Getting published and reading

[WriterDoug]

Many authorities say: Write what you know about. But it works the other way around as well: Know what you write about.

I had an argument with my best friend, about this very same thing. He is a bit of a pessimist at times, stating that becuase I am only in my mid 20's, there is no way I could yet know enough of the world or have the life experience to write a truly wonderful novel.

I went on to explain a number of authors who published young, and I even expressed that I feel this "write what you know" doctrine is a little outdated for the 21st century. Technology is so immediate nowadays, that we can virtually learn everything about everyone, eveyhwere. The only thing missing may still be that actual moment of being there, but even that can be effectively emulated.

It is nothing new anyway.

Novelists who have never been to a war zone in their entire lives have written great war novels.

Historical fiction writers nowadays certainly did not have any life experience prior to the 20th century.

Horror writers rarely murder people, or have worked in forensics / homocide.

I brought to his attention some inspiring words of Henry James on his "Art of Fiction" in which he states his respect for an author who was able to capture a novel merely through one, quick glance of something this author passed by and saw. Experience may be a memory, a desire, the process of learning--just about anything.

To assure relevance to the topic, I will just say to the topic starter:

definitely read, and then write a lot. do not do both at the same time though, unless it really works for you. I recall reading something of yours that sounded suspiciously so much like R. Jordan's WoT that I really raised an eyebrow.

-WD

[SJAB]

Originally Posted by WriterDoug

I went on to explain a number of authors who published young, and I even expressed that I feel this "write what you know" doctrine is a little outdated for the 21st century. Technology is so immediate nowadays, that we can virtually learn everything about everyone, eveyhwere. The only thing missing may still be that actual moment of being there, but even that can be effectively emulated.

Personally I don't think it is outdated. You do write better from knowledge you "know", as in researched well, than from skimming a few pages on the net. The availability of such knowledge often makes for lazy research. Good research is hard, mind numbing, time consuming work. But if you do it correctly it shows in your writing, done badly it also shows.

On a personal note, I found, when writing about a "spinning mule" in a cotton mill, there was only so much I could learn from books. Two days at a working museum taught me a lot more and gave me the "feel" of what it was like to be in that environment.

Yes, writers have written books at a young age, often good books, but with age comes the knowledge of interaction between people of various ages, sexes and races. Things that you don't think twice on, become, over time, a well of information, that can and does work its way into your work.

Take a look at the first novel of any well-known writer, then look at one wrote 10 to 15 years later. Not only has the craft of writing improved, but the way the writer creates his/her characters has deepened. 10 or 15 years of life has had an affect.

[Teresa Edgerton]

Originally Posted by WriterDoug

Technology is so immediate nowadays, that we can virtually learn everything about everyone, everywhere. The only thing missing may still be that actual moment of being there, but even that can be effectively emulated.

You have to be careful with information gained over the internet, however, because it can be extremely superficial, if not downright inaccurate. The web is a good way to find out what questions you want to ask and what books you want to read to become knowledgable on a subject, but it can't replace in-depth book research.

Although even casual internet research is better than none. I remember quite well a story written by an otherwise intelligent and knowledgable member of a writers group I belonged to where she made the glaring error of locating Machu Picchu in a rainforest in a valley -- when even looking up the place in an encylopedia (this was before the web and before Goggle) would have been enough to avoid that particular mistake.

Sometimes, actually being there or actually having been through the thing does provide the really telling details that bring a place or an experience to life on the page. Yes, you may be able to get the same details by reading first person accounts, but there is also the danger of misunderstanding what you read because you don't understand the context -- which is again a reason for not doing slap-dash web research, but consulting as many sources as possible -- and with learning as much as you can about the world at large through general reading -- so that you can acquire that context. Another example from my writers group days: A member wrote a scene in a story based on an old photograph she had seen, assuming it was an example of ordinary public behavior in the 1890s. Other members who knew the time period pointed out that the picture was almost certainly taken for a smutty postcard, the Victorian equivalent of soft-core pornography.

And as another writer in that group said on another occasion, explaining something he had put into a (published) story, that he wished he could take back: "I knew just enough about that subject to get myself into trouble."

I will just say to the topic starter:

definitely read, and then write a lot. do not do both at the same time though, unless it really works for you. I recall reading something of yours that sounded suspiciously so much like R. Jordan's WoT that I really raised an eyebrow.

There is, in fact, nothing wrong with copying writers you admire when you are first starting out. It's one way to experiment with different ideas and techniques, to see which ones work best for you, so that in the course of time you can pick and choose, combine, modify, refine, and eventually develop something that is much more personal and original.

But in order to develop that sort of originality, you need to draw your inspiration from many, many sources, instead of just one or two. It is an interesting fact that SFF stories by people who don't read very much SFF -- instead of all coming out startlingly original -- tend to look depressingly similar.

[Patrick Mahon]

I'd second Teresa's point about the potential risks of web research. In my day job, I'm constantly coming up against people who seem to have read a couple of articles on the web, and then ask a pretty silly question, thinking it is incredibly sophisticated.

[WriterDoug]

of course i would advocate verifying materials on the web. part of my work requires being able to identify a shady source with one that is well-backed and accurate. generally, i like to look for a works cited, or for any way with which I might be able to validate that the material I am reading / viewing is in fact what I really desire.

the Internet may be no less biased or misleading than tv, movies, books, just about anything these days. it is important, no matter what, to be equipped with the skills to spot a good source from a bad one. a bad source always bounces back and hurts an author.

[violetann]

Originally Posted by WriterDoug

the Internet may be no less biased or misleading than tv, movies, books, just about anything these days. it is important, no matter what, to be equipped with the skills to spot a good source from a bad one. a bad source always bounces back and hurts an author.

The internet can be a LOT more biased and misleading than TV, movies and books at least as technical side. TV and movies etc have safe guards from governments and other sources.. They have to make sure things are accurate and not just made up.. at least the none fiction professional ones. The TV networks, publishers, etc are businesses which means: if they do something shoddy or wrong or generally misleading then will get bad reviews etc and not be able to make any more TV shows or books etc. though they do make mistakes biased, etc. may be that’s part of being human we all mess up and make up our minds.
The internet though has no safe guards really. It’s incredibly easy to make a web site and buy a domain name. So just because something has .com or .co.uk at the end of there own site name, doesn’t mean the author is serious. My own site only costs me about £3 per month and it has: huge space and bandwidth. Though I have a yearly domain registration which is about £10 a year if I remember rightly, so anyone can publish anything they want to say for under about £46 a year since there are cheaper places. The people that made that site could just disappear if there writings/site is found to be completely wrong and make a new one, since it is incredibly rare that a site which just holds information to have any real life contact details (other than may be a name and e-mail) or real life company behind it. Partly due to the freaks which are on the net that will steal your personal info if you give too much out, but this gives an example of how TV, Books and movies are different. You normally always have someone to complain at like trading standards etc if it doesn’t do what it is meant to do i.e. you buy a book on mathematics and it says 4 + 2 = 5 or something equally silly, since It doesn’t do the job it was meant to do. Though I do love the internet and I find it use full like someone else said to work out what to research.

I’m quite surprised by the fact that in the writing world under 20s writers are consider so young and it seams from what I’ve read that a lot older people (yes addressing people 30+ as old you can tell my age now lol. I think that’s something to do with personal age the younger you are the further away 30’s and 40’s seam. I’m 18 btw) 25 or 30 braking into the industry and it not being unheard of. I personally found this as quite surprising since I expected like most other industry, your normally expected to be on a run of the ladder at like 18 or getting on it some how. I was quite surprised by this. May be because I’m use to look looking at I.T related career paths, which many good ones you have to be a real young I.T geek to get a very good job in it.