up. One such topic is the Alamo and the recent Citizen Committee Approval for the Alamo Plaza Redesign. I believe that this is such a contentious issue because the way we collectively ‘Remember the Alamo’ is different. If we are to be honest with ourselves about our relationship with history it is probably best to say that it is a complicated situation. This is especially true with the story of the San Antonio de Valero Mission, better know as ‘The Alamo‘.
The Alamo is very often at the center of how we tell the history of Texas but the story of Texas doesn’t begin with the Battle of the Alamo. While we know many details about the Battle of the Alamo in 1836, there is still much to be learned about Texas history and the mission San Antonio de Valero that became an important battlefield that defines how we tell the story of the great state of Texas. While I know not everyone is happy with the Alamo Plaza Redesign, I am excited that we are having an open discussion about Texas history and believe that this is a learning opportunity for every interested party who wants to learn more. The best thing we can do is to continue researching and trying to do a better job of filling in those gaps of knowledge so we can tell the best and most informative story of the Alamo to future generations of Texans and visitors alike.
Great post, the Alamo Plaza Redesign is a really fantastic example to bring up as well. Upon reading the article you linked, I was shocked to learn just how contentious the process has been. According to the article, committee members fear for their safety so much that they requested that their votes remain anonymous indefinitely. The photo of the woman being escorted out by police definitely conveyed the tone for the article as well. The Alamo is arguably the most widely known symbol of Texas history but in my experience is most frequently visited by school groups and tourists. My hope is that the redesign will ultimately provide a more accessible and engaging home for the Alamo.
This is an important concept to keep in mind as custodians of history. People don’t like change, there is comfort in the familiar. When an agency comes in and says that they are going to take an icon and make it better people will be skeptical. When working with a project like the Alamo Plaza redesign things can get scary for both the people that want to make improvements and the people that want to save the Alamo. As historians we must decide there public opinion matters and where we as experts must make the tough calls.
Only having recently moved to San Antonio, I was shocked to hear about the Alamo Plaza redesign, as the businesses surrounding the mission have become somewhat iconic, their own type of historical buildings as you will. When I would visit SA, I would visit the wax museum or the haunted house. that being said, I fully support the expansion, as businesses can always be moved, while history cannot. Great post!
You bring up a really good question and topic to think: historical vs historical fiction. I think the issues around Aaron Burr and what the American public believes/knows about him is a great comparison to the “The Alamo”. People “remember the Alamo” differently and, as you said, there was a lot that happened before the famous battle. The reconstruction of the Alamo plaza is similar to what happens a lot in the retelling of stories, in the eyes of those with privilege to tell the stories their way. Thank you for sharing the link! I was educated myself. This topic also reminds me a lot of the Mandela Effect. https://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/mandela-effect-false-memories-explain-science-time-travel-parallel-universe-matrix-a8206746.html
although that article may seem different at some parts, it just best explains the what the Mandela Effect is
Interestingly enough, I have visited the Alamo maybe twice. Sara mentioned that it is most possibly one of the most visited sites in The Lone Star State. One of those visits for me was when I was probably nine or so and took a tour. The visit was long and extensive but I can tell you now that I could not remember a thing learned by that tour and wouldn’t even know how to get someone to the nearest restroom. “Remember The Alamo” right? Well, all I seem to remember is the facade that is used for graphics all over the city and maybe something about Bowie or even a random fact about the Friars. With that being said, the point I am trying to make is that the building or re-building of this surrounding area of the Alamo might not be that much of a bad thing after all. To me it depends on the intent of the renovations. Is it with gentrification in mind or is it driven by preservation. That is the question that I would like to ask those anonymous voters.
I really like your insight into the idea of these “gaps” in history. How we deal with them and you deciding not to take a side makes this blog much more impartial. I find myself contemplating which practice I use to answer these gaps. In my head whenever I am talking about a historical narrative I place theories into these gaps but I try to make the reader know that is what they are, theories. I also like the point about the Alamo, we do put a great deal of emphasis on it and at times forget about the vast history that is left out.
This is a really interesting topic, and not one with a clear solution in mind. Questions of what do we save, how much do we save, how do we do it, and and what cost are incredibly important in many fields. With history, the force of sentimentality is a strong factor. Questions of preservation and progress, and the tug of war they’ve played against each other since, well… forever is one I believe we’ll have to spend a lot of time thinking about. I like how you tied this all together with your own personal interests and goals. It can be difficult to find a balance between ‘storytelling’ through narrative and objective history, especially when the available information and quantity of perspectives is limited.