All of what you described, Selwyn, would fall under the subject of history, not biographies, which is what I was referring to. I can read about kings in textbooks, I can read about witch hunts in fiction as well as in texts for school. I'll read books about science or autobiographies without complaining. But I don't want to read a book about.. JK Rowling if it isn't written by her. Nobody can properly capture another person's life properly, no matter how much research they do. Just as I could never write down every single thing about my characters because then they wouldn't be realistic at all. Historical Fiction about certain people is exceptionally interesting, particularly if they change things slightly but still keep the timeline correct, for example. If an author can't think of anything to write about except the simple fact of what someone else did, I don't care to read it. They could at least put in some creativity. Then I would be able to appreciate it. History textbooks on their own, similarly, are interesting because they teach lessons and show us what not to do, etc. But they're written for the purpose of telling us facts, not the life story of specific individuals. We know what year whichever king did whatever they did, but we can't know their thoughts or their secret hobbies or anything like that. If someone tried to do that, they would have to do a historical fiction work for me to consider reading it.
I do love documentaries, though. I watched the one about how they found the burial spot one of England's kings and proved he was illegitimate. Documentaries aren't the same as biographies to me, particularly because of the medium. Film is much easier for me to sit through than an average biography.
by Declan Arryn Thu Jun 04, 2015 4:43 am
