You'll hear this over and over again throughout your career. Write what you know. Most writers find this to be tedious and little too revealing at first. They would rather escape into the unknown and romanticize what is the exact opposite of their life and personality. You may have slipped into this unwittingly. However, you can still make it work, but you'll need to research, research, research.
@jannert thank you for this! God, I want to blast this out to my old English teachers / professors and creative writing instructor. Being forced to read our stuff aloud in class was a huge turnoff and influenced what classes I gravitated toward. Journalism classes didn't require the reading aloud of our work. Speech class, I got through, but I ended up dropping Creative Writing and never taking another because it was so horrifying to read our written work aloud.
I can't remember which famous writer said it, but my old news writing professor used to quote it, and I agree: "It's not write what you already know."
Well, news writing/journalism is quite different from creative writing. I don't think the same advice applies to both arenas.
The writer who said it was a fiction writer. I want to say either Bradbury or Vonnegut but can't remember, so I didn't attribute it. And in terms of research, I can tell you from personal experience as a writer of both, there is NO difference in the type of research between the two forms of writing. (spelling edit)
If you don't see a difference between the research and writing of news writing and fiction writing, then there's one you probably shouldn't be doing.
I didn't want to give the impression that written work should never be read out loud. We wouldn't have audio books if that were the case. And I do (occasionally) enjoy hearing works being read, and I am not the shy type, so I don't mind reading my work or other people's work out loud. But I think forcing people who are not so inclined to read out loud in front of a group is a mistake, for the reasons you quoted. Some folks will avoid a class or workshop that would do them lots of good otherwise, but because they are forced to read their stuff out loud they don't join in the first place, or quit soon afterwards. And some topics do cause listeners (and readers) to shrink or squirm a bit, so that detracts from the experience. I believe in doing what works. Some groups trade work to read out loud, so they are always reading somebody else's stuff. This can be extremely beneficial to the writer, because when they hear their work being read by somebody else who doesn't know what's coming next, they will certainly hear where the writing stumbles and needs work. And maybe it's easier to read embarrassing stuff out loud if you didn't write it yourself! Our writing group is very open about this. We trade works to read, or read our own, or pass the work around in written form. It's no bother to be flexible.
I don’t specifically look for romance, erotica, etc. but I don't shy away from more graphic scenes when I'm already involved in a story. What would definitely turn me off in a sex scene would be obvious authorial intrusion, and I suppose the creepier the scene, the more likely I’d be to conclude that the author is a creep. Creeps, in my opinion, don't always advertise themselves as such, and a given person may not always be aware of all aspects of another individual. In a well written piece, even if I didn’t share a female character’s tastes or views about sex, I shouldn’t be able to tell whether the said character portrayed the author’s views or not.
Thanks. I got your meaning but others may not have. For me it was just simple stage fright about reading my own work. I was even singing in a band at the time, performing original material, but it was still different.
I apologize for coming off as rude. My comment wasn't necessarily directed at any poster as much as it was in general. I strongly believe that there is a big difference between news writing and fiction writing. And there should be. These two types of writing are not trying to accomplish the same thing, and I don't believe they should be approached the same way. Blurring the line here can be a very scary thing.
@Shenanigator was referring to the research part of the two forms of writing, I believe, which is very similar. Not the actual writing, which most certainly is not.
That I don't think is or should be the same either. A journalist should be out there, getting the news. Talking to people. Interviews. Reviewing official documents. I think there should be a lot more research and fact-checking in the news industry than novel writing. A novelist can get google images to get a lay of the land. I would hope a journalist would do a lot more than that.
That's not an apology, and it WAS rude. And, no, of course your words weren't directed at me, but, just as you have done in the past, your words were certainly directed at the thousands of journalists who, every day, risk their lives and put up with things like being shot at, raped, groped, kidnapped, tortured, or arrested to bring people the news and attempt to teach you a little something about the world while you gaze at your beloved MFA. I've bitten my tongue in the past, but know what? It's really fucking old, @deadrats, and after this, I have lost whatever any remaining smidgen of respect I ever had for you as a writer, much less as a human being. Ban me if you want, mods. I'm not going to stand by and watch someone denigrate my colleagues.
It's cute that you assume I only use internet "research", for novels or otherwise, because you push a few buttons on a computer and call it research. Post #2, this thread : https://www.writingforums.org/threads/what-style-are-you.157085/#post-1647649 I'm outta here.
The ignore list is a wonderful thing (until you click off it to see what the fucks going on) - that said to be fair It read more to me like D/R was saying that Journalists have to research properly but fiction writers don't (which is also a rubbish but not as offensive as if it was the other way round)
That isn't what deadrats said. He said that research for journalism requires tons of serious fact checking and getting things correct, while research for a novel can be done on Google because there's a far less serious requirement to get things factually correct. He made absolutely no reference to you, or anyone, specifically. He just said "a novelist can Google it really quick". I don't agree that you can't or shouldn't do lots of serious research for a fictional book, but it's true to say that you're under almost no real scrutiny to get things factual when your work is fiction. At worst you'll make a historical or scientific blunder (get a date of a historical event wrong, mis-represent a major political event, etc). If you get something very wrong in a factual article for a news journal, the repercussions are much worse. I think deadrats is being a little dramatic by claiming that research for journalism and research for novels are drastically different and blurring the lines can be outright 'scary' or whatever, but he didn't target you with his post. I don't get how you're equating any of this to anything deadrats said, though? All his point is trying to suggest is that he thinks there's a big difference between journalism research and research for fiction. How you're getting that he's insulting frontline journalists in deadly areas is beyond me.
Introvert Workshop And then Susan, she, I can't really say, well you know, she did something really really naughty, you know it was naughty, I can't say but you have to use your imaginations, it was really really naughty in her underwear.
I have mixed feelings, I guess. I've had a couple of stories in my mind for some time that I hesitate to write because I'm not sure I want to "go there." Then again, that sounds kind of lame for a writer, when I "say" it out loud. Those might be exactly the stories I should write. On the other hand, I've read plenty of things where I felt like the author was trying too hard to be edgy or something, where the results just grossed me out and made me want to put the book down. Things like telling us in great detail about a character picking their nose, that kind of thing. Maybe the answer is to definitely "go there" on the first draft but think again before submitting it or self-publishing it. Or use a separate pen name for it.
That's awesome! I personally live by the adage, "you can pick your characters and you can pick your nose, but you can't pick you character's nose. This author has proven me wrong. I'd love to read that description. What book was it?
This skates pretty close to "I'm sorry if I offended you." Since you quoted me I'll assume you were apologizing to me in part, but it is not in any way accepted.
Her breath heavy and she began to glisten under the intensity of anticipation. It felt huge in her small hands. She dared to explore it further, studying the skin of it. So soft and yet firm in her grasp. She hoped it was as tasty as it looked. Eying it with a predators gaze, she focused her efforts to finding out how delightful it would be to her salivating mouth. Pinching it at the top, she gave it a firm steady tug. Then another, and another. Then she ate the banana.