The Scarecrow
Yeah, I just can't let go of these Oz-themed entries, but they really have been inspiring me to do some creative thinking. Today, the Scarecrow. For me, he represents research. For while I do house an enormous amount of utterly useless information and trivia in my brain, I still have to research my books.
Some people do all their research beforehand. I'm usually too impatient and research as I go. In general, I tend to "fudge" my research a tiny bit. No, I'm not talking about lying, cheating, or otherwise putting in bad information, I'm talking about choosing my characters wisely. For instance, if I have a choice to make between a heroine who is a comparative religion professor (my main character in January 2007's BLOOD SON) and a chemistry professor, I will choose to make her a comparative religion professor because I am considering returning to university for a PhD in comparative religion . . . and I do all my "fun," downtime reading in that. Chemistry? Not so much. Anyway, thus in research, I tend to choose characters where I already have some pre-existing strength or I have relatives or dear friends with that strength. Granted, THE ROOFER was full of hitmen, so take from that what you will. :-)
One word of caution about the Scarecrow. And I learned this the hard way. Sometimes you do not know what you do not know.
Huh?
While I have a wonderful editor, and in turn have had mostly great copyeditors, sometimes an error slips through the cracks. And it nearly always turns out to be something I did not know that I did not know. For instance, in TRACE OF INNOCENCE, the main character has a recollection of her mother planting bulbs in her garden. In spring. Apparently, according to my brilliant and knowledgable about almost everything mother, you don't do that. I live in a tropical climate, so what do I know? I also don't garden (any time I have had a garden, it's been vegetables, not flowers). My guess is it didn't jump out to my editor, nor to the copyeditor. It was a single line. And I didn't RESEARCH it, because I didn't know what I didn't know.
So that little lesson is a word of advice. Be really careful, Scarecrows. Sometime you don't know what is brains . . . and what is straw. Anyone with some research advice or stories they wish to share?
Some people do all their research beforehand. I'm usually too impatient and research as I go. In general, I tend to "fudge" my research a tiny bit. No, I'm not talking about lying, cheating, or otherwise putting in bad information, I'm talking about choosing my characters wisely. For instance, if I have a choice to make between a heroine who is a comparative religion professor (my main character in January 2007's BLOOD SON) and a chemistry professor, I will choose to make her a comparative religion professor because I am considering returning to university for a PhD in comparative religion . . . and I do all my "fun," downtime reading in that. Chemistry? Not so much. Anyway, thus in research, I tend to choose characters where I already have some pre-existing strength or I have relatives or dear friends with that strength. Granted, THE ROOFER was full of hitmen, so take from that what you will. :-)
One word of caution about the Scarecrow. And I learned this the hard way. Sometimes you do not know what you do not know.
Huh?
While I have a wonderful editor, and in turn have had mostly great copyeditors, sometimes an error slips through the cracks. And it nearly always turns out to be something I did not know that I did not know. For instance, in TRACE OF INNOCENCE, the main character has a recollection of her mother planting bulbs in her garden. In spring. Apparently, according to my brilliant and knowledgable about almost everything mother, you don't do that. I live in a tropical climate, so what do I know? I also don't garden (any time I have had a garden, it's been vegetables, not flowers). My guess is it didn't jump out to my editor, nor to the copyeditor. It was a single line. And I didn't RESEARCH it, because I didn't know what I didn't know.
So that little lesson is a word of advice. Be really careful, Scarecrows. Sometime you don't know what is brains . . . and what is straw. Anyone with some research advice or stories they wish to share?
posted by Erica Orloff at 7:00 AM
9 Comments:
Here's my take on research: Often, a little dab'll do ya. I'm not suggesting that anyone lie or cheat or put in bad information (yes I am) but, many times, a few telling details are all it takes. For example, a while back the PI character I'm writing about needed to gain access to some security tapes at Wal-Mart. I consulted a former Wal-Mart Loss Prevention Associate, got enough info to make everything sound real, and then made up the rest. The security office I invented probably doesn't remotely resemble the real thing, but it works in my fictional world and that's all that matters. I mean, how many readers will know that Wal-Mart doesn't really have microphones in the produce department? Maybe they do, maybe they don't. In the world I created they do, and the telling details I got from research added to the verisimilitude.
It all goes back to the wizard, pushing buttons and pulling levers to create an illusion. If we can keep our readers in what John Gardner calls "the fictional dream," we can make them believe anything.
Well, except that anyone would plant flower bulbs in the Spring. :)
Jude:
LOL! Sure, rub it in! Spring-time bulbs! They bloom in the winter then. ;-)
I agree, by the way, with your take on research. And, as you said, it's transporting people to the make-believe world. I know when i was researching my Billie Quinn books, I was worried because the REAL world of criminalists is NOTHING like CSI, and I presumed fans of the show would freak. I mean, CSI people simply do not investigate. They gather evidence (the techs) and they analyze it in a lab. They are not out there with guns interviewing suspects. BUT, the shows work (I don't watch them, but zillions of fans do), and people are transported.
I tend to research al I go as well. I love research but sometimes I just have to get writing. I totally enjoyed researching demons and Arch-angels for my new series. I found out some interesting stuff.
But then sometimes I will have to research an item or weapon to move my storyline along.
Hi Lisa:
I shared either on this blog or a friend's that I am compulsive so I cannot just leave a blank like some writer-friends. I.e., my best friend will write "So she fired [fill in weapon later]." I have to fill in as I go, so I know what you mean. Sometimes I drop everything to find that one little fact. God bless Google.
E
I am so totally in the research as you go camp. I'm working on an outline for a new story and in it there is a lot on nano-technology and synaptic functions in the brain. So, I've been doing quite a bit of research in this area, since there is no way I am an expert on this.
I want my descriptions to be accurate in this are since my story relies significantly on how synapses work within the brain. I don't expect that I will have a lot of highly knowledgeable people in that field reading my book, if it gets published, but I want to to be as close to real as I can make it. For me, it is a matter of principle to get it right. Well, maybe not "right", but at the very least, not "wrong".
I totally get the 'don't know what you don't know' part. Its like 'here are all the things you know that you know' (thimble full), 'and here are all the things you know that you don't know' (double thimble full), 'and here are all the things you don't know that you don't know'... and it is the rest of the universe.
I'm not going to sweat not getting it all right however. I know I'm not a scientist writing a thesis or other heavy academic/industry research paper. If I get it wrong I get it wrong. If it gets published and people like it, that's what is important to me.
Erica, can you pass me some more straw?
I do not use an outline and I never have. I do love my research, which I use to do for fun many years ago. But Logan my mc doesn't like to wait she is very impatience. I guess she gets that from me.
Ewoh:
If you get a chance, read BY THE LIGHT OF THE MOON by Dean Koontz. It's sort of a parody on technothrillers, but he makes it seem plausible that microscopic robots could be injected into the bloodstream, giving the victims superhuman abilities.
Also, check out WHEN THE WIND BLOWS and THE LAKE HOUSE by James Patterson. Through genetic manipulation, a group of children are created with the wings of birds.
In the above exapmles, the authors take state of the art technology and push it to the next level. Their research is sound, which makes their exaggerations believable.
Jude,
Thanks so much for the excellent suggestions. I will definitely be looking at those.
I've just come off a ten-year stint of reading not much more than technical books and articles. Now I find I'm having to play catch-up in my reading. I really appreciate your help with those suggestions.
Ewoh:
Wow . . . yes, so true. What I don't know that I don't know . . . IMMENSE!
Jude:
Great point. Good characterization and a solid story can make a little bit of research or a cool technological idea travel a long way. People want to suspend disbelief, and as storytellers, we help them escape into our world.
E
Post a Comment
<< Home