Research tips (again)

Status
Not open for further replies.

Zelenka

Going home!
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Oct 1, 2007
Messages
2,921
Reaction score
488
Age
44
Location
Prague now, Glasgow in November
I generally panic a lot about research, both in fiction and in my academic work. It feels like no matter how much I read, I can never know everything about the period or subject and so I always have this feeling that there's some little detail that I haven't come across and that will derail the whole thing. What I wondered was if my approach to research was perhaps the wrong one and if anyone had a suggestion as to how to structure my research better, so that I might feel a little less stupid about it all?

The way I usually organise myself is to have an idea of what's going to happen for the whole book, read general information for the period, then research more in depth as I come to each chapter. For an example, the first chapter of my (currently rather dreadful) WIP involved a discussion as to the interpretation of dreams, so my reading for that was a lot of literature on Protestant and Puritan ideas on dreaming, church fathers' writings, some classical references.

Next chapter, I need to read up on a couple of specific issues about London, so I have the call numbers jotted down for some books I want to look at in the library, either tomorrow or saturday. Most of my work's done in the library, although I've been in contact with the Temple Church, trying to get hold of some information, and I have a trip planned for just after the New Year to get a general 'feel' for the geographical area, since I haven't been to that part of the country in a while.

I'm kind of torn at the moment because I love my WIP, my MC and the premise of it, as well as the period in general, but I want it to have a chance of being good, and the historical details are really important. (I know that sounds daft - they're always important, but what I mean is, the history of the place and such plays a part in the narrative too).
 

Puma

Retired and loving it!
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Apr 21, 2006
Messages
7,340
Reaction score
1,535
Location
Central Ohio
Quite a while back, Jess, I had a post in Other for a contemporary WIP I was working on. I called the post an infodump because it was set up as a college lecture on geology which I thought readers needed to understand to be able to understand what would happen in my WIP. One of the seasoned veterans on AW, Bufty, asked me in a post whether I hadn't really put all the geologic information in because I needed to understand it. My first reaction was shock at the question, but over time, I came to understand that Bufty's question was spot on.

What I'm getting at is - it's very possible to go overboard with too much research and bog a WIP down with details. If you do a moderate amount of research and your conclusions are supported by reliable sources, you don't have to dig for the minutiae. Readers may wonder about some facts you don't tell them and that's actually good because that means you developed enough interest for them to want to go look or dig up additional information themselves.

Getting bogged down in details is a common pitfall; fear of not being accurate enough is a common malady - as in bodice rippers, leave a bit to the imagination. Puma
 

Doogs

Super Member
Registered
Joined
Aug 2, 2007
Messages
1,047
Reaction score
213
Location
Austin, TX
Website
doogs.wordpress.com
Puma, I think you're dead-on.

Earlier this year, I caved to pressure from the wife and a few friends to send out queries for my novel. It wasn't ready. I know that now and I knew that then (just let myself get talked in the other direction). But I got a request for a partial.

The verdict? Lots of potential, good writing, and too much information. I was so eager for the reader to know everything that I let it get in the way of the story.

Now...what took ten pages to cover takes three. I think my first chapter is much stronger than it was, but I've decided to finish at least one full edit before testing the query waters again.
 

Zelenka

Going home!
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Oct 1, 2007
Messages
2,921
Reaction score
488
Age
44
Location
Prague now, Glasgow in November
Quite a while back, Jess, I had a post in Other for a contemporary WIP I was working on. I called the post an infodump because it was set up as a college lecture on geology which I thought readers needed to understand to be able to understand what would happen in my WIP. One of the seasoned veterans on AW, Bufty, asked me in a post whether I hadn't really put all the geologic information in because I needed to understand it. My first reaction was shock at the question, but over time, I came to understand that Bufty's question was spot on.

What I'm getting at is - it's very possible to go overboard with too much research and bog a WIP down with details. If you do a moderate amount of research and your conclusions are supported by reliable sources, you don't have to dig for the minutiae. Readers may wonder about some facts you don't tell them and that's actually good because that means you developed enough interest for them to want to go look or dig up additional information themselves.

Getting bogged down in details is a common pitfall; fear of not being accurate enough is a common malady - as in bodice rippers, leave a bit to the imagination. Puma

How do you know where the balance lies though? Is it just a case of writing it then seeing what people critique, too much or too little information? At the moment, though I know I have a load of details and I have double checked anything I can double check, I still feel that I'll have done something wrong and so need to keep looking, not so much because I want to have loads of details in the book, but because I feel if I don't check each fact as much as I possibly can, someone will pick me up on it.
 

donroc

Historicals and Horror rule
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Apr 27, 2006
Messages
7,508
Reaction score
798
Location
Winter Haven, Florida
Website
www.donaldmichaelplatt.com
Don't worry, even if you research perfectly, someone will disagree with your take on the historic person or event. Just write the best you can, think of the general reader, and show rather than tell. Just attend a college faculty party and hear the disputes over interpretations and you will see it matters not to the general reading public. The typical reader will accept whatever you write if it is compelling.

www.donaldmichaelplatt.com
 

funidream

Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jan 31, 2006
Messages
247
Reaction score
94
Location
chicago area
gilding a lily

As historical fiction writers, we are by nature fascinated by the detail, and we think everyone is just like us, but they're not - readers are most interested in the story and the characters. My agent mentioned the biggest problem with most of the historicals that come across her desk is they are far too heavy with detail, to the detriment of the story.

All in all, you have to train yourself to find the balance. So instead of being concerned over how complete your detail is, focus on what detail is essential to keep the reader back in time, in your setting and/or advance characterization and plot.

I often catch myself using a crowbar to fit in every little detail about how to heckle flax, or some such thing, and I have to remind myself that the details are there to enhance the story, not the other way around. I'd say about 80% of my research goes toward helping me "know" my time period and characters and and doesn't necessarily make it into the book. Don't worry now about future readers picking up on something you might have gotten wrong or missed - they will, and you can't control that - concentrate on your story, and how your research supports it.

At the HNS conference, someone asked Bernard Cornwell about how much detail to include and he said something to the effect of "I always keep in mind I'm writing entertainment, not a f!@#$%g history book.";)
 
Last edited:

Carmy

Banned
Joined
Dec 8, 2005
Messages
1,654
Reaction score
119
At the HNS conference, someone asked Bernard Cornwell about how much detail to include and he said something to the effect of "I always keep in mind I'm writing entertainment, not a f!@#$%g history book.";)

How true! If the story is entertaining, the MC believable, dates and details accurate, most readers would rather not be overwhelmed with historical information.

Sometimes too much historical information can be a writer's downfall. Marion Zimmer Bradley fell by the wayside in Mists of Avalon but many readers (including writers) praise that novel. Personally, it was the last novel of hers I bothered to read because she flubbed her research when she mentioned my home town.
 

Zelenka

Going home!
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Oct 1, 2007
Messages
2,921
Reaction score
488
Age
44
Location
Prague now, Glasgow in November
As historical fiction writers, we are by nature fascinated by the detail, and we think everyone is just like us, but they're not - readers are most interested in the story and the characters. My agent mentioned the biggest problem with most of the historicals that come across her desk is they are far too heavy with detail, to the detriment of the story.

All in all, you do have to have train yourself to find the balance. So instead of being concerned over how complete your detail is, focus on what detail is essential to keep the reader back in time, in your setting and/or advance characterization and plot.

I often catch myself using a crowbar to fit in every little detail about how to heckle flax, or some such thing, and I have to remind myself that the details are there to enhance the story, not the other way around. I'd say about 80% of my research goes toward helping me "know" my time period and characters and and doesn't necessarily make it into the book. Don't worry now about future readers picking up on something you might have gotten wrong or missed - they will, and you can't control that - concentrate on your story, and how your research supports it.

At the HNS conference, someone asked Bernard Cornwell about how much detail to include and he said something to the effect of "I always keep in mind I'm writing entertainment, not a f!@#$%g history book.";)

That is sort of the ethos I have when I set to writing the book, to give only what's necessary to the plot and to create the atmosphere, that sort of thing, but I found I was told the opposite - that my writing didn't have much of a feel for the era and lacked detail. I based my approach on the kind of detail I'd seen in books I admired or which were similar to my own, which as you've said, don't tend to bog down the narrative in detail, but I don't know if I've overcompensated and taken too much out.

Also, do you think there's a difference between a purely 'historical novel' and a genre novel with a historical setting? For instance I've noticed I get far fewer comments about historical accuracy and detail when the book is a historical fantasy, even if I'm using a genuine setting (as opposed to a made-up or alternate world). My WIP is historical but could also be described as 'horror' I suppose, or supernatural or something like that.
 

pdr

Banned
Joined
Feb 12, 2005
Messages
4,259
Reaction score
832
Location
Home - but for how long?
Actually...

you need to know as much as you want to know to be comfortable writing BUT then you write from that knowledge not about it.

Eg 17thC pistols were matchlock/firelock (same thing) flintlock and wheel lock. Their working actions were slightly different and therefore you need to know that a wheel lock pistol was held flat with the wheel mechanism on top to fire, that the match/firelock needed its cord blown on to a glowing red before firing and that a flintlock pistol is vulnerable to the flint being chipped and therefore won't work if the flint is damaged.

You don't tell your readers all this - the re-enactors will know, the others don't want a history lesson mid-story - but you use the knowledge to position your characters, and in their comments. So A is showing off his new pistol and warns B not to drop it as the flint might chip. Or you describe C as turning his writst to present his pistol in firing position at the highwayman.
And in all three cases you make sure that your man with the pistol is very close to the villain as the pistols don't fire accurately over more than a very short distance. You show the reader what you know but only if necessary and you never tell them all you know.
 

ishtar'sgate

living in the past
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Aug 23, 2007
Messages
3,801
Reaction score
459
Location
Canada
Website
www.linneaheinrichs.com
I love research and go to the same lengths you do to get it right. I go about it a little differently, though. I do all my research up front and leave none of it until later because it bogs down my writing if I have to stop to do further research. Obviously, I don't remember everything but I go over my research until I am so familiar with the period, I feel as if I'm there. It may be an odd way to go about it but when I reach the point in my research when I mentally exist in the period and can operate as a citizen of the time, I start to write. If I know I'm going to reach a scene where I'll need information I don't already have, I get the information before I begin. That's the only way I can keep it seamless which, for me, is the key to invisible research that isn't an info dump but rather a way to make the period come alive to readers.
Linnea
 

Zelenka

Going home!
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Oct 1, 2007
Messages
2,921
Reaction score
488
Age
44
Location
Prague now, Glasgow in November
you need to know as much as you want to know to be comfortable writing BUT then you write from that knowledge not about it.

Eg 17thC pistols were matchlock/firelock (same thing) flintlock and wheel lock. Their working actions were slightly different and therefore you need to know that a wheel lock pistol was held flat with the wheel mechanism on top to fire, that the match/firelock needed its cord blown on to a glowing red before firing and that a flintlock pistol is vulnerable to the flint being chipped and therefore won't work if the flint is damaged.

You don't tell your readers all this - the re-enactors will know, the others don't want a history lesson mid-story - but you use the knowledge to position your characters, and in their comments. So A is showing off his new pistol and warns B not to drop it as the flint might chip. Or you describe C as turning his writst to present his pistol in firing position at the highwayman.
And in all three cases you make sure that your man with the pistol is very close to the villain as the pistols don't fire accurately over more than a very short distance. You show the reader what you know but only if necessary and you never tell them all you know.

OK, I get that, and that makes me feel better about a scene I have later on (once I actually get out of London and get to start shooting things), as that was sort of how I was going to tackle it, but I'll make sure I don't have my MC explain out why the stuff is happening as it is. (It's first person POV so the temptation is always there, perhaps more so than in third POV where you'd be just getting on with the action).

I think I'm going to think of this the same way I used to approach my tours down south - no matter how sure you were of facts and how accurate your research, there were people who took delight in trying to argue or finding flaws. I used to just laugh them off at work (as 99.9% of the time they were talking rubbish and even if they were right, they were deliberately trying to make someone look stupid and themselves look better, rather than offering decent criticism), so I'm going to try and stop being afraid of them in my writing as well. I have a story to tell. :D

I love research and go to the same lengths you do to get it right. I go about it a little differently, though. I do all my research up front and leave none of it until later because it bogs down my writing if I have to stop to do further research. Obviously, I don't remember everything but I go over my research until I am so familiar with the period, I feel as if I'm there. It may be an odd way to go about it but when I reach the point in my research when I mentally exist in the period and can operate as a citizen of the time, I start to write. If I know I'm going to reach a scene where I'll need information I don't already have, I get the information before I begin. That's the only way I can keep it seamless which, for me, is the key to invisible research that isn't an info dump but rather a way to make the period come alive to readers.
Linnea

I try to do all my research first but it's just not practical with me. I outline very carefully but there is always some leeway once I start writing the chapter, so other things crop up that I didn't anticipate and that need checked. For an example, I decided to add a scene in the Temple Church, London, and I just needed to check a few details about it, get the name of the Master in 1645, whether there was a reader, if anything odd was going on that I might use, that sort of thing. I suppose it does interrupt the flow of my writing but at the same time, it's given me a few nice little incidents I hadn't known about that I might now work in.
 

funidream

Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jan 31, 2006
Messages
247
Reaction score
94
Location
chicago area
so I'm going to try and stop being afraid of them in my writing as well. I have a story to tell. :D

That's the attitude! Tell the story.

I research a ton upfront, and also as I go along - I always find that there is something I don't know. And just how a character can pop up out of nowhere and become significant, sometime you run a cross a tasty little historical tidbit or event of info that seems to be tailor made for your story.

Speaking of historical events - here's me, Grammy Chris with my first grandchild born December 16th, meet Gloria Aghunopua Momoh (my son-in-law is Nigerian, and Aghunopua is Nigerian or "pure heart") We have all taken to calling her Glory.

Glory%26Grandma-1.jpg
 

Zelenka

Going home!
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Oct 1, 2007
Messages
2,921
Reaction score
488
Age
44
Location
Prague now, Glasgow in November
That's the attitude! Tell the story.

I research a ton upfront, and also as I go along - I always find that there is something I don't know. And just how a character can pop up out of nowhere and become significant, sometime you run a cross a tasty little historical tidbit or event of info that seems to be tailor made for your story.

Speaking of historical events - here's me, Grammy Chris with my first grandchild born December 16th, meet Gloria Aghunopua Momoh (my son-in-law is Nigerian, and Aghunopua is Nigerian or "pure heart") We have all taken to calling her Glory.

Congratulations. She looks very content there! :D
 

Drasheny

Registered
Joined
Sep 23, 2007
Messages
41
Reaction score
9
Location
Amongst soybeans and steeples
I'm so glad this question was raised.

I agree because you can get trapped into too much telling about your extensive research and not enough showing.

Well, you have to do enough research to be able to show properly too. I don't want to info dump or clog my writing with irrelevant details, of course. (At this point that's far from the problem.) I enjoy researching also, but sometimes I like to plunge ahead with the writing, telling myself I'll fill in details later. With this method, I get discouraged with my gaping holes of ignorance. I just like to have a lot of options when I write. If I want to describe my MC's agitated state of mind, do I describe her cluttered desk? (Cluttered with what?) Or does she fidget with her clothing? (What is she wearing?) It's like...I feel slightly less stupid with the clothing, so that's what I'm stuck with. It doesn't make for a very enjoyable writing experience.

So, no advice...just sympathizing.
 

a_sharp

Somebody give me an A
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Aug 23, 2007
Messages
673
Reaction score
126
Location
Portland...in the rain
Makes me wonder about Ken Follett's dip (or re-dip) into 14th Century England with his new novel, World Without End. Here's a reader's review:
When I read the original book, Pillars of the Earth, many years ago, I enjoyed the book, I would like to have seen a sequel.

Now that the sequel, World Without End, is here, I think that it needs to go back to the editing room--for a bit of a reality check--a 14th century reality check.

When one reads a historical novel, one enjoys suspending reality--going back to the time, the era, the feeling of being in that time. In this novel, Follett has forgotten that his characters live in the 1300s, and not the 21st century. He jerks the reader away from the 1300s, by giving his characters 21st century insights and personalities, and by injecting 21st century value orientations and socio-politicical awareness that would have been out of place, and are totally historically inaccurate.

For example, The casual way that the elder sister of Caris is shown to be accepted in her town, despite an illigitimate pregnancy--and, the description of Wulfric as "hot", totally disrupt a reader's immersion into 14th century life. Those are just two examples of the rupture of the time, taking the reader back to the future.

I also think that these kinds of 21st century insight are given only to the women in the novel, while the men are portrayed as slightly more intelligent than a block of wood.

I think that I would have enjoyed the book more had there been more careful attention to the details that make a work of fiction a seamless work in which one could immerse oneself without the continuous disruptions that distract a person from the 14th century back to our own time.
Sounds like the renowned Mr. Follett's genre leap left one student of history out in the cold.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.