The Traitor's Wife: Nonfiction Vs. Historical Fiction

Aishwarya Chawla

When studying historical events, I am inclined to use nonfiction books over historical fiction. During the assignment, I read the nonfiction book 1776 by David McCullough which was about General George Washington and his journey with his soldiers through wins and losses of battles and also shows his greatest win against Cornwallis and Rall. I also read the historical fiction The Traitor's Wife by Allison Pataki which was about Benedict Arnold and his wife Peggy Shippen Arnold, it was told from Peggy's maid Clara's perspective. I preferred the nonfiction book, 1776 by David McCullough over the historical fiction book The Traitor's Wife by Allison Pataki for studying because the information is factual, there's more historical

For example, in The Traitor's Wife, it says, “Beyond that was a small orchard, its trees appearing to hold the first signs of apples. Cherry blossoms bloomed in the May warmth, forming neat columns of shady pathways. The manicured grass, so unlike the wild fields of the farm, was intersected by meandering pebbled walkways, where her ladies must tread when receiving finely dressed visitors. Birdsong pierced the blue sky, as did the aroma of fresh-petaled flowers” (page 14 Pataki). This shows the place where they were which was an orchard but actually, they might have never even gone to an orchard because it's historical fiction. For instance, in 1776 it says, “In Philadelphia, the same day as the British landing on Staten Island, July 2, 1776, the Continental Congress, in a momentous decision, voted to “dissolve the connection” with Great Britain. The news reached New York four days later, on July 6, and at once spontaneous celebrations broke out,” (135 McCullough). This shows that the continental congress “dissolved the connection” with the British July 2 which is a cold hard fact and there's no plot which is messing with the factuality. For example, in The Traitor's Wife, it says, “She cared nothing for Robert Balmer, and in fact had felt relief each time she’d remembered that both he and André were gone. Letting that man kiss her had been foolish and naïve, but it was none of Cal’s business” (page 128 Pataki). This shows how they are developing a plot when they talk about him being naïve and Cal. This takes away from the factual information, therefore, nonfiction books are better for studying than historical