Let's Talk About Violence in Historical Fiction.

I'm taking a seminar class on history in contemporary fiction, and the last novel we read was called The Book of Night Women, by Marlon James. It discusses the slave trade in Jamaica in the early 1800s. It is also the single most upsetting book I have ever read.

The Jamaican slave trade in the early 1800s was seriously horrible. You know the horror stories we've all heard about American slavery (which, seriously, was wayyy not cool)? In Jamaica, it was worse, because the culture and intentions were so different. And this novel did not hesitate to confront even the most gruesome elements. The sexual abuse of slaves, the punishments for minor infractions, the utter disrespect for the humanity of others -- all are described in unfaltering detail. More than once, I thought I might throw up at the thought of the violence people are capable of towards others.

Night Women was hugely upsetting to read, but I think it's important that the book was as brutal as it was. Part of what made it so disturbing was the fact that these things really did happen -- the specific characters in the novel were fictional, but the dehumanizing violence thrown at slaves was very real. I think glossing over the violence, using euphemisms and implications rather than gory details, would have been a lot less powerful in telling the story. Only by forcing readers to face the details can the novel accurately give a sense of how horrible the times were.

But at the same time, such graphic imagery makes the novel inaccessible to a lot of people. I would never consider giving this book to a child, and even I finished it only because I had to for class. Without the context of the discussion the class offered, I feel like this novel would have been simply horrifying without the deeper understanding of the historical context. Definitely a book worth reading and talking about, but one that I think needs to be talked about if it's going to be read.

What I'm getting at is this: violence absolutely has a place in historical fiction, because it's important not to deny the facts of the past, and gruesome events shouldn't be sugarcoated (at least in my opinion). But I also think it's important to make those historical truths accessible to readers, and that's a line that can be really hard to find.

I don't necessarily have an answer to this (by which I mean, I don't have an answer to this), but I'm curious to know: what do you guys think about the role of violence in historical fiction?