| Subject: Re: Historical accuracy: why is it appealing? |
Author:
MM
|
[
Next Thread |
Previous Thread |
Next Message |
Previous Message
]
Date Posted: 13:45:10 06/05/12 Tue
In reply to:
Alfred
's message, "Historical accuracy: why is it appealing?" on 11:49:24 06/05/12 Tue
Huh? Alfred, I'm don't understand your question.
Some time ago, someone, I believe it was Olivia, but I could be wrong, started a thread about her spanking situation. The thread went pretty long, and months later she confessed she'd made it up in a new tread (I'm 'orry I lied... as I recall.)
Folks were justifiably annoyed to angry and several of us offered to gladly administer the richly deserved spanking!
I don't think we expect that every detail of every spanking description is totally accurate, but to be true to the memory, true to the emotions, yes. Whether for punishment, pleasure, or a mixture of both, clinical memory goes out as soon as the cheeks redden.
As for historical accuracy, I just read a novel set in ancient Athens. The author referred to "papers" meaning both written records and physical objects. Paper wasn't invented for 500 years more, and a continent away. The author also referred to a character as a "serial killer," a concept of the late 20th century. Historical accuracy is important in such a book because its absence is jarring to the reader and its presence adds greatly to verisimilitude. If I described a hand spanking that led to bleeding, you'd wonder what I was thinking.
Again, I don't get your question. Your hypothetical makes my head swim, sorry.
MM, scratching his head
[
Next Thread |
Previous Thread |
Next Message |
Previous Message
]
| |
