OnlineBookClub.org

In many historical novels, the level of research varies greatly. If you are in your 80's or know your history, how accurate do you feel the book is? ( Basic premise of immortality excepted of course.)

Written history is not a hundred percent accurate. Written history is at times, bias. The author may have a wrong interpretation of an artefact or oral history.Historical fiction is not accurate, it may only present a part of reality.

I think the historical part of this book kind of takes a back seat. The author uses major events as a backdrop for the story (example WWII when Steven finds the immortality pills), but I didn't think the historical aspect really impacted the story. The story could easily have taken place in a different time period, with Steven coming across these pills some other way. That being said, there weren't too many specific details which you could question the historical accuracy of.

In this particular book, I would have liked some additional backstory about the Dalai Lama. I don't really understand his importance. Or the difference between Dalai Lama, Confucianism, Buddhism, etc.

greenstripedgiraffe wrote:In this particular book, I would have liked some additional backstory about the Dalai Lama. I don't really understand his importance. Or the difference between Dalai Lama, Confucianism, Buddhism, etc.

You make a really good point! I also felt a little more explanation about Buddhism in general and the relationship with immortality would have been helpful given what a large role the religion played in the overall story.

I agree with others here - the historical aspect (WWII and the concentration camp) seems pretty accurate, but it isn't the focus of the read; therefore, there isn't much here about it. I also agree with a bit more explanation of Buddhism would have been more interesting and added to the story.

I'm nearly half way through the book and see absolutely no accuracy or real discussion about Buddhism. I feel like the book is more of a fantasy than anything else.

MarisaRose wrote:I think the historical part of this book kind of takes a back seat. The author uses major events as a backdrop for the story (example WWII when Steven finds the immortality pills), but I didn't think the historical aspect really impacted the story. The story could easily have taken place in a different time period, with Steven coming across these pills some other way. That being said, there weren't too many specific details which you could question the historical accuracy of.

I would tend to agree. Any historical period that was wrought with conflict and war would have worked.

In all my years of reading historical books, I've never come across any book that was 100% historically accurate. Every book is bound to have some historical mistakes. This is not the fault of the author. The faults are mainly due to stereotypes, incorrect interpretations, and incorrect transmission of oral history. This book was around 95% accurate historically, which is way more than many other books I've read belonging to the same genre.

I think that authors modify the history based on the story's plot and characters.

I am in my 80s. I do think the author's description of Dachau is well within historic parameters. Otherwise, I don't recall anything that could be considered historically accurate in the rest of the book. It is a very interesting fictional read.

Well, this is probably not what you were looking for, but the historical accuracy of analog recording was...not good. As someone who's spent time as a musician in analog studios, that was quite painful to read. He was assuming 78's were a universal limitation, but that's only for home use. A radio station or studio could record at 33 in the '40s. Plus, even if they couldn't, the A&R guy would be looking at using new microgroove technology of the time rather than holding out on some hypothetical magnetic tape (which hindsight tells us works, but they had little inclination at the time). Most of the war stuff seemed pretty accurate, sharks aside.