Les séries historiques entre la fiction et le réel : quand les scénaristes rivalisent avec les historiens

Cet article explore les liens entre les récits que construisent les historiens dans leurs livres et ceux que nous proposent les séries télévisées historiques afin de mettre en lumière comment les seconds peuvent concurrencer les premiers. Sa première partie montre les atouts dont disposent les auteurs de fictions télévisées pour traiter du passé de manière particulièrement vivante et riche, plus encore qu’au cinéma. Sa deuxième partie établit que les séries dites historiques relèvent davantage d’un travail de mémoire que d’histoire puisque justement le passé est saisi comme vivant dans une démarche où l’affect l’emporte sur la raison. Sa troisième partie essaie de définir ce que serait une série véritablement « historienne », c’est-à-dire construite selon un regard similaire à celui que l’historien porte sur l’objet de son étude.This article explores the links between the narratives that historians construct in their books and the narratives proposed by historic television series in order to bring to light how the latter can compete with the former. Its first part shows the assets at the disposition of authors of televised fictions to deal with the past in a particularly rich and vivid way, even more so than cinema. Its second part establishes that so-called historical series often draw from a work of memory rather than of history, precisely because the past is understood as living in an approach where affect wins out over reason. Its third part attempts to define a series that could be considered truly “historian”, which is to say constructed according to a perspective similar to that of historians towards their objects of study

Les séries historiques entre la fiction et le réel : quand les scénaristes rivalisent avec les historiens

This article explores the links between the narratives that historians construct in their books and the narratives proposed by historic television series in order to bring to light how the latter can compete with the former. Its first part shows the assets at the disposition of authors of televised fictions to deal with the past in a particularly rich and vivid way, even more so than cinema. Its second part establishes that so-called historical series often draw from a work of memory rather than of history, precisely because the past is understood as living in an approach where affect wins out over reason. Its third part attempts to define a series that could be considered truly “historian”, which is to say constructed according to a perspective similar to that of historians towards their objects of study