...with his opinion.
'By and large historical novels are just pulp fiction with a historical setting.'
This is true - most HF is exactly this. Not that I'm ashamed of liking it for that reason, but if I wanted to read something factual and edifying, I'd go sink my teeth into an academic tome.
'The fans are the same kind of geeks who write sonnets for people they fancy and reenact medieval battles at the weekend.'
Also true. I'm one of them (Shakespeare geek, HF writer, reenactor - albeit not mediaeval)
'It is only in the age of Hollywood adaptations that historical fiction has become such a store of caricature and melodrama.'
Couldn't agree more. These days the first questions anyone asks about an HF book seems to be 'who would play...'
But where we disagree is that he seems to think all the above is a bad thing? That's because he's a literary snob. I'm not. I've got a masters degree in ancient Greek and I'm a pretty discerning historiographer, but I do love me some nice juicy HF
HF *IS* genre fiction - why be ashamed of that?