It really depends on the thing, and it's a matter of degree. I haven't lost a parent, for example, but I've experienced grief from other sources enough to be comfortable writing about it. I would have more trouble writing about piloting a plane than about piloting a ship, even though I haven't done either one -- I have more experience on boats to fill in the gaps.
Usually research helps. I'm not a gun nut, but I read a lot about target shooting with air pistols for one story and ended up feeling pretty comfortable -- and I gained insight into what was going on in the story and why the guns were important, which is more crucial. If research doesn't help and there's no theme or imagery to be squeezed from the event, and I can get away with it plot-wise, I skip over it with minimal description. "He landed the plane."
It's easier for me to infuse everything with my own feelings and experiences, but one could go the other way and observe everyone (including one's self) with a certain objectivity. Both approaches have weaknesses and all writers use both to some extent blah blah boilerplate.
I happen to write in a way that leans very heavily on the internal world, so observing the actions of others is less useful (and interesting) to me. Every writer watches behaviour, but behaviour to me is just the visible part of the iceberg. What other people say and write about their experiences is a lot more helpful for the kind of writing I do. Someone with a style that concentrates on externals, body language, etc. will do things differently.
A final corollary to all that is that for a lot of writers, all writing is about your own experiences and none of it is. I don't feel particularly close to things I've written about myself. I identify more with some of my invented characters than with the character of "me" that comes through in my journal and my hamfisted autobiographical writing. I'm not alone in this, from what I read.
You should really go through minisinoo's memories, because she's made tons of very insightful posts on writing, experience, and all that stuff.
I'm going to go check out minisinoo as you've suggested, as I can use all the help I can get. And no, you're definatly not alone in this...I'll tell you what's brought this up for me. I've been re-plugging away at my novel and I'm finding and aura of, non-humanity to some of the characters. Now this would be fine in a fantasy story with dragons and wenches and the like, but I'm looking to write a moral analogy in the guise of a historically-based fantasy fiction, and so the people have to SEEM like they are people. The human condition, I believe is how it's described.
I can do the whole "brooding and sad, yet humour-filled and good-driven" knight because I can relate to that feeling, but some of the other characters are hard to get my mind around, so I figured I would get some pointers. Lady Astelde/Adeline (as she will be known again...), if you've read the book, is particularly difficult to write because of her lack of passion for life, as well as her cold hearted nature.
Usually research helps. I'm not a gun nut, but I read a lot about target shooting with air pistols for one story and ended up feeling pretty comfortable -- and I gained insight into what was going on in the story and why the guns were important, which is more crucial. If research doesn't help and there's no theme or imagery to be squeezed from the event, and I can get away with it plot-wise, I skip over it with minimal description. "He landed the plane."
It's easier for me to infuse everything with my own feelings and experiences, but one could go the other way and observe everyone (including one's self) with a certain objectivity. Both approaches have weaknesses and all writers use both to some extent blah blah boilerplate.
I happen to write in a way that leans very heavily on the internal world, so observing the actions of others is less useful (and interesting) to me. Every writer watches behaviour, but behaviour to me is just the visible part of the iceberg. What other people say and write about their experiences is a lot more helpful for the kind of writing I do. Someone with a style that concentrates on externals, body language, etc. will do things differently.
A final corollary to all that is that for a lot of writers, all writing is about your own experiences and none of it is. I don't feel particularly close to things I've written about myself. I identify more with some of my invented characters than with the character of "me" that comes through in my journal and my hamfisted autobiographical writing. I'm not alone in this, from what I read.
You should really go through minisinoo's memories, because she's made tons of very insightful posts on writing, experience, and all that stuff.
Reply
I can do the whole "brooding and sad, yet humour-filled and good-driven" knight because I can relate to that feeling, but some of the other characters are hard to get my mind around, so I figured I would get some pointers. Lady Astelde/Adeline (as she will be known again...), if you've read the book, is particularly difficult to write because of her lack of passion for life, as well as her cold hearted nature.
In any case, thank you for your insight.
Reply
Leave a comment