Every historical novel (not just historical romance) always picks and chooses from history to decide what experience to give to a modern audience.

People by and large choose to overlook huge portions of it—the lack of real sewage, for instance—or dentistry or whatever, and you know, it’s fine! Because some people really did just have excellent teeth.

This is why discussions of ”historical accuracy” always drive me nuts.

Because *every author* is imposing their worldview on history, and once we accept this is true, it’s a feature, not a bug.

Your fave made shit up to fit their world view. If their world view was regressive, it shows. If you think history was lock-step regressive until protest was invented in the 1960s, you’ll buy into that view, not because it’s accurate, but because it matches your own.

This is what writing historical fiction is for me: it is a chance to expand people’s view in the present by opening up the past.

I do a fuckload of research for every book. My books are generally historically possible, which is what I think the standard should be.

But I am writing a book in 2020 for modern audiences, and anyone who claims they *aren’t* is straight-up lying.

I’ve seen tons of historical fiction about the White Guy in Japan or the White Guy in China or the White Guy in wherever, and now you all want to complain about the Black people in England?

Get out of here.

This thing you are pretending is a discussion of historical accuracy? It’s not.

You are talking about who you think is allowed to belong where.