How historically accurate should a story be?

[zombieparanoia]

I'm putting together an outline for a story I want to do in the future which would be something along the lines of the battle of Thermopylae but with an LD twist. Now I've done a bit of research/curiosity reading on the topic but worry about being too bogged down in details or not accurate enough. Basically I think its a neat idea but don't want to have to get a friggin degree in ancient civilizations just to write the story. What sort of details do you notice when reading period pieces that really bother you? Should the dialogue be different than "normal"? ie: shakespearean characters would likely not use the term "dude" very often, nor would they know what a "wedgie" is so the use of those terms might throw off the illusion of the story. But at the same time characters set in the shakespearean period wouldn't necessarily have to use the grammar or style shakespeares writing would they?

[prettycorpses]

I think you should have a certain degree of it so it makes your story all that much more believable but like you said dont let it get too bogged up with the details...dialogue should be the same as the period you're writing for and as far as I know not everyone spoke like Shakespeare wrote...not as bad anyways! Personally if Im reading a story thats set in a certain time and then the characters are all like 'hey dude, wheres my car' it would put me off! Did any of that make sense? hope so!?

[Macabre]

People complaining about historical accuracy has ruined many a good book and movie review. So many folks whine, bitch and moan about it that it's just crazy. Take the movie The Last Samurai, for example. I thought it was a great movie, and had everything in it that I look for in a film. yet, some folks panned it because it is not exactly the way it happened in the history books. My comment is, so what? The movie NEVER said it was a historical account, so why should that matter? Enjoy it for what it is. The same people bitched about Troy, which I also thought was a good movie, for the most part. Now, if you decide to write a story titled "Analysis of the conflict at Thermopylae", then you'd better have your facts straight. Otherwise, fiction is fiction, and you have some creative license. If I want a documentary, I'll watch the History Channel.

[Exatreides]

It all really depends on how much work you want to put in on it, how much time and effort you want to put in it. A couple years ago, I started a idea for a fic, set right after the battle of waterloo, a Waterloo mind you that included a victory for the French over Welington, and the Prussians. I spent oh...I dunno around 20 to 30 hours researching everything from the type of guns they used, to how they moved, talked, what they wore, where they were going on the battle field (cote de hougemount anyone?) But, as I spent so much time researching, my orignal interest for the story waned, and I only wrote around two pages total. If anyone's interested.. It was about a division of French Elite troops (the Grognards Old Gaurd), sent to mop up a Prussian division that arrived late on the battlefield. The Grognards defeated the Prussians after a nice battle, but.. As the day continued the Moans of the dead began to increase and the tens of thousands of French, English, and Prussian dead began to rise.. What would 800 of the old Gaurd do? Armed with only the single shot rifles and with orders to hold their ground. Yea, thats as far as I got.

[AssassinFromHell]

In my opinion, it depends on several factors. One of which being when in the event it occurs. If you're doing a LD story that takes place during a certain event, I think the historical facts should be on a significant level of accuracy up until the point where we see the rise of the dead. At that point, it becomes fictious due to the dead rising from the grave. I don't general look for these things in a story, just as its not incredibly out of whack. So basically, don't make it like a history book. But at the same time, don't make yourself look uneducated. There's a fine line there.

[deadpunk]

I would make sure to toss in enough information as neccessary to let the reader understand the period, but as stated by others, I wouldn't bog it down with detail. Fictional Period pieces are tricky... you want to provide some sense of historical accurracy, yet you need a free hand to make it fictional. I for one, however, would be glad to finally see a period piece with the LD that is NOT set in WWII. Can you say 'refreshing' boys and girls? I knew that you could...

[Danny]

if theres one thing to learn from samurai champloo ,ignore history, just like scientologists and intelligent design nuts,lol.

[bassman]

Or you could just go down the road that Joel and Ethan Cohen took with "Fargo" and say it's entirely true, with different names but in reality, it's entirely false.

[Danny]

very wise.

[Tullaryx]

The main thing is try to stay away from modern euphemisms. Like someone else mentioned earlier, slang that we know of today wouldn't fit and sound good coming out of a Spartan warrior.

[Danny]

-cough-gladiator-cough-

[Svengoolie]

Don't sacrifice creativity for historical or technical accuracy. Those things are okay, but don't make them the focus of the piece...like some writers have done--remember, you're writing a story, and not a research paper.

[Danny]

basically its your project so do what you think lends itslef to your ''vision'', but dont go to far overboard like that gay ass batman and robin film,lol.

[bassman]

basically its your project so do what you think lends itslef to your ''vision'', but dont go to far overboard like that gay ass batman and robin film,lol. We don't mention that film around here, Hellsing Ughh....and I had to read this while I'm eating...

[Tullaryx]

I always thought that Morganbesser's historical zombie stories in fiction were good examples of how to do it.