Pre-novel research?

AnonymousWriter · Apr 30, 2009

Obviously research plays a large part for all, if not most historical fiction writers. There is always things that we have to find out about our time period or events within them.

But my question is: How much research do you do before you start writing?
Do you do very little and just find out facts you need when you come to that part in the story or do you do most of your research before starting?
Or are there some writers who get their first draft down then go back and research things that they need to know, filling in the gaps on a rewrite?

firedrake · Apr 30, 2009

My first two books are set during WW1 and WW2, respectively.
For the first book: I did initial research on the Royal Berkshire Regiment and their engagements during WW1. Then I did a 'Big Picture' time line. Once I started to write, I'd stop to do research on whatever topic I needed more info on.

The second book was a bit different. I had an idea where I wanted the story to go and did a lot of research beforehand on various RAF fighter and bomber squadrons. I wanted to set the book in places that I know so that dictated which airbases and, therefore, which squadrons I needed to research. I also did a 'big picture' time line. When one of the MCs switched over to the USAAF, I picked the Fighter Group which suited the location and then found a wonderful web-site which gave a day-by-day account of the 4th Fighter Group during the war. As with the first book, I stopped to do research where I needed more information. Plus, my Dad, being a plane, train and bus buff, was able to help me with some of the research, not to mention some of his memories of growing up in England during the war.

Sorry, it's a bit long-winded, but that's how I did it.

cooeedownunder · Apr 30, 2009

There is a saying, write what you know.

I believe write what you know or what interest you so much, you strive to make it real and to do that you need to research the topic or era. I don't outline, so I don't research prior to writing as such.

I normally start writing about what ever it is that interest me and let the charachters take me to where they do and find out things as I need them. I know the area I am writing about very well and have basically been researching it for over 18 years, and still almost daily I seek out more information about that area, the surrounding areas, the people, the society of that time, not only in the country I am in, but events else where in the world that would affect my world, regardless if I use the information.

When you start your research probably has a bit to do if you outline the story prior and if you already have some knowledge of the era but I don't think research stops until the book ends.

firedrake · Apr 30, 2009

cooeedownunder said:
There is a saying, write what you know.

When you start your research probably has a bit to do if you outline the story prior and if you already have some knowledge of the era but I don't think research stops until the book ends.

QFT.

Yup.

donroc · Apr 30, 2009

I started my HF set in 17th century Spain with a rough outline, an historical MC, and some ideas for fictional characters. Next, I did a humongous amount of reading/research for the flavor/verisimilitude as well as biographies of the royal family and other notables. That research gave me more ideas and saved wrong turns.

As I wrote, whenever I had a question about the times, I did more research, which included corresponding with experts.

As mentioned above, I researched until the end.

I am doing the same with the sequel.

Puma · Apr 30, 2009

Hi - One of the possibilities you mentioned was getting the first draft down and then going back and doing the research - I actually did the exact opposite of that - I wrote the first draft based on the research and how that material flowed and then went back and created the fictional story to go with the researched material. It was not easy.

For the most part I do a lot of preliminary research and then do whatever else is necessary as I go along. It's not unusual for me to have a couple day lapse between writing chapters because I'm gathering material and getting the story line worked out.

I do always have a working outline (very much abbreviated) and modify that as I go along with the actual writing. Hope this all helps. Puma

funidream · Apr 30, 2009

Like Donroc, I start with a basic outline and lay down a thick layer of research which includes lots of reading, trips to sights, libraries and museums, and tapping into internet resources.

It is inevitable that during the course of this initial research, I bump into some new information that I end up weaving into the story. When I feel like I "know" my stuff, I start the real writing, and even then, I'm constantly researching.

Once I begin writing, I have built up a collection of books and reference materials. I also work with two computers - one to write on, and one to turn to for internet access.

This is a link to a recent guest blog post I recently wrote about my research process:
http://www.devourerofbooks.com/2009...est-post-and-giveaway-from-christine-blevins/

ishtar'sgate · Apr 30, 2009

AnonymousWriter said:
But my question is: How much research do you do before you start writing?
Do you do very little and just find out facts you need when you come to that part in the story or do you do most of your research before starting?
Or are there some writers who get their first draft down then go back and research things that they need to know, filling in the gaps on a rewrite?

I do tons of research before I begin writing. I don't feel ready to write until I can put myself in my characters shoes and know exactly what their world looks like and what a typical day in their life might be. In general, I don't really think you can plug that in afterward primarily because your story won't take its direction from the place and time but rather have the place and time thrust on it - and that shows.

Inarticulate Babbler · Apr 30, 2009

funidream said:
Like Donroc, I start with a basic outline and lay down a thick layer of research which includes lots of reading, trips to sights, libraries and museums, and tapping into internet resources.

It is inevitable that during the course of this initial research, I bump into some new information that I end up weaving into the story. When I feel like I "know" my stuff, I start the real writing, and even then, I'm constantly researching.

Once I begin writing, I have built up a collection of books and reference materials. I also work with two computers - one to write on, and one to turn to for internet access.

This is a link to a recent guest blog post I recently wrote about my research process:
http://www.devourerofbooks.com/2009...est-post-and-giveaway-from-christine-blevins/

Funny how close our research methods are. The main difference is, I reasearch until a story boils up and then start writing, I research scenes as needed. I walked the Battle Road with my family, while researching the opening scenes to my novel (which is being edited at present

).

Interestingly enough, the novel I'm working on now is in a time we don't know much about. It's been said that all of the archaeological evidence of man from that period could fit into the bed of a pickup truck. It only fascinates me more, and fills my brain with possibilities.

Doogs · May 1, 2009

I tend to proceed in layers.

First layer is summary research. Basically - what happened. This foundation gives me some ideas for start/end points in the story, major events, and some key players.

The second layer is environmental. What was the state of the Roman legions in the 4th century? How did the weapons factories work? How did the imperial bureaucracy function? Principal cities, social mores, etc.

The third layer is the in-depth research into the hows and whys. This involves careful study of primary and scholarly texts, tons of notetaking, and careful thinking.

Once these layers are done and I feel I have a good grasp of the time, events, and characters, I build an outline. This usually starts with a brief line per chapter (e.g. "The Visigoths cross the Danube and things quickly start to suck") just to set the flow of the story. Then I go back and add in detail.

Once I get the first couple of chapters pretty firm in my mind, I start writing. I find if I try to plan every last section of every chapter at the outset, things get stilted and forced. This way I have the general path laid out, and the guideposts I have to hit, but I have some freedom in how exactly the characters move.

When I get to the end of a chapter, I pull back, reassess, and plan the next chapter, and so on and so forth.

angeliz2k · May 1, 2009

I haven't been at this long enough to have a habit, but so far my pattern seems to be: research to construct the story line, then research on the time and place, then start writing and do ad hoc research where needed. There are always little things that pop up along the way that I can't really research ahead of time. For instance, a character picks up a book--I want to give it the right title and author. Or a character insists on making some allusion, and I have to make sure the allusion fits. Then I often have to go back to my original reserach and refresh my memory. I'm still in school, so my poor little brain gets overloaded with school stuff and can't always retain everything it's meant to.

Suse · May 1, 2009

There's no rule of thumb to determine how much/long to research. I work out all the intricacies of my plot first. For example, I had to commit to which of the disputed dates for the Trojan War I was going to accept, and that led to a consideration of how much of a 'world view' to include (did I need to research the Sea Peoples, Hittites, Luwians, etc).

Once I knew my current story very well, I did masses of research. I read every book I could get my hands on about the Mycenaeans and the periods just before and after them. I honestly think I must have hit every website Google found that featured the term 'Mycenaean'. I even ended up on a 'Mycenaean site' that turned out to be a 'Greek holiday' site. I thought, 'Ooh, this is nice'. Clicked something. Up popped a ton of porn, and my PC decided to slow to such an impossible crawl I lost patience trying to cure it. I wiped the hard drive and forgot to save several research folders. That hurt. I use better AV now.

After I've done my preparatory research, I start writing. But I thoroughly agree: the research never stops. How can it? New works are written. New evidence can turn up. Sometimes you make changes to the story. I've got two books to read at the moment. I'm dreading it because mostly they will be full of the same old, but you never know.

DMarie84 · May 1, 2009

I think I start with just a small bit of research--enough that I can get the basic storyline down without making the characters act out of their culture and time.

All the little details, like food, festivals, religion, etc. I'll wait to research. I tend to mark it in my draft and highlight the area that needs more research and detail. I also make a list (added to almost daily) of things that I will need to look up for the revision. Right now I just have the basics for the book.

selkn.asrai · May 1, 2009

Like any history student, research is almost involuntary to me. I gather my multitude of references and get to it. Where the story manifests itself fully, the foundation of the research is usually there. And I seem to expound endlessly from that point on.

The truth is, I don't think I can write more than two lines without researching. It's ongoing.

I find it thrilling.

Inarticulate Babbler said:
\
Interestingly enough, the novel I'm working on now is in a time we don't know much about. It's been said that all of the archaeological evidence of man from that period could fit into the bed of a pickup truck. It only fascinates me more, and fills my brain with possibilities.

Age of Neanderthals and/or Cro-magnons?

Inarticulate Babbler · May 1, 2009

selkn.asrai said:
Age of Neanderthals and/or Cro-magnons?

Yeah, of sorts. Pleistocene Epoch/late Stone Age, modern man (Homo Sapien) is there, Neanderthals make some appearances, and possible a few of the modern-Neanderthals (Homo Erectus Soloensis, only evidence found in Java). What I found fascinting (other than the possible migration over the ice shelf) was that recent discoveries show Stone Age Man had battles on a large scale: formations, leaders, villages with earthworks...etc. Evidence also supports the making and understanding of bows and arrows for tactical advantage--not just the atlatl and long-dart (or launching spear) and knapped knife.

So, well, my mind went off in all sorts of directions.

pdr · May 2, 2009

Direct me...

towards the research/articles etc. please, Inarticulate Babbler, I am always interested in early man.

I was lucky enough to see Ozti the iceman when the exhibition toured Japan and was able to spend a day there, taking detailed drawings and notes. Found the clothes outstanding and his possessions. He was far better equipped than most modern mountain goers.

AnonymousWriter · May 2, 2009

Thanks for all the comments guys. It's good to see such a wide range of differences in each writer's research method. I guess I must try to find the method that works for me, since it seems that everyone works differently.

BravoYankee · May 2, 2009

I wouldn't have started my story if I hadn't had a basic knowledge of the time period I was writing, which I did thanks to lots of history and classics courses. But, the rest of the research kinda just came as I went, looking up things I wasn't quite sure of on the fly. Some things required much bigger chunks of research (i.e. legion organization/history or the Julio-Claudian family tree) but I didn't need to do sizable research up front cause I had a good enough baseline just to get started.

Don't they always say: write what you know? It's true. Makes it much easier.

Inarticulate Babbler · May 2, 2009

pdr said:
towards the research/articles etc. please, Inarticulate Babbler, I am always interested in early man.

I was lucky enough to see Ozti the iceman when the exhibition toured Japan and was able to spend a day there, taking detailed drawings and notes. Found the clothes outstanding and his possessions. He was far better equipped than most modern mountain goers.

I especially liked http://historicaltextarchive.com/sections.php?op=viewarticle&artid=167 on Neolithic warfare. But I've only nicked the tip of the iceberg. There are books listed in that article which I have to investigate.

Doogs · May 2, 2009

BravoYankee said:
I wouldn't have started my story if I hadn't had a basic knowledge of the time period I was writing, which I did thanks to lots of history and classics courses.

I was in the same place with my first book, set during the Second Punic War.

The current WIP? Not so much. My knowledge of the Late Roman Empire was severely lacking, and what I knew of Alaric mostly came by way of a History Channel documentary on the Visigoths (90% of which I've since discovered to be inaccurate). Suffice to say, I found I had to do a LOT more research to get to a point where I felt comfortable starting the story.

BAY · May 2, 2009

Like Doogs I've noticed some errors on the History channel from time to time, but they do reveal a lot of taped footages that are fantastic. I really enjoyed their documentaries on the German POWs in America. One tape showed them getting off a train and marching in perfect formation into the Aliceville camp. The reactions of the American onlookers were interesting to observe too.

AnonWriter-I research until I can picture time and place. (Sometimes that takes way longer than I expected). I think the key is not to let the history overtake the character's story.

BravoYankee · May 3, 2009

Yah, I cringe once in awhile when I watch the Hitler...*cough... I mean, History Channel. Not so much because it seems most of the stuff they show is on WW2, but because I have seen some interesting problems with accuracy every once in awhile.

Granted, some of it is just nit picky details like having J. Caesar's legionnaires wearing lorica segmentata armor, but other things are a bit more annoying because they're glaring inaccuracies.

Oh, and Doogs, I'd invest in a copy of the Oxford Classical Dictionary. It's the greatest resource I've ever had... the reference footnotes alone justify the price tag.

Doogs · May 3, 2009

BravoYankee said:
Yah, I cringe once in awhile when I watch the Hitler...*cough... I mean, History Channel. Not so much because it seems most of the stuff they show is on WW2, but because I have seen some interesting problems with accuracy every once in awhile.

Granted, some of it is just nit picky details like having J. Caesar's legionnaires wearing lorica segmentata armor, but other things are a bit more annoying because they're glaring inaccuracies.

At least WW2 is history. Seems like every time I skimmed the program guide back before we canceled cable, History Channel was showing something on UFOs. UFOs, really? But I must say, Dogfights is probably one of the single greatest documentary series I've ever had the chance to watch.

Oh, and Doogs, I'd invest in a copy of the Oxford Classical Dictionary. It's the greatest resource I've ever had... the reference footnotes alone justify the price tag.

Got it, and I agree, it's a great all-around reference. You want to really blow your mind - check out the Barrington Atlas of the Greek and Roman World. The price is ridiculous, almost impossible to justify, but it's so packed full of detail that my inner map geek squeals with joy every time I crack it open.

Doogs · May 3, 2009

BAY said:
Like Doogs I've noticed some errors on the History channel from time to time, but they do reveal a lot of taped footages that are fantastic. I really enjoyed their documentaries on the German POWs in America. One tape showed them getting off a train and marching in perfect formation into the Aliceville camp. The reactions of the American onlookers were interesting to observe too.

Love the archival footage. I think where History Channel runs into problems is trying to cover a massive topic in, what, 45 minutes? They tend to stick to a very glossed over, almost high-school level of coverage. I have a hard time watching any of their stuff on the ancient world without wanting to hit the TV.

History_Chick · May 3, 2009

I typically write about a period that I love and know a little about. Then I write the story and fill in the details later. If this works or not, I dunno cause I'm not published yet, but here's hopin

Pre-novel research?

AnonymousWriter

firedrake

practical experience, FTW

cooeedownunder

Grateful for the day

firedrake

practical experience, FTW

donroc

Historicals and Horror rule

Puma

Retired and loving it!

funidream

ishtar'sgate

living in the past

Inarticulate Babbler

Pissin' Everyone off, 1 at a time

Doogs

angeliz2k

never mind the shorty

Suse

wants mutant powers

DMarie84

I wish I had a time machine

selkn.asrai

Rawr.

Inarticulate Babbler

Pissin' Everyone off, 1 at a time

pdr

AnonymousWriter

BravoYankee

Inarticulate Babbler

Pissin' Everyone off, 1 at a time

Doogs

BAY

BravoYankee

Doogs

Doogs

History_Chick