WRITE ABOUT WHAT YOU ... NOOOOO!! Sherry Ashworth
One of the most puzzling pieces
of advice I was ever given came from an editor some years ago. Think of the book you’d like to read, she
said, and write that!
Even now, as I type those words,
my head spins. What kind of books do I
like to read? Books that tell me
something I didn’t know before. Novels
set in countries I’ve never been to.
Characters that have the type of personalities that I’ve never explored until
now. A set of circumstances I’ve never
met, or a situation that has never occurred to me. For example, one of my top reads recently was
Jeffrey Eugenides’ Middlesex, which
ticks all of the above boxes.
Also, the editor’s advice seemed
to conflict with that age-old writer’s mantra – write about what you know. If I know about something – if I know about
something VERY well – I might be an authority on it, but I am inevitably bored
with it and want to escape. That’s not
the book I want to read! When I write
fiction I prefer to set myself a problem, to create a situation where I don’t
know the outcome, so that I can resolve it alongside my reader. It’s important that neither of us get bored.
And yet. The novel I’m reading at the moment is
Elizabeth’s Gaskell’s Wives and Daughters.
I chose it because it
offered me familiarity. Although I’d not
read it before, I know enough of Mrs Gaskell to be certain about what I would
find. A simple, slower England, finely
analysed characters, gentle comedy, masterful storytelling and most important of
all for me right now, the portrayal of a whole world in which I could become
fully absorbed. I wanted a novel that
would be a companion for me, one that didn’t demand too much, that didn’t test
me but entertained me, that would hold my hand through some interesting
personal times. And Mrs Gaskell – you did
it! Wives
and Daughters is all those things.
So I’ve been re-thinking my
editor’s advice. Sometimes when we read
we don’t want a novel that turns a reader into Scott of the Antarctic. We want a novel that comforts and
reassures.
Sometimes a familiar or nostalgic
setting can do that for us. Or a story
where we can feel fairly certain that the outcome will comprise the heroine
walking off into the sunset with Mr Right.
At one time I also thought that
authenticity was crucial in a novel – to write it, you had to have lived
it. Now I’m not too sure. I’ve read too many novels which have been the
result of meticulous research rather than experience, and they convince
absolutely. I give you Hilary
Mantel! I’ve learned you can decide what
you want to know, find out about it, and then write the book you want to read
about it!
So in fact that’s what I’m doing
now, or will be doing when my writing life resumes its natural rhythms. I will return to my research into transatlantic
steamships in the 1860’s. If any of you
know anything about them, please get in touch!
I’m actually writing as I research, because that way I hope to get the
freshness of discovery into my writing, and also avoid the trap of the research
that becomes an end in itself.
So I’m not so much writing about
what I know, as writing about what I’m finding out. And reading and writing pretty much
simultaneously, writing the book that I’m actually reading!
Comments
I think you can convert research into something convincing by always, always filtering it through what you know about people. For instance: research will often give you the rules people were supposed to follow - but people rarely follow rules all that strictly.
It's a bit like an artist copying a photo. A good artist will use their experience to add the third dimension that's missing. An artist not quite so good will copy the flat areas of light and shade in the 2-D image, and the result will be distorted.
Nice post, thanks.