本論文旨在陳述格拉漢姆•斯威福特的《水鄉》、小川樂的《歐巴桑》以及麥可‧翁達傑的《英倫情人》等三部編史小說所呈現的後現代歷史觀。這三部小說如一面三菱鏡般分別展示了由侷限、修訂至肯定等三種不同的歷史觀點。本論文第一章提出的編史小說理論基礎，旨在支持三位作者經由詮釋其書中人物來呈現往事的方式，並確認人們對任何已發生事件的陳述、解釋與理解，必有其侷限性與不可掌控的偶發性因素存在，因此歷史的修訂在所難免。
第二章討論斯威福特藉《水鄉》點出歷史的侷限性。在《水鄉》中，法國大革命的大歷史論述，與東英格蘭沼澤地區單一家族世代之小歷史論述並陳，作者意圖使書中主角能對其所處之世界有所理解。斯威福特在書中明確地否決了歷史進步論與歷史目的論，推翻了歷史書寫客觀說以及歷史事件可被全盤瞭解的可能性。然而，他也深盼文學得以超越歷史的限制性及消極性，並進而釋放人類於無形無意義的現實中。《水鄉》不但強調儘管我們好像走向歷史的盡頭，但歷史永遠是我們的一部分﹔它更進一步指出，歷史的生機是可在見多識廣、有本有源、且立足於歷史脈絡的故事中重現的。
第三章闡述小川樂的《歐巴桑》所呈現的歷史觀，目的在說明虛構小說或編史小說能夠讓作者說出一些史書無法表達完全、或揭露無遺的事物。小川樂在《歐巴桑》中以較廣的文化面並融入個人經驗，敘述一個移民加拿大的日本家族，遭受二次大戰期間的拘留以及經歷戰後困苦經驗的故事。在國家場景中，書中主角重溫及重述她的過去，並穿插著她的家族歷史，即所謂的小歷史，以及日裔加拿大族群的大歷史。小川樂在《歐巴桑》中，以說故事的方式，藉由主角對往事的重溫及重述，另闢蹊徑，走出一條有別於專斷權威之官方紀錄的另類的歷史。由此可見，無論個人歷史或國家歷史都需要重訪往昔，不斷以不同的角度重新省視並修訂歷史，以使人類在巨創其他族群後，能深刻反省，避免重蹈覆轍，並恢復歷史生機。而說故事的確是一個能夠適度洗滌人類苦難的手段。
第四章以翁達傑在《英倫情人》中的歷史觀為重點。《英倫情人》廣納不同文化及多樣歷史，地理上橫跨歐、亞、非三洲，且涵概各類人種，是各種不同歷史、文化、及人種的集合，也是目前世界全球化的縮影。未來世界在多元文化世界觀與個人身分認同的相輔相成下，雖有諸多紛擾，仍可望日臻美好。《英倫情人》證明了這世上沒有任何單一個人、國家、歷史或文化可以遺世獨立。經由書中人物所揀選的連續一系列文學藝術作品，清楚表明了歷史的範圍已擴展成為全人類所共享的文化全景，且由初民社會相傳至今。翁達傑證實了即使歷史沒有絕對的事實，歷史仍然可貴，因為它是我們文化的一部分。只有靠著口頭或是書面的故事敘述，人類歷史與文化才能公諸於世，廣為人知。因此，文學不但是我們文化的縮影，最終也成為全人類共有的文化資產。
第五章的結論概括了本論文所討論的每位編史小說作者在其作品中所表達的獨特歷史觀。他們殊途同歸地讓我們更加瞭解我們是如何以我們的視野、外貌、及態度成就今日之我。他們為我們呈現的不是一個歷史教訓，而是一幅複雜人性的清晰影像。

This dissertation intends to address the postmodernist view of history as seen through three historiographic metafictional works—Graham Swift’s Waterland, Joy Kogawa’s Obasan, and Michael Ondaatje’s The English Patient. The three novels function as a prism through which different perspectives of history are reflected, refracted and represented, from limitation to revision and to affirmation. Chapter One offers the theoretical assumptions of historiographic metafiction to support the way each author of the respective novel in this dissertation presents the past through his/her personal interpretation of each individual character in the novels, and to affirm the fact that any version of events, any explanation of what has happened, any perception of the past is necessarily limited and contingent, and may therefore need to be revised.
Chapter Two discusses the way Swift sees history as limitation through Waterland. In Waterland, the paralleling of grandes histoires, the French Revolution and the two World Wars, with petites histoires, the lives of an individual family on both the paternal and maternal sides as they were lived in the region of Fenland in East England, is meant for the protagonist to make better sense of the world in which he resides. Through Waterland, Swift ostensibly negates the concepts of progress, teleology in history, objectivity in history writing, and a complete knowledge of historical events. He nevertheless holds his hope that the surpassing power of literature may both transcend the limitations and negativity of history and liberate humans from a faceless, shapeless, and meaningless reality. Waterland emphasizes not only that history is always a part of us even through we seem to be heading toward the end of history, but also that history can be revitalized through informed, guided story-telling in a historical context.
Chapter Three addresses the way Kogawa’s Obasan demonstrates that a book of fiction or historiographic metafiction would enable the author to say something that a history book could not say well or at all, something that history writing is unable to reveal. With its broader cultural perspective and integration of Kogawa’s personal experiences, Obasan tells of the experiences of a Japanese immigrant family in Canada through the Internment during World War II and their postwar hardship in the postwar era. The recalling and telling of the protagonist’s own story, her petite histoire as well as that of the Japanese Canadians, in a national context shows a way out of the tyrannical authority of official records and offers an alternative reading of history through story-telling. History, both personal and national, needs a revisit to, and a revision of, the past so that humans can rectify wrongs and recuperate strength after the catastrophic harm done by some to others. Story-telling offers a revision of history to effect a “proper purgation” of human sufferings.
Chapter Four focuses on Ondaatje’s perspective of history through The English Patient. Embedded in both heterogeneous cultures and diverse histories, crossing the three continents of Africa, Europe, and Asia, and peopled by various races, The English Patient is a conglomeration of different histories, cultures, and races, which epitomizes the present state of globalization. A better future, though weak and vague, may hopefully come by the complementary co-existence of the multicultural world-view and the sense of self-identity. The English Patient proves to us that no individual, no single nation, history, or culture can be self-contained or self-sufficient. The continuous parade of literary and art works chosen by each character manifests that the scope of history has exploded to include a panorama of cultures shared by all and passed on from the pre-historical ages to our contemporary era. Ondaatje affirms the value of history on the assumption that even though there is no universal truth in history, history is nevertheless precious because it is part of our culture. Only by story-telling, orally or literally, can history and culture be made known and explicit to the public. Literature as an epitome of our culture is virtually our communal books and our communal discourse.
Chapter Five, the conclusion, summarizes the way each author of the respective historiographic metafictions sees history as discussed in this dissertation. In one way or another, they have elevated our understanding of how we come to be the sorts of people that we are with our perceptions, outlooks, and attitudes. Instead of telling a history lesson, they portray a clearer picture of who we, in all our complexity, fully are.