Wow.
This is
just ridiculously late, isn’t it? I
think this may be the longest I’ve ever gone without posting something
here. For all of you regular readers, I
am so, so sorry (occasional, sporadic readers—I regret nothing!). In the past couple weeks I’ve been trying to
finish the fourth Ex book, plus traveling for cons and events. This week the third book, Ex-Communication,
came out everywhere so it’s just been kind of a whirlwind.
But enough
about my whiny excuses. Let’s look into
a new topic...
A question
came up the other day about research.
How much do you do? How much do
you need to do? How much of it needs to
go into your book?
It’s tough
to pin down how much research is right because—odd as it may sound—getting the
facts right is such a subjective thing.
There are times I need to get things right and there are times I need
to... well, make stuff up.
Here’s a
couple of guidelines I use when doing my own research.
Story Always Comes First
Truth
to be told, when I sit down to write a first draft I don’t do a lot of research. I don’t worry about what town George
Washington was in on May 31st, 1769, what deck the first class galley was
located on the Titanic, or how tall Alexander the Great’s favorite horse
stood in cubits.
To be
blunt, none of that matters. Not in a first draft. If I’m going to get
hung up on page eight about whether or not Einstein’s maid was right or left
handed, well... I’m not going to get very
far.
I also
shouldn’t try to reverse-engineer stories to facts. I don’t decide “wow, I’d like to do a story
about the American Revolutionary War” and spend a month looking stuff up and
waiting for anything to jump out at me.
I do
research to add to the story, not to build the foundation with it. So I need a story first, research second.
Well, not
really...
Character Comes Second
I’m going
to say something now that may annoy some of you, but it really needs to be said.
There are
stupid people in the world. A lot of
them. To be honest, there are matters
we’re all stupid about. There are
aspects of religions, sciences, history that we know nothing about. I know there’s lots of stuff I know nothing
about, and the vast majority of folks are the same way.
Some of
these stupid, uneducated people are going to show up in our stories.
It’s
tempting to have everyone get everything right in a story. They understand every reference, know the
complete history of every nation on Earth, comprehend every bit of jargon or slang. The truth is though,
people get stuff wrong all the time.
There are people whose only knowledge of firearms comes from Schwarzenegger movies,and there are folks who
got most of their medical knowledge from House.
For the longest time, most of my investigative skills came from the
Three Investigators and the Hardy Boys, with some fine tuning from Scooby
Doo. This is just human nature.
As a
writer, it’s important for me to understand what a character will know and what
they won’t (and what they might “know” instead). So there’s going to be a lot of times in my
writing where research gets tossed aside.
I don’t want to discard it, but I need to understand there are times
research just isn’t relevant. Because if I want believable characters, some of them are going to have to be stupid
characters. Or at least, uneducated in
several fields.
Fifteen Minutes or Less
As a few
thousand people have observed, one of the amazing things about the internet is
just how much information is on it. It’s
hit the point that most of us are more amazed when we can’t find
something online.
Which
probably makes for a good rule of thumb.
If I can spend a solid fifteen minutes searching for something online
and find no sign of it (Cleopatra’s bra size, for example), there’s a good
chance very few other people are going to know the answer to that, either.
Keeping
that in mind...
Know What You Don’t Know
There’s an
old chestnut that in any situation there’s what you know, what you know you
don’t know, and what you don’t know you don’t know. The last one is almost always what gets you
into trouble.
The trick
here is that I at least have to have enough knowledge to know what I don’t
know. For example, any time I write
about a field I’m not familiar with, I feel safe saying there’s a lot of slang and specialist terms used by people in that field. So there’s a bit of figuring here about how
many people will know that factoid I can’t find.
For
example, I don’t know much about black-ops security password required lengths,
but--by their very nature--neither do a lot of other people. On the other hand, I also don’t know a lot of
military nicknames for different ranks and jobs, but between active and reserve
there are over two million people in the U.S. Armed Forces, so that’s a much larger
potential audience who will know if I screw something up.
It’s A Trap!
Probably
the best guideline I can offer. There’s
a point where research becomes an excuse not to do any actual work. Some people use “research” as an excuse to put off writing for another day or two.
Or a week. Or a month. I know a few folks whose writing has come to
a dead halt because they need to do more research. Some times it’s research into history or weapons or a certain town square.
Other times it’s research into better ways to structure their story or how
to establish character.
Just
remember that first rule of thumb up above.
I need to have a story first.
Until I have at least a crude, bare-bones draft to work from... I don’t
have anything.
Until then,
go write.
Thanks Pete, I've been hanging out for this one, very helpful.
ReplyDeletePersonally I'm at the stage of filling out a story with details and tend to get easily distracted with research. I understand from my visual arts background how important leaving unnecessary details out of the composition is to making it strong and focussed. I'm still working on applying that to my writing.
Cheers.
Not totally related, but I would love to get your take on this article:
ReplyDeletehttp://www.slate.com/articles/arts/culturebox/2013/07/hollywood_and_blake_snyder_s_screenwriting_book_save_the_cat.single.html
Awesome!
ReplyDeleteHey, Midas,
ReplyDeleteSorry it's taken me so long to get back to you on this.
I think the article makes a lot of great points, and they're points I've tried to make here again and again. There are some rules to writing, but a lot of things are unique to each writer and story.
Snyder wrote a book of guidelines and a bunch of people started following them as absolute, unbreakable rules. Worse yet, they weren't the creative people, but the money people who felt they now understood how a story "should" be done. So lots and lots of writers were forced to follow this formula because... well, that's what the guys paying them said to do.
So... that's my take.