In this intention, it fits to stand out that this book of Lukcs is inserted in a context demarcated for the revolution idea and, therefore, the idea nothing has of abstract utopian. However, some warnings and certain points of Lukcs can be recouped and be problematizados in the reading of romances that if present as historical. A first warning would be of that, to judge the rightness of the romance, it does not fit to use as criterion the degree of historical allegiance. It warns Lukcs, also, that many narratives disclose to a type of author bitter taste and resented by the failure of the bourgeois revolutions, what takes literature to scrumble it the vision centered in the elites. With this, during the historical process, some writers start to represent the separate hero of the popular life; the daily life of the people appears then as it chats banal disentailed of a historical statute. Finally, valley to recoup the most excellent warning made for Lukcs. For it, in the vision of Of Landmark (1997), cannot have separation between romance and historical romance.
Already for Edgar De Decca (1997), of the historical point of view, the historiografia and the romance had been born together, in century XVIII, for bias of the iluminista thought. However, throughout century XIX it is that history and the romance if distanciaram, thus establishing the separation between truth and fiction. The historical research, its theories and methodologies, and the emancipation of the man as subject, place it as protagonist of its proper history. In these same bases, also appear the romance, with the idea of that the man, only it, is the owner of its proper destination. Thus, as much the historiografia as the romance has, since its sprouting, the same ideal. However, second Of Decca (1997), the difference between historiografia and romance are not in what they pursue, but in the way to investigate such objectives.