So, let’s amend. It’s not that historical fiction is no longer published, it’s that the relatively few openings are designated for rather particular types of history. First, history is rewritten with fantastical elements or really a fantasy set in a historical setting. History is also rewritten altogether with “gender swaps” of key historical figures (e.g., King Arthur as a girl) or modern issues and ways of thinking implanted into characters from the past.

It’s enough to convince a young reader that praiseworthy women were always champions of feminist ideals, that every century grappled with the same racism spoken of today, and that every noble family had a progressive daughter who wanted everyone to be equal. All of which bends more toward fantasy than history. (Netflix’s adaptation of the highly engaging, highly beloved classic Anne of Green Gables, “Anne with an E,” was rendered unwatchable with the imposition of modern sensibilities not found in the book such as racism, sexuality, and feminism.)

Second, many agents willing to take on historical projects specify only “non-Western” historical fiction, fables, settings, etc. Ostensibly, the purpose is to write something new and increase the range of stories available to readers. Which would be a good thing if the “inclusivity box” had been widened, instead of merely shifted away from the Western world.

Third, only particular time periods with particular types of protagonists make the cut. If you’re an adult reader, you may have noticed the oversaturation of World War II stories on historical fiction shelves. Notably, these aren’t usually Holocaust stories (though those usually get published, too), but “untold” stories about the women of the war. Victorian England. The latter half of the 1900s. The occasional Greek gods and mythology, a dash from ancient India or Arabia, and that basically covers the entire range of historical fiction on offer. Moreover, any historical reference during war, tyranny, or other trying times is usually a simple narrative of “evil man was bad” instead of an introduction into some of the social and political complexities that encourage any particular event or era to come about. //

Like anyone, teens will pursue information about things they care about, and what better way to get them to understand what we went through to get to this point, what life was like before, and what was endured to build society, than connecting to a character living and dealing in the nuances of those times?

Let young readers imagine themselves in the shoes of their historical counterparts. Let them draw courage from those who fought and endured and dedicated themselves to something bigger. Let them live through characters who have to make tough choices because history isn’t black and white, but a whole gradient of gray. And, once they’re interested, let them go looking for more. See if they don’t get better at understanding history then.