Have you ever heard "If you are going to write a book write what you know."?

Question

If this is true, is this saying authors who write fantasy know about fantasy. Those who write about heavenly life forms know them as well. It makes sense to me to write about what feels good to you.

Answer 1

How about if it was phrased this way... "If you're going to write about it, you better know about it." It isn't talking about genres, for how would anyone know about dragons? If you invent a magical creature, you have to know what that creature is like, and how it would act in certain situations, and why. If you don't know that, it will seem fake. Don't write about losing both your parents in a car crash without at least doing some research on grief. Again, if you don't, it will seem fake.

In other words, research where possible, and flesh out the characters where research isn't possible. If you haven't experienced something, it's hard to write about, and even harder to make it seem real.

Answer 2

There's a difference between knowing and understanding. You can always write what you know, with enough research. But I think the phrase would be better as "write what you understand."
When you write what you know, your book sounds logical: the height of your character, the distance between Earth and Mars when they're in opposition, the results of frostbite. So it makes sense to have those details correct.
But the story doesn't come alive without understanding, and that doesn't happen until your character's height means something, the distance between the planets is felt, and you describe the frostbite so that your readers' fingertips ache.
Understanding comes from experience-- but not necessarily first-hand experience. For instance, if you have ever left home or left a place where you were comfortable and felt the distance, then you understand what it is to feel so far away. If you have ever felt pain, then you can describe pain without sounding like a liar. If you have ever felt awkward about yourself, or some aspect of yourself that you couldn't change, then you are capable of understanding a character who feels awkward about his/her height.
Understanding is being able to empathize with your characters, even if those characters are in situations you've never experienced.
So, yes, if you're going to write a decent book, write what you know (from research, when necessary), but if you're going to write a good book, write what you understand.

Answer 3

No, It doesn't mean that at all. but for some one to write about love, war, hate, etc..the things that would make up the fantasy novel etc. You have to have some knowledge and grasp of feelings and motives and how life works. The best science fiction is heavily based in science. It's best to write about what you know and have experienced..You can change the settings to outer space. but the character has to ring true.

Answer 4

Thank you Probl and Leria for your intelligent and well thought answers. Thumbs way up for both of you. You "get it".

Of course it still applies to writing fantasy. Ask Anne Mc Caffrey. She knows more about Pern than most people know about their home towns.

Maybe you need to have that expression re-worded in a way you can understand. How about this.

"If you are going to write a book, write about what you know. If you don't know about a subject and you want to write a book about it, become an expert in the subject so you can write about what you know".

Research and planning are the keys to writing a great novel. If you plan on writing about a topic you are unfamiliar with, find an expert to interview, read information - whatever it takes to become an expert. You simply cannot make things up.

For instance I have written four murder mysteries - and I haven't had to murder a single person yet. I have a consulting team - a doctor, lawyer, cop, munitions expert etc. When I cannot find the information I need, I conduct interviews and find out. No, I have never fired a .357 Magnum, but I have done enough research to know that the recoil from one would knock me on my butt or maybe even break my arm. See? I do know what I write about.

As for fantasy, planning is the key. Tolkein had to actually plan out his whole world for Lord of the Rings. He did not make it up as he went along. Same with Anne Mc Caffrey. There are actual maps for Middle Earth or Pern. Both of them ARE writing about what they know - a fantasy world they very carefully crafted and created. They are also writing about characters they have written character studies for = characters they know intimately. See the difference?

As for writing what feels good to you, that is fine, but I have a question for you.

Does it feel good to you to get published and get royalty checks? Or does it just feel good to write haphazard junk and poorly researched stuff nobody will ever read?

It's the author who does the preparation and crafting of their novel who gets the big bucks, my dear. The "feels good to me" writer who cheats their audience by making it up as they go along ends up in a writers group at the local library with a lot of other wanna be authors who simply "don't get it" wondering why they can't get a break or having their mothers tell them "You write such great stories - you should be published". Mothers make GREAT literary critics - let me tell you. NOT!

The reason is very simple. Attitude. A little word that means a lot. Are there any other questions you want answered?

Pax - C

Answer 5

I've heard that quote, but I don't entirely agree with it. I think you write about what you know concerning, perhaps, character traits in people or the mores and manners and speech of a certain time period. For instance, you don't write about the 16th century England and have a woman as your protagonist who is a 21st century American who acts and speaks like it, too. (Unless, of course, you are doing a time travel novel. However, you'd STILL need to know how to make the other characters behave and speak.) If you apply that advice "write about what you know" to fantasy novelists, you could say they have to really KNOW their own made-up land and people before writing the story or else a reader won't believe or be interested in his/her fabricated land/people.

I like this quote better: "I tell writers to keep reading, reading, reading. Read widely and deeply. And I tell them not to give up even after getting rejection letters. And only write what you love." Anita Diament

Answer 6

It's generally a vague expression of "write what you KNOW about your genre"--but not LITERALLY write about what you've read from your favorite author or book.

For example: I'm a STAR TREK fan. I have a ton of books on the cult classic. I also have books stemming from Asimov, McCaffrey, King, and a couple from Robert Jordan. (To name a few in my immense collection.)

So I have extensive knowledge in science-fiction, fantasy, and horror. But it doesn't been I will write along the same lines as those authors above.

It means that I have KNOWLEDGE of what science-fiction, fantasy, and horror *is*.

So I can apply what I know about the genres to my books with relative ease.

Answer 7

I think it's another one of those fortune-cookie apothegms that doesn't really mean much when you look at it. And (like you say) what's a science fiction writer supposed to do? So people change the statement around till it no longer means what they started out saying. Then it becomes something like: "If you are going to write a book, first get a lot of life experience."

Answer 8

If taken literally that phrase would mean the death of the novel.
Also, poetry would not be with us because it isn't the product of knowledge but rather of imagination.
The case could be made that scientific research as we know it would not exist.
So, in sum, it's a hollow phrase except when applied to 'reports'.
I may be all wet. If so, I apologize.

Answer 9

Don't think so because then lots of authors would be killers.

Answer 10

I have heard that quote. As to the rest of your rants, they didn't take the form of a question.