Redefining history? The blurred lines between fact and fiction

What is history? Is it a tribute to the conqueror or the lament of the conquered? Or does the truth lie somewhere in the middle? These were the questions raised and answered at the Times Litfest on Sunday.

“History is just a list of names, dates and figures. It’s historical fiction that gives people context and perspective. Fiction depends on gaps in historians’ interpretations to make these figures more relatable,” said author Sutapa Basu, who relied on “oral traditions and folklores” for her novel on Padmavati, a queen of the Rajput dynasty, whose existence is debated by historians. The session was moderated by Dipankar Mukherjee, founder of online publishing platform Readomania.

TOI's Manimugdha Sharma, while advocating a more “rigorous” research process involving “documentary evidence”, warned that historical fiction can also lead to an alternate reality that can serve certain sections with vested interests.

Writer Parvati Sharma, whose works have revolved around Mughal emperors, while admitting that all historical sources are subjective, said there is a difference between lies and biases.

“The problem arises when you begin to depend on history to assess your present worth... Today, we are known as the nation of Gandhi, but over the last few years there have been attempts to eulogise Godse. Recently a school booklet in Odisha stated that Gandhi died in an accident,” said Parvati, adding that readers have to be wary of such distortions.

Mukherjee also pointed out the inability of the reader to separate fact from fiction, and members of the audience agreed that the challenges will only get tougher as India navigates a turbulent past to move into an uncertain future.