Translations

Original Source: https://stage.jeyamohan.in/197339/ Date: 25-Mar-2024   In some form or other, there is a history in every fiction and a fiction in every history. The history in a fiction is not really a history in a strict sense, whereas the fiction in historiography is certainly history. We always call as historical fiction only those stories that tell a slightly older history. i.e. If the imagination is let to elaborate the history that we had developed with minimal proof, we call that a historical fiction. When contemporary history is fictionalized, we do not see the history in it. We consider it 'realism'. We have defined a boundary for 'contemporaneous'. For us, the period before independence is historical period. Post that, it's contemporary period. That is why novels like Suthanthira Thagam (Si.Su.Chellappa), Anbe Aaramudhe (Thi. Janakiraman) that have as their background Indian independence movement, do not seem like historical fictions. Whereas, the fictio...

  Original Source: https://stage.jeyamohan.in/197258/ Date: 24-Mar-2024   As soon as the modern historiography began in India, so did modern historical fiction. In fact, both evolved hand in hand. Even in case of European history, it can be understood that the situation was the same - that is modern historiography and modern historical fiction evolved together. What's more surprising is the fact that in 16th century AD, even as the ancient historiography was making way for the modern one, the trend of fictionalizing the early set of history books had begun. Shakespeare arranged his plays inspired by the books on Ireland and Scotland by Raphael Holinshed and Edward Hall. Alexander Dumas fictionalized the writings of French Historical author Pierre de L'Estoile. In Europe, modern historiography could be seen twinned with fictional literature.  India's modern historiography started in 18th century. Even as the history of Bengal was getting written, Bankim Chandra Chatterjee...