3
Jul

“Through a lens like watered glass”

   Posted by: Kathe   in Research

The Little Professor’s got some very interesting shoots and tendrils curling about the idea of Victorian/”Dickensian” fiction, with shout-outs to the great Sarah Waters (whose own trio of fierce Victorians – Affinity, Fingersmith, and Tipping the Velvet – I came to just this year) and others whose work can be classified as neo-Victorian.  As Under the Poppy is my own first venture into the waters of historical NV fiction, I can browse the LP’s checklist and confirm that yes, there is sexuality present, in various forms and formats, and yes indeed, there is stink. (Sidebar note: smell, scent, olfaction is so visceral and such a powerful descriptive tool, everything I write has stink in it. Yum.)

As for the actual history — well, the fact is I didn’t think beforehand about the book as historical fiction, as any “kind” of fiction; I understood in a backdoor sort of way that it would be part of a genre per se, but other than that I thought not at all; I just wrote. When I needed to know if a certain activity or device was present and/or available in my variant Victoriana, I looked it up (and sometimes became pleasurably lost among the byways of the pince-nez and buttonhook et al) and then added, or did not, accordingly.

What was most important to me, what is always most important to me when I write, was recreating on the page that world I saw so clearly in my mind’s eye: the universe of Rupert and Istvan, that most faithful and intimate world they had built and sustained between them, and all the concentric temporal worlds of society and custom, the road, the stage, the brothel and the salon, through which orbits they passed in turn and tandem on their way. Anthony Lane’s wonderful observation about Flaubert’s use of detail – his research “furnishing and feathering a world that had already taken shape within his mind” – is exactly my model.  Everything on the page is there to feather that nest, to hold you in that world until the story is done.

Is it odorous, sex-charged, boots-and-corset puppet-mad, this world? Oh absolutely. Is it neo-Victorian? It can sit at that table, I hope, without annoying its fellows. Need you wear pince-nez when you read it? Only if you want to. Did I make it all up? Yes and no, like all fiction, like the best fiction it aspires to be. Read it, please, then you tell me.

This entry was posted on Saturday, July 3rd, 2010 at 12:19 pm and is filed under Research. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

2 comments so far

hannah
 1 

Is there any chance you can talk/write a little bit about what sources you used to research the time period and how accurate puppet shows in a cabaret-esque brothel setting is?

December 13th, 2010 at 11:58 am
 2 

Hannah, my research method was PRN/as necessary on the day-to-day functioning of a Victorian-era brothel, so by necessity that was about 90% online, following credible support for yea or nay (language sites for slang, historical haberdashery sites for clothing names, fabrics, etc.) on a particular detail in the story.

My main go-to for puppet lore was Eileen Blumenthal’s PUPPETRY: A WORLD HISTORY, but if I needed to know if, say, there were ever puppet performances of Don Giovanni at midnight in Prague, I went online. Given the historical ubiquity of puppets, and the human ingenuity (that’s the kindest word) that can turn anything into, let’s be kind still and call it an erotic device … think of Oskar Kokoschka and his Alma Mahler doll, so if there weren’t erotic puppet shows in a brothel someplace it would be a surprise! :)

December 13th, 2010 at 2:41 pm

Leave a reply

Name (*)
Mail (will not be published) (*)
URI
Comment