"Though my books are written from a historical perspective, I have goon so far back that I am in the realm of prehistorical speculation rather than simple historical fact to weave my stories around"
About this Quote
Auel is quietly staking out a creative loophole: history gives her authority, but prehistory gives her freedom. By admitting she’s gone "so far back" that she’s operating in "prehistorical speculation", she preempts the most predictable critique of her work - that it’s not verifiable. The move is savvy because it reframes the contract with the reader. Don’t come here for footnotes; come for a world that feels earned.
The phrasing does double duty. "Historical perspective" signals research, texture, and seriousness, while "to weave my stories around" foregrounds craft over proof. She’s telling you the scaffolding matters, but the building is still a novel. That verb - weave - is a wink at how prehistory enters pop imagination: not as a timeline but as a tapestry of plausible details (tools, migration, weather, bodies) stitched into something emotionally legible.
The subtext is also a defense of narrative as a kind of surrogate anthropology. Prehistory is a blank space where readers want answers: How did people love, grieve, organize power, survive? Auel positions herself as a translator of that yearning, not a lecturer. It’s a cultural sweet spot, especially for late-20th-century historical fiction, when audiences craved immersion and "authenticity" but also wanted the warmth of character-driven storytelling.
She’s not dodging responsibility, either. She’s drawing a boundary: fact can’t save you here; plausibility has to. That’s the real intent - to claim legitimacy without pretending omniscience.
The phrasing does double duty. "Historical perspective" signals research, texture, and seriousness, while "to weave my stories around" foregrounds craft over proof. She’s telling you the scaffolding matters, but the building is still a novel. That verb - weave - is a wink at how prehistory enters pop imagination: not as a timeline but as a tapestry of plausible details (tools, migration, weather, bodies) stitched into something emotionally legible.
The subtext is also a defense of narrative as a kind of surrogate anthropology. Prehistory is a blank space where readers want answers: How did people love, grieve, organize power, survive? Auel positions herself as a translator of that yearning, not a lecturer. It’s a cultural sweet spot, especially for late-20th-century historical fiction, when audiences craved immersion and "authenticity" but also wanted the warmth of character-driven storytelling.
She’s not dodging responsibility, either. She’s drawing a boundary: fact can’t save you here; plausibility has to. That’s the real intent - to claim legitimacy without pretending omniscience.
Quote Details
| Topic | Writing |
|---|---|
| Source | Help us find the source |
More Quotes by Jean
Add to List
