Let’s start with the writer of Bond. James Bond.
“Everything you write”—? That sounds ominous, Mr. Fleming…as if there will have to be a lot of it indeed. The last thing you need before starting on your big novel is another formidable obstacle, right?
Don’t stress. Let’s demystify it together in the next three (or four) issues. We’ll take a conceptual overview here, then talk about research-gathering in Writing Rhythm Issue #34. We’ll talk organizing and using it in Writing Rhythm Issue #35. Then—in Writing Rhythm Issue #36, which could be considered an issue about research but could also be the first of many about characters—we’ll cover backstory and why you might want to get to know your players before you write too much about ’em.
Here, in a single phrase, is why we need at least some research. You can’t fake or make up everything; all stories have some basis in the real world. And if you fail to describe that world accurately, you may violate the suspension of belief. Too lazy to research? Just remember, readers may stop reading if your story’s not ringing true.
On CBS This Morning, Author Dan Brown adds another angle on how to think of research. It’s not “write what you know,” he says. It’s:
“Write what you want to know.”
He suggests you learn whatever you always wanted to know, then take “…other people on your learning process through your novel.”
Let’s break pre-writing research down into two components. On the site So You Want To Write (SYWW?), Christopher Canniff discusses “How to do Research for a Novel.”
He explains that all research comes down to direct and indirect experience. His definitions:
· Direct experience is life experience.
· Indirect experience can be studying life [in those occasions] where direct experience is not possible.
Here’s an example from my own material.
I just finished a serial murder mystery in my psychic detective Touch series called “The Snowfall Snuffings.” The killings take place, as the title implies, during snowstorms. For many years my family and I have made trips to nearby mountains in Southern California to enjoy the winter environment, thus I am familiar with snow, getting “snowed in” (an important part of my plotline), the necessity to put chains on tires, etc. I was able to include these details in my tale because I had done them. In other words, I used direct experience to inform me.
Now for the indirect part. I needed the experience of others to give me the background of my fictional serial murder cases, in which the perps freeze their victims to death. I needed to know how that would work, how long it takes, including the symptoms, details about medications designed to deal with long-term frostbite, etc.
Next time I’ll share specific resources for finding and then storing and using information like this…or whatever info you need. But today we’re discussing the idea of researching, not the research itself. And in regards to the idea: control turns out to be a big issue.
In the Center for Fiction article, “Research in Fiction—Necessary but Dangerous,” author Helen Benedict speaks of controlling the amount and use of research, and the fine balancing act this control requires.
· If you’ve applied too much research, you might take the fun out of your made-up world and overwhelm it with facts.
· If you’ve applied too little research, readers may not buy your fictional universe in the first place.
· The trick is to research exactly the facts you need and inject no more or less of those facts than your story demands.
And here’s another school of thought entirely which suggests that you don’t research at all until AFTER you’ve written:
…which is mystery writer Eric Wright’s tip on CBC. Much the same sentiment is reflected by Jeanne Kisacky on Writer Unboxed.
In her article, “Writing Comes Before Research, Or at Least at the Same Time,” Kisacky says, “…at best, writing and research happen in regular alternation, with writing, not research, driving the train…”
In her blogpost “How to Research Your Novel and When to Stop,” J.F. Penn encourages research by whatever means are available, including watching, reading, traveling and even social media. The vital part, she implies, is to know when to stop, because at a certain point, research becomes counterproductive.
Three Warnings Regarding Pre-writing Research
DON’T research until you collapse.
DON’T go down unnecessary rabbit holes (it’s your call when to do it; Writing Rhythm Issue #35 will contain more rabbit hole advice).
DON’T use research to procrastinate from getting to the writing.
You always have access to Christopher Canniff’s first element of research, Direct Experience, the kind of research we already have in our memories. It’s research we can accomplish by simply being silent and taking in the world and the folks in it, listening to real conversation, observing how the morning dew sparkles in the grass, watching people’s body language. Stuff covered in this newsletter starting way back in Writing Rhythm Issue #3, in fact—the one titled, “When People-watching is Homework.”
You have to do homework for Canniff’s second category of research. We’ll get to that in the following issue. Decide for yourself how much research you even want to consider. Or jump right into the story and research later, if that’s your inclination.
Personally, I’d suggest doing at least a modicum (or small quantity) of research prior to writing. In my example, I used Direct Experience, but I needed Indirect Experience research as well. Whatever you do, just be mindful that it stays within reason.
This word was just mentioned, so I’d think just a tiny bit of concentration should bring it back…
What is a modicum?
Action Plan
Hey. It’s the month of Halloween. Want to sink your teeth into my serial-length story about a haunted hunting lodge and the two out-of-towners who stumble across it? Check out The Lodge at Fear Summit, only on Kindle Vella. The first episodes are free.
Next Up:
34) Pre-writing Research: The Gathering. Pre-writing Research 2 of 3. See you in two weeks!
Craig