Write what you don't know.

[Paul Whybrow]

When starting out as writers, we're advised to write about what we know. This makes sense, though carries the danger of our early stories being overly autobiographical.

Writing about what we don't know stretches our abilities, needing lots of research if we're not going to make colossal errors that knowledgeable readers will pounce upon. In the last couple of years, I've needed to fact-check such subjects as poisoning, autopsies, stone babies, mummification, American Civil War battles and covert surveillance techniques.

It sometimes needs hours of researching to locate a detail that will be read in a few seconds.

In the last couple of weeks, I've been finding information about steam trains—how they operate, and more particularly what was known as The Beeching Cuts. Named after the bureaucrat who wrote reports on making the British railway network more cost-effective, it resulted in 55% of stations and 30% of route miles being removed. This effectively isolated many rural communities. The replacement bus services were unpopular and swiftly disappeared, leading to the rise of car ownership.

I need to know about choo-choo trains, as I'm writing a short story to enter for the Dragonfly Tea Competition.

This is free to enter, with prizes of £1,500, £750 and £500. I read last year's winning entry, (link on the site) noting that the author included a tea stall in the narrative which symbolised the healing power of tea. Inspired by this, I intend to have my locomotive driver brew up on the footplate of a train he's collecting from a line slated for closure, driving it into storage at a central depot. The theme for the competition is Journeys, and my protagonist will also be making a journey into his memory while he drives the loco to its fate.

I now know more about steam trains, how to tackle gradients and curves on lines and government transport policy than I'd have thought possible.

What have you written about, that needed tons of research?

 

[James Marinero]

Generally I stick to writing about what I know and exploring those boundaries. However, I think it was in the novel 'Saturday' that Ian McEwan wrote about a brain surgeon's day. McEwan actually attended brain surgery operations to 'get under the skin' of the subject...

The difficulty of writing in new areas is fact checking and actually getting an authority to read your work and correct it. One can do loads of research and still get it wrong. In 'Gate of Tears' I wrote about an air battle but was lucky enough to find a Falklands war vet who had flown Harriers. He put me right on several points, but there was a flip side too. I'd written about some modern fighter aircraft maneuvers (this spelling checker like us eng) that he was unaware of, such as the Kulbit (essentially a somersault of the plane). This clip is really something (sorry if boring for many) and more more interesting IMHO than a video of the inside of someone's skull...

 

[Katie-Ellen]

Most recently, the history of the Gas Street Basin. All sorts of things, some new, some vaguely known before but needing detail and checking; the druids showing their behinds to the Romans at the Awre/Noose on the Severn, as the cavalry of Aulus Plautius was swept away by the bore wave while out chasing Caractacus. Legends via Geoffrey of Monmouth, contemporary police procedural. The core is drawn from close to home, as with so much fiction writing, but a story needs clothing and if it ain't autobiography, and even if it is, there's going to need to be research.

The thing to beware of is not to overdo it, and this:

'Somebody is boring me. I think it's me', Dylan Thomas.

 

[Robinne Weiss]

Generally I stick to writing about what I know and exploring those boundaries. However, I think it was in the novel 'Saturday' that Ian McEwan wrote about a brain surgeon's day. McEwan actually attended brain surgery operations to 'get under the skin' of the subject...

The difficulty of writing in new areas is fact checking and actually getting an authority to read your work and correct it. One can do loads of research and still get it wrong. In 'Gate of Tears' I wrote about an air battle but was lucky enough to find a Falklands war vet who had flown Harriers. He put me right on several points, but there was a flip side too. I'd written about some modern fighter aircraft maneuvers (this spelling checker like us eng) that he was unaware of, such as the Kulbit (essentially a somersault of the plane). This clip is really something (sorry if boring for many) and more more interesting IMHO than a video of the inside of someone's skull...

I SO want to fly one of those! You can bet that pilot is grinning like mad.

 

[Robinne Weiss]

Yeah, the key with research is to gather absolutely massive amounts of information, then include just a hint of it in the story. Otherwise it sounds like a school report.

 

[James Marinero]

Yeah, the key with research is to gather absolutely massive amounts of information, then include just a hint of it in the story. Otherwise it sounds like a school report.

I could be guilty of that, but hopefully I'm improving book by book...

 

[Katie-Ellen]

Generally I stick to writing about what I know and exploring those boundaries. However, I think it was in the novel 'Saturday' that Ian McEwan wrote about a brain surgeon's day. McEwan actually attended brain surgery operations to 'get under the skin' of the subject...

The difficulty of writing in new areas is fact checking and actually getting an authority to read your work and correct it. One can do loads of research and still get it wrong. In 'Gate of Tears' I wrote about an air battle but was lucky enough to find a Falklands war vet who had flown Harriers. He put me right on several points, but there was a flip side too. I'd written about some modern fighter aircraft maneuvers (this spelling checker like us eng) that he was unaware of, such as the Kulbit (essentially a somersault of the plane). This clip is really something (sorry if boring for many) and more more interesting IMHO than a video of the inside of someone's skull...

Fantastic machine.

 

[Paul Whybrow]

Certainly, giving too much information has a deadening effect on the reader's engagement with a story. If it becomes an obstacle to navigate around, interrupting the flow, then take some facts out—we're not giving a lecture!