You know cat, you keep bringing up these "Rules of Fiction" as if it's commonly accepted and known. You state these rules as fact. So much so, you seem to imply that anyone who isn't aware of these Laws as ignorant heathens
However, after following quite a few of these threads, I'm baffled, who governs these rules? Who came up with them? And lastly, what would you have people do to the heretics that violate your rules?
Oh, Lord. Rules of fiction? Again: Philip Roth starts out with a fantastic premise that Lindbergh wins the election in 1940 against FDR and proceeds from there with history that never happened. Dan Brown starts with a premise that Jesus married Mary Magdalene and proceeds to distort known recorded history. (Actually, he starts from the end, in the 21st century, but let's never mind that.) You see no problem with that? If you read historical fiction, the literary kind, you'd see and acknowledge that certain rules of, let's call it, decency are being followed, even if they are unwritten. The author is free to build plots around known historical events, respecting the foundations of known history. Paranoid conspiracy theories, revisionist history, such as this book, are by and for the unlearned, unread fools, me thinks. In the end, when writing historical fiction literary authors (as opposed to hacks)have generally respected what's known and invented around that, meditated around that and mused around that. No one, to my knowledge has written down these rules, but unless you are writing fantasy or a dystopia, your readers expect you to follow them. Makes sense? No? It's FICTION, people!
I don't want to flame you, or insult you, m'Lord, but this is close to a flame, isn't it?! But to answer your question, if I were an editor, I wouldn't publish them. But in publishing and cultural matters nowadays, economics trump aesthetics, don't they. It's the lowest common denominator that wins. Garth Brooks vs Kieran Kane. Dan Brown vs Alexander Hemon. Sell and sell more, the crowd calls out for more, as the song goes. It's just too bad that we no longer care to recognize that there are levels of cultural products and that we sniff at anyone who disses popular culture. We measure quality by quantity. *5% of everything is crap says Sturgeon's Law, and ifit'spopular there is something wrong with it said wisely one of cat's relatives.
I thought this forum was a place to reflect on these things and not just follow the basest emotions and keep declaring that Eddie Van Halen, say, is this century's Mozart.