Ron,
I agree that persons writing fiction should have license to write make-believe,
however, there is nothing make-believe about there NOT being domesticated pigs
during the time setting of the FICTION book of which you speak.  I've surveyed
many in my writer's circle and they all agree that to make such a historical
boo-boo in a book (even if it is for pleasure reading) is not kosher.  Whether
fiction or non-fiction there are those who believe that what is written is
based somewhat in fact.  Thanks to all of this about cows in Virginia, I will
be replacing my sheep as counting animals as I try to doze off tonight..moo.

Sister Mary

P.S.  I'm writing a book.
--
It is within the boundaries of love that you discover life. Enjoy it!


Quoting Ron May <[log in to unmask]>:

> Ok Sister Mary, I apologize for saying people who believe fiction writers
> ought to thoroughly research and be accurate in every detail in a FICTION
> book
> are "nutzoid." I did not think I was singling out anyone in particular.
> However, I refuse to waste my time debating with individuals. Fiction means
> make-believe and if a writer creates an image of Never-Never Land or a
> Neolithic in
> Virginia with domesticated pigs, then that is what fiction is all about. I
> think
> there has been some confusion between fiction and historical ethnography.
> But
> hey, if you want to create a positive image for archaeology in fiction
> books,
> why not write a book yourself?
>
> Ron May
> Legacy 106, INc.
>