Research - Do It Before or During the Writing?

Photo by author

I've proven to be a rebel in many areas of writing. At least, according to those who hold to all the "rules" and outright myths that permeate the publishing industry. One area that has become apparent is with regards to the research I do for stories. According to many, I do things backwards. I do very little to no research before I start writing a book and almost all of it while I'm writing.

Since I don't outline (*cringe*) my stories before writing, I have no idea what information I'll need until I need it about 99% of the time. I've tried it "their" way, and the mess was astronomical and the time wasted and lost highly discouraging. I forced myself to dig into research before I ever started writing. I ended up needing to research as I went and didn't use anything I had spent WEEKS researching beforehand. I won't make that mistake again. Consider that lesson well-learned.

A few months ago, I needed to flesh out the idea for Alpha: 1945 First Love. World War II Germany. It was suggested that I "read everything you can get your hands on about World War II." My eyes glazed over just thinking about trudging through all that dull material, and that's aside from one stark reality - do you have ANY idea how long it would take to read ALL the material I could get my hands on about WWII? Ugh, ugh, ugh. Also, do you have any idea how little of that material would actually end up being useful? A LOT of time wasted on research when I could've been writing.

That advice was based on the philosophy of starting "general" research first, then working your way to the specifics. I pretty much see that as taking a 12-gauge shotgun with bird shot to a fly that's 10-feet away for which you just need a well-aimed hit close-up with a fly-swat.

No. Just. No. Unequivocally no!

That's like suggesting someone read everything they can find on:

1. DOGS, when what they really want is information specifically about German shepherds used for herding in modern-day Germany.
2. The US, when what they really want is information specific to a particular three block area of Tucson, AZ in summer.

Think about it. Those examples are NOT an exaggeration when you consider the tremendous scope of WWII versus the information I actually needed for a short story set in Germany with specific circumstances.

Part of the reason I can research so quickly, on the fly while writing, and lose very little time (rather than spending weeks, months, or even YEARS like some writers) is that I go in reverse with my research. I start with the very specific and work my way outward, thereby only researching information that is relevant to MY STORY. I don't spend countless hours researching things I'll never use.

For my WWII research, how that looked was:

1. Information about US spies and saboteurs operating in Germany. (Not Japan or other places US troops were during that war, and not British or German spies and saboteurs.)
2. Instances of major German cities bombed by Allied forces toward the end of the war. (That ruled out 1941-1944 and narrowed it down to 1945.)

I ended up finding both very quickly with well-placed keywords in a search engine. Using those, I found my dates and setting. Then, I expanded research outward to include specific landmarks in Dresden, Germany and activities surrounding the bombing in February 1945. As I wrote the story, I looked at rationing in Germany during that time (rationing looked very different in 1945 than it did earlier in the war, so information about how rationing was in 1941-42 was NOT useful for 1945) and other such things pertinent to the daily life of those living in Dresden during that specific time frame. I found some great reference material, including photographs and first-person eyewitness accounts (WOOHOO!).

I got exactly what I needed for my short story without spending a LOT more time and energy researching information I'd never use.

I repeated that process to research for setting and such for the other historical short stories in the Alpha series. I'll take the same approach when I start work on the Enforcer series. I've long taken that approach when researching topics for my contemporary novels.

What this experience has taught me over the years is that, once again, the "experts" are only experts on what works for them. Just like outlining and doing character questionnaires and interviews, research before writing is a matter of individual style and creative process. Don't let anyone tell you the "right" way to do such things. Try different approaches. Keep what works. Discard what doesn't.

If you want to research as you write, do so!

If you'd rather just write your story than spend weeks or months outlining beforehand, do it!

If you find character questionnaires as mind-numbing and worthless as I do, blow them off!

Give yourself permission to let the story flow unimpeded by all those logic-based procedures.

If you're one of those who research topics to death before you ever pick up the pen or touch the keyboard, and outline every single scene and chapter of your book in the minutest detail before you write, and fill out one character questionnaire after another, knock yourself out. If that works for you, go for it. If any or all of that is NOT working for you, discard it, no matter what some "expert" says.

Enjoy the process. Don't let "experts" bog you down. They aren't you. They don't know you. They don't know how your creative process works, how your creative mind works. If you hang around writers long enough, you'll find that God has created us so incredibly unique and diverse. No technique or method works for all of us. Rather than shoving each other into one tight little box, embrace those differences.

Set yourself free to JUST WRITE! Have fun! In the process, give others permission to love their way, too.

Confessions of a Deranged Writer - Part Deux

Photo courtesy of "taliesin" of morguefile.com

Any of you who have followed my blog for a while probably caught my first posting by that title - Confessions of a Deranged Writer. If not, check it out before proceeding. Today's post is an extension/update on what I shared before. Go ahead. I'll wait.

....

All caught up? Good. Now, first to address my previous confessions:

#1 - I'm still a total, unapologetic pantser, and I don't care who doesn't like it. I no longer apologize for my disdain for plotting/outlining (the root canal principle still applies). I just do what I do and go with what works best for me and no longer worry about what other authors feel about it. I don't give a rat's patootie what someone calls it - pantsing, organic, intuitive, whatever. Changing the name doesn't change what I do.

#2 -  Still no clue where a story is going most of the time. That really weirds out some people, but they'll either get over it or get under it, as my mother says. Totally up to them which, and not my problem. I say "most of the time" because... well... see Confession #8 (yes, that one is new).

#3 - I still research on the fly. I tried it the other way because that's what we're "supposed" to do as writers, right? I spent DAYS doing research blind, not having a clue what I'd actually need. It bombed completely. I ended up having to research on the fly anyway, and those hours spent before the project ended up being wasted time. I didn't use any of that information because none of it fit the story.

#4 - Nothing's changed here. I still get to know characters as I write. Amazing what they reveal to me as we go. Letting my subconscious have control of the story truly is magnificent!

#5 - These days, I rarely argue with my characters. I've learned to trust that they know what they're doing. That's truly not as weird as it sounds. It's all about trusting my subconscious to know intuitively, instinctively where things are going and just going with the flow. If that's a new concept for you, check out Writing Into the Dark by Dean Wesley Smith.

#6 - I'm STILL losing sleep over the lives of fictional characters. I've pretty much accepted this is to be my life as long as I'm a writer. And, honestly? I'm okay with that.

#7 - I STILL LOVE NANOWRIMO! Camp NaNo, too! No matter what naysayers and poo-pooers say, I unabashedly love it. Why people find it necessary to denigrate and devalue something simply because it doesn't work for them, I'll never know. If it doesn't work for them, move on to something that does and leave the rest of us alone. "The world isn't all about you," is what I want to tell them. If you haven't checked out NaNo (which takes place every November) or Camp NaNo (two sessions each summer - this year April and July), check them out. See if they're a good fit for you. If not, that's okay, too. Find something that IS.

(I no longer belong to ACFW. I track numbers on my own though, just as I've done for years.)

Below are NEW confessions, things I've learned over the past couple of years.

CONFESSION #8 - That "most of the time" I mentioned in #2 pretty solidly applies, but.... You knew there was a "but" coming. I know you did. I've found I occasionally break out of chronological writing (start at prologue or chapter 1 and write to "the end") and fall into what is referred to as Puzzling. On occasion, scenes come to me that fit later in the book. I used to fight it and try to force myself to stay on task, which slowed me down. Now, I write them and then go back to where I was and keep working forward. I've got two projects currently on my WIP docket that are partially done and written that way. Both have completed scenes scattered throughout the book. I just have to bridge the gaps between them. Sometimes it slows me down; sometimes it doesn't. Depends on my creative flow. I just go with it and don't stress over it.

CONFESSION #9 - I'm pretty much a rebel. Not the criminal variety, though you might get some disagreement out of those authors who are legalistic about "rules". *G* I got tired of having "rules" shoved down my throat that actually hurt my writing, I finally rebelled. I even wrote a book about it to encourage others not to get DISCOURAGED when the same thing happens to them and leaves them feeling squashed and worthless. The "rules" of writing are really nothing more than guidelines that can be used or discarded at will when storytelling, as needed to produce the strongest story you can. My goal? Tell strong stories that reach a reader's heart. Being legalistic about "rules" hinders that instead of helping it.

CONFESSION #10 - I've thrown off the chains others have put on me, let go of the "rules" and myths that used to keep me beaten down. I follow a writing process that works great for me, regardless of what others say about it. I write what I want to write, regardless of whether it might be controversial or not, or whether some publisher thinks it'll sell or not. I indie-publish without apology and LOVE it! I have fun when I write. I love getting new books into the hands of readers and hearing their feedback about my characters, stories, and how it touches their lives.

CONFESSION #11 - I'm a sprint writer, not a marathoner. That means, I tend to write large amounts in shorter periods of time with breaks throughout. Sometimes that can mean writing 11K in one day and little or nothing the next (been there, done that), or it can mean that I do 2-5K each day for several days in a row before taking a break. I don't write 1-2K every single day all year round like some authors I know, and that's perfectly okay. I'm not a creature of consistency. I still get the job done. When I've FORCED myself to be a marathon writer, my creativity and productivity have both suffered. I'm no longer trying to fit this round peg (ME) into a triangular hole.

So there you have it. I'm a pantsing sprint-writer who researches on the fly and rebels against "rules" when they damage my writing or squash my voice. I no longer allow the opinions of others, or what works for THEM, to put me in chains. Letting go of what others think and the myths and "rules" I found so stifling, following my own creative flow and where God leads me, has opened doors that I never believed possible. Since late October of 2014, I've added short stories to my writing roster. Those have been fun (well, mostly - the Alpha series had its less than pleasant moments because a couple of those stories are truly tragic). I've loved the fact that I've now branched out from Contemporary Romance, Romantic-Suspense, and Women's Fiction fully into Medieval Fantasy AND Urban Fantasy. I never planned on that last one. It just happened. (So much for the one-genre-only "rule" we writers are supposed to follow, but that's a whole other confession....)

Rules, Rules, and... More Rules?

Photo courtesy of wallyir of morguefile.com

I’ve been keeping track of the “rules” of writing as shared in various places online where I lurk or participate. Interestingly, more often than not (much to my dismay), these “rules” are applied in sweeping, legalistic, and extreme fashion. Guidelines intended to strengthen writing by LIMITING certain words and phrases are shoved down people’s throats as something entirely different. And just to make it all the more fun, the rules seem to change, without warning.

Until I learned to put these "rules" in their proper place and perspective, they felt like an ever-tightening chain that became heavier every day, threatening to snuff the life right out of my writing.

Here are some of the ones I’ve seen pushed using the extreme application I so often see:

1. No adverbs. (This appears to be many people’s favorite witch-hunt. Adverbs are apparently truly evil, doncha know? - And, yes, I did that double-adverb on purpose. *G*)
2. No -ing words. (Regardless of the fact that some NOUNS and ADJECTIVES are very valuable -ing words.)
3. No -ed words. (Yep, I’ve run into that one, too, believe it or not! Just try to write in past tense without them. I dare you.)
4. No dialogue tags (he said, she said, and any variations on "said" that you can think of). (Use beats only.)
5. Don’t use a name to start a paragraph. (You don’t want to start every paragraph with a name, but come on!)
6. No weasel words - just, as, seem, was, that, were, to be, really, often, usually, like, well, might, very, rather, began, started, some, suddenly, immediately, decided, wondered, thought, once, some, most, many, a lot, a few, more, a little, a bit, nearly, almost, quite, rather, anyway, even, knew, felt, would/could/should, up/down/back, is, are, had, have been - to name but a few (he he). There are more and the list is ever-growing as people decide one word or another is evil - depends on the source you check.
7. Don’t start a sentence with or, and, or but. And to go along with THAT rule...
8. Use only complete, grammatically correct sentences, no fragments.
9. No italics.
10. Show, don't tell. (Regardless of which works best for a given spot? Please. Sometimes, telling is a good thing. Sometimes, it's not.)
11. Never begin two or more sentences in a row with the same word or phrase.

Amazingly enough, I’ve also seen “no adjectives” pop up a time or two. What’s to be deemed evil next? Nouns? Pronouns? *sigh*

The only place any of these rules can (usually) be broken is in dialogue. (I say “usually” because I’ve even run up against the occasional individual who insists breaking some of these rules makes for “weak” dialogue, too.) The only exception being the use of “alright” in lieu of “all right”. The former is NEVER acceptable, even in dialogue, and just might get you shot. Well, maybe not anything that extreme (at least not that I’ve heard about so far), but it may get you declared a hack amateur by those who fret over such things. Apparently, it doesn’t matter how widely accepted it is, even by some publishers or dictionaries, there are some who just hold a disdain for this word. Some authors avoid criticism simply by never using either "alright" or "all right", period. People fret over the oddest things sometimes.

Anyway, here’s a writing exercise for those of you who are off-center like me. Take a scene you’ve written (copy to a new document, of course - do NOT use your original) and apply all of these rules as strictly as they are often pushed. See what you end up with.

If you are REALLY whacked and LOVE a challenge, try it with an entire chapter.  he he 

Am I saying we should blow off the “rules”? No. You DO need to know the “rules” of writing. They can help you write stronger and better. BUT keep them in proper perspective and apply them with common sense, reason, and balance. Recognize that they are guidelines, not absolute rules never to be broken lest you be burned at the stake, or at least blackballed by the entire publishing industry.

Don't let the "rules" snuff the life out of your writing, or your JOY in writing. Throw off the chains of writing-rules-legalism and write to your heart's content!

Photo courtesy of matthew_hull @ morguefile.com

So, what about YOU? Have you ever found yourself stifled by any of the above rules being shoved down your throat in their extreme forms? Have you been confronted with "rules" that aren't listed above? If so, please share!

BTW - to see the winner of the free autographed copy of my latest book, PROMISES, check out the comments on the Home blog post.