"Margaret" wrote:Since I posted, I saw an article online that suggested Sharon Dogar may have trimmed the scene and toned it down from the first, unpublished version, which may indeed have been a sex scene (though from the section in the published version, I can't believe it would have been anything but tasteful). In any case, the published version is the one that counts.
I've just posted a guest article from Sharon Dogar on my website, titled Peter van Pels, in which she addresses the question of whether, and to what extent, a novelist has the right or should exercise it to create fiction around the life of a person who really existed. I found it quite interesting. She doesn't dismiss the concerns of people who think this should not be done, but of course, her own conclusion is that the benefits outweigh the concerns.
We wouldn't have very many historical novels, if it was forbidden to write fiction about people who really lived - of course, the sensitivity is bound to be greater around people who lived more recently, especially within living memory.
That was a good article. I'm interested in reading the novel now.