# When Life Takes a Toll on my Writing



## Ftc10 (Aug 27, 2013)

So....writing about love, relationships, or intimate situations is really difficult when your 23 and the only man who hits on you at work is old enough to be your dad (shudders with disgust) and you have never been in anything close to a relationship. 
On a typical day all by my lonesome, I caught myself in the midst of pouring over yet another romance novel (I like to live vicariously through the characters because I'm about that life) and realized that I would have no idea how to replicate romantic or intimate moments in my own writing. 
I tried to write a love scene (I will show no one). I didn't know what to so I made it really depressing and awkward for the characters because I am familiar with depressing and awkward. 
So I guess I want to ask; what should I do?!


----------



## DondreKhan (Aug 27, 2013)

This sort of reminds me of an awkward female character I did around that age.  She has a lot of fear that if she somehow breaks up with her long time boyfriend that she'll never find anyone else because of how odd she can be.

Writing romance when you've never had a relationship is near impossible.  Based on my own before and after experience, any romantic interaction between characters before I had similar experience was crap.  It was too cookie cutter, near sitcom style "these are the directions to get laid" and "this is what you do when you have a boyfriend/girlfriend."  You also just don't have the experience to know what details to include.  Also, when virgins write sex scenes, they tend to be flagged by being too flat and reading like a series of directions, sound like wish fulfillment (the worst), or the details aren't right.  If you haven't been there than you don't know what to write about how the characters feel or what the events should be.  It's either "insert peg A into slot B" or all oral sex all the time.  There are also other things that people without experience tend to fixate on because they've never had an intimate moment themselves.


----------



## Lewdog (Aug 27, 2013)

Feelings aren't made, nor bought, or forced, though some people may think you can make yourself have feelings for someone.  They come naturally.  It's something you have to experience to be able to describe.  I wish I had an easier answer here but I don't.  

The best advice I can give you in the mean time, is try to keep things simple.  Imagine the way you loved a pet, a friend, or a relative, and use that love as a conduit to lead you to the love you feel in romance.  Honestly there isn't THAT much difference.  When you love someone regardless of who they are, you would give your life for them, you always want the best for them, and your emotions are natural and fluid.  They come without trying to build them, and they are intense like a strong drug.  

So there it is, use whatever experiences you do have in life, and keep things simple until you have a better understanding of what it means to lose yourself in someone else.  I hope that helps.


----------



## popsprocket (Aug 27, 2013)

I'm not a fan of literally interpreting the whole "write what you know" thing, but in the case of relationships there aren't really two ways around it.

I agree with Lewdog on keeping it simple.

If you want to write about characters in a relationship it doesn't have to be all heart-stopping-love and world-rending-passion. Some of the best things about being in a relationship are the shared smiles and the little moments where you hold hands or are just close to someone. That sort of stuff is easy enough to write about and doesn't require in depth analysis of what the characters are feeling, because holding hands and sharing a gentle smile speaks for itself.

... of course that doesn't really help if you want to write a relationship about heart-stopping-love and world-rending-passion, but it should get more subtle romantic plots going.


----------



## Bad Craziness (Aug 27, 2013)

Lena Dunham has more or less made a career out of depressing and awkward.

What you've written sounds like it's personal and honest. To my mind that's far more interesting than what a romantic or intimate moment is 'supposed' to be.


----------



## Ftc10 (Aug 27, 2013)

Hmm...well it might work??

- - - Updated - - -

Thank you!


----------



## Ftc10 (Aug 27, 2013)

Well I like what you wrote about the cliche aspects of relationships. I think writing about the other side might be interesting to readers...

- - - Updated - - -

Yeah I got my work cut out for me! :apologetic:


----------



## Ftc10 (Aug 27, 2013)

Yeah I don't think I could fake anything worth reading...


----------



## Ftc10 (Aug 27, 2013)

Bad Craziness said:


> Lena Dunham has more or less made a career out of depressing and awkward.
> 
> What you've written sounds like it's personal and honest. To my mind that's far more interesting than what a romantic or intimate moment is 'supposed' to be.



Thank you! That makes me feel better!


----------



## Jeko (Aug 27, 2013)

I have the same problem. I'm trying to write a fantasy novel about werewolves and vampires, but I don't know any. 

If you're trying to write something real, write something that's real to you. If that's depressing and awkward, go for it. But if you want your writing to be escapism from your life, then you will struggle, because the fantasist is never satisfied. Write lies based on truth, be honest with your writing and yourself, and you'll find a much clearer, much stronger kind of expression will emerge.


----------



## Sintalion (Aug 27, 2013)

There's a good majority of people who believe that experience is the greatest teacher. Most of the time I'm inclined to agree. But as a researcher, well, I do believe that a lot can be learned through careful, diligent study. 

I have never broken a bone or been shot, but I've spoken with people who have, have done my research, viewed x-rays, felt bones, held bones, etc. A character of mine gets shot. I may not be able to describe the feeling 100%, but I like to think that I can do a pretty good job. I have never been to Norway, but it's the setting of the manuscript I'm working on. 

There's a lot that we as writers just haven't experienced, but it should never stop you from trying to. Writing about relationships is no more difficult than writing about an ACL tear. There's millions of websites and real people out there who can give you a taste. A good writer can take those notes and make it work. Maybe not perfectly, but well enough to convince a reader. 

Think about flirting. Research how to do it and what are the signs that someone's flirting with you. Read about 10-15 articles. After that (and maybe even before) you'll find that almost everything repeats. It's not because the dating world is holding back secrets from you, it's because these general things happen over and over and over again! A lot of people do sneak glances at their crush. They do make sure they're not eating pizza like an animal. By knowing the general, you can easily come up with more scene-specific examples (business man turns off his cell phone on a date; woman brushes her teeth before dinner). 

Be an observer. See how couples act around each other. Many people have a gut feeling that lets them pick out couples without ever knowing if they're in a relationship. Why is that? What is the couple doing that gives them away? Check out some pictures of couples. How do you know they're a couple? What are they doing that you wouldn't do with a stranger? 

Be a reader. How about your favorite novelists? How are they writing romance? Google some goofy topics about love. Read what comes up. 

As an exercise, try writing about a friend's relationship, or a president's. In the end it's not about what the writer has or has not experienced. It's about what the character experiences. Again, some stuff might be harder. You might not quite know what it's like to see your SO after a few months apart, but if you poke around and read you might be able to form enough of an idea. 

Personal experience is great to supplement your knowledge, but sometimes it's hard to come by. Until I get shot, I may never be able to fully grasp all the nuances of being shot, but if I do, I may not be able to put them into words, either!


----------



## philistine (Aug 27, 2013)

Trying to write about something which you have little to no knowledge of isn't a good idea. It's not as if the topic can be researched, either. Experience is king in that respect.


----------



## shadowwalker (Aug 27, 2013)

I don't think I agree that one has to have had a relationship to write about it. Surely you have friends/family and have been able (or can start) to observe those relationships - even discuss them. There are autobiographies that discuss, sometimes in more detail than one wants, that person's relationships. Undoubtedly there are facebook and twitter discussions up to your eyeballs - people seem to have no qualms about such posts. As to the emotions, as someone mentioned, you have experienced love via family, pets, friends - even crushes count, you know. Extrapolate. And finally, sex - do you know how many authors do very well with the "fade to black" sex scenes? Putting the reader right there isn't a requirement.

So yeah, it might be more difficult, but you're not writing your autobiography, after all. You're writing fiction. As also mentioned above, people write about a whole range of things they've never experienced themselves. We'd have a lot fewer books if people didn't.


----------



## philistine (Aug 27, 2013)

shadowwalker said:


> I don't think I agree that one has to have had a relationship to write about it. Surely you have friends/family and have been able (or can start) to observe those relationships - even discuss them. There are autobiographies that discuss, sometimes in more detail than one wants, that person's relationships. Undoubtedly there are facebook and twitter discussions up to your eyeballs - people seem to have no qualms about such posts. As to the emotions, as someone mentioned, you have experienced love via family, pets, friends - even crushes count, you know. Extrapolate. And finally, sex - do you know how many authors do very well with the "fade to black" sex scenes? Putting the reader right there isn't a requirement.
> 
> So yeah, it might be more difficult, but you're not writing your autobiography, after all. You're writing fiction. As also mentioned above, people write about a whole range of things they've never experienced themselves. We'd have a lot fewer books if people didn't.



I'd be willing to concede the fact that if one studied romance novels, erotic fiction, and a variety of other sources which detailed intimate relationships and the like, one COULD produce a novel which made the reader believer the author knew what he or she was talking about. In all certainty though, it'd end up coming off as strained, artificial, and lacking that certain something which experience would have otherwise provided.

Concerning your last sentence: I think it's a bit different with romance, or something more personal. A person writing about the hardship of loss (family) would be making a huge arse of themselves if they had never experienced it. They'd be horribly arrogant in doing so. Call me critical, though I'd view a person with no relationship experience writing a romance novel precisely the same way. I think anyone who knew their stuff would sense something was off about it.


----------



## gmehl (Aug 27, 2013)

There are conventions in popular genre, easy to track down, and romance can get fairly specifically defined for the various lines -- publishers often share them willingly and there's no shortage of books that lay out the guidelines for the various styles.  Unless you're genuinely unique, you'll have to fit in to the standards, follow the formula, play the game.

The other side of the coin is more literary, where originality really counts, and then you may very well get involved in the way you think relationships _ought to be _or perhaps _probably are_ rather than something you experienced yourself.  

As a 23-year-old, you might, for example, spend some time _observing_ much older couples, all kinds. Talk with them, learn about them. You'll likely form impressions ... and a sense of what good, bad and indifferent relationships might be like. Do some imagineering.  Try writing some sketches.  Do the same with kids, middle aged, people who are isolated, ordinary people, odd people.  It's this kind of experience that might help develop your skills and expand your repertoire.


----------



## philistine (Aug 27, 2013)

gmehl said:


> There are conventions in popular genre, easy to track down, and romance can get fairly specifically defined for the various lines -- publishers often share them willingly and there's no shortage of books that lay out the guidelines for the various styles.  Unless you're genuinely unique, you'll have to fit in to the standards, follow the formula, play the game.
> 
> The other side of the coin is more literary, where originality really counts, and then you may very well get involved in the way you think relationships _ought to be _or perhaps _probably are_ rather than something you experienced yourself.
> 
> As a 23-year-old, you might, for example, spend some time _observing_ much older couples, all kinds. Talk with them, learn about them. You'll likely form impressions ... and a sense of what good, bad and indifferent relationships might be like. Do some imagineering.  Try writing some sketches.  Do the same with kids, middle aged, people who are isolated, ordinary people, odd people.  It's this kind of experience that might help develop your skills and expand your repertoire.



A person with no romantic experience, who isn't aware of the finer nuances gotten from _actual_ experience, won't be able to spot what it is exactly they need to form that element of authenticity. I'm sure most in this thread will tell you just that. It's only once you learn things from being in a relationship; what is good, what is bad, what is the 'right thing' to do, what shouldn't be done- only then can you spot those same mistakes and errors in the relationships around you. 

Also, writing a book on a subject with nothing more than a body of secondhand research is being willfully ignorant of the cardinal rule of writing: that the work must be truthful.


----------



## DondreKhan (Aug 27, 2013)

popsprocket said:


> I'm not a fan of literally interpreting the whole "write what you know" thing, but in the case of relationships there aren't really two ways around it.
> 
> I agree with Lewdog on keeping it simple.
> 
> ...




This is a very good idea.  This is the sort of thing that people without experience forget.  You shouldn't be sending characters on dates or have really great sex; the little things are where you'll make the story convincing.  Yet those are hard to put in without experience.


----------



## shadowwalker (Aug 27, 2013)

I don't know, philistine. I've read a lot of romance books in my time and quite frankly, they all come off as fantasy or wish fulfillment. I mean, most are supposed to have "lived happily ever after" - and how often does that happen in real life? Romance, IMHO, is total escapism - whatever difficulties the MC runs into must be resolved, and in a manner which allows the MC to have a happy ending. And I have to repeat - writers write about things they have never experienced, never done, all the time. If one only writes what ones knows through experience, our libraries would be nearly empty - and the books therein would probably be very dull indeed.


----------



## DondreKhan (Aug 27, 2013)

Lewdog said:


> Feelings aren't made, nor bought, or forced, though some people may think you can make yourself have feelings for someone.  They come naturally.  It's something you have to experience to be able to describe.  I wish I had an easier answer here but I don't.
> 
> The best advice I can give you in the mean time, is try to keep things simple.  Imagine the way you loved a pet, a friend, or a relative, and use that love as a conduit to lead you to the love you feel in romance.  Honestly there isn't THAT much difference.  When you love someone regardless of who they are, you would give your life for them, you always want the best for them, and your emotions are natural and fluid.  They come without trying to build them, and they are intense like a strong drug.
> 
> So there it is, use whatever experiences you do have in life, and keep things simple until you have a better understanding of what it means to lose yourself in someone else.  I hope that helps.



I agree to a point that there's a lot of similarity to many different kinds of relationships, but there's still differences.  Having a sexual relationship is going to have a different effect on you than a close relationship with someone related to you.  You change after you've had sex.  It's slow and it doesn't make you less awkward than you were to begin with, but it changes your maturity and the general way that you act and perceive things.  After freshman year, I started to grow up a lot and abandon a lot of stupid ideas I had.  There was a kid junior year who was still a virgin and who still had a lot of his childish ideas.  On his Facebook profile, he identifies as being interested in the military, even though all he knows are long lists of vehicles and weapons.  Being a military historian is technically completely different once you get a mature attitude, but I can say that actually being a military expert requires a lot more knowledge of how things work than that.

EDIT-  It doesn't do any of the things you think it will do, I should add.


----------



## philistine (Aug 27, 2013)

shadowwalker said:


> I don't know, philistine. I've read a lot of romance books in my time and quite frankly, they all come off as fantasy or wish fulfillment. I mean, most are supposed to have "lived happily ever after" - and how often does that happen in real life? Romance, IMHO, is total escapism - whatever difficulties the MC runs into must be resolved, and in a manner which allows the MC to have a happy ending. And I have to repeat - writers write about things they have never experienced, never done, all the time. If one only writes what ones knows through experience, our libraries would be nearly empty - and the books therein would probably be very dull indeed.



I guess my conception of romance was a little misguided. If we're talking Mills and Boon, or whatever is popular right now, then I guess it's no longer a chief importance. People don't read those to expand their mind, after all. Nor do they even give a damn if they're accurate. It's escapism, you're right. 

Like I said, I think truthfulness and authenticity matters more on some subjects than it does others. For certain things, you can do some research and end up transmitting your knowledge gained on the subject quite convincingly. With other things, that just can't be done.


----------



## Lewdog (Aug 27, 2013)

shadowwalker said:


> I don't know, philistine. I've read a lot of romance books in my time and quite frankly, they all come off as fantasy or wish fulfillment. I mean, most are supposed to have "lived happily ever after" - and how often does that happen in real life? Romance, IMHO, is total escapism - whatever difficulties the MC runs into must be resolved, and in a manner which allows the MC to have a happy ending. And I have to repeat - writers write about things they have never experienced, never done, all the time. If one only writes what ones knows through experience, our libraries would be nearly empty - and the books therein would probably be very dull indeed.



Let's look at this in other terms.  Do you think a person that has never played baseball, will be able to write a good story compared to someone that has?  Then just because someone has played baseball, doesn't stop them from using their knowledge of baseball as a conduit to the fantasy of doing things that are rarely done in the game.  Say you have someone that knows about baseball, and they write a story about a player that hits the game winning home run in the bottom of the ninth inning in the final game of the World Series.  Like your romance novels and the "happily ever after endings," that type of home run doesn't happen often, but it doesn't mean they can't use their first hand knowledge to write about it.

My analogy probably didn't come across as intended, and it sounded much better in my head, but I hope you got the point.  :lol:


----------



## DondreKhan (Aug 27, 2013)

shadowwalker said:


> I don't know, philistine. I've read a lot of romance books in my time and quite frankly, they all come off as fantasy or wish fulfillment. I mean, most are supposed to have "lived happily ever after" - and how often does that happen in real life? Romance, IMHO, is total escapism - whatever difficulties the MC runs into must be resolved, and in a manner which allows the MC to have a happy ending. And I have to repeat - writers write about things they have never experienced, never done, all the time. If one only writes what ones knows through experience, our libraries would be nearly empty - and the books therein would probably be very dull indeed.



That's specifically romance novels.  In other stories that portray relationships seriously, it's really obvious when some kid has inserted himself having the sex he has never had, and really stupid.  There's a big difference between a virgin writing about sex and someone writing about going to south Asia.  For one, most of us have had sex and can spot all the inaccuracies.


----------



## Sintalion (Aug 27, 2013)

Inquisitor Ehrenstein said:


> That's specifically romance novels.  In other stories that portray relationships seriously, it's really obvious when some kid has inserted himself having the sex he has never had, and really stupid.  There's a big difference between a virgin writing about sex and someone writing about going to south Asia.  For one, most of us have had sex and can spot all the inaccuracies.



There's a big difference between a bad writer writing about sex and a good writer writing about sex. That's it.


----------



## Lewdog (Aug 27, 2013)

Sintalion said:


> There's a big difference between a bad writer writing about sex and a good writer writing about sex. That's it.



What do you get when you have a good writer that is bad at sex, and a bad writer that is good at sex?


----------



## Sintalion (Aug 27, 2013)

Lewdog said:


> What do you get when you have a good writer that  is bad at sex, and a bad writer that is good at sex?



A spouse who can afford a little something on the side, and a spouse who forgives their partner for writing instead of working. ;-)

What you're trying to do there is say that the good writer is in fact  bad (IE: not a good writer), and the bad writer is in fact good. The  point is, when you write well, that's it. You suspend the reader's  disbelief. It goes no further than that. You're either good enough to do it or you aren't, and that has nothing to do with how many partners you may or may not have had. Not all romance novelists who write about threesomes and orgies have actually experienced them (and additional partners is _very _different from having just one). 

If the good writer  messes up and writes a not-so-good love scene, there you go. They wrote a  bad scene. But it has nothing to do with whether or not they personally have had  sex. It just means they wrote a bad love scene. They did not write it well enough to convince the reader that they know what they're talking about. It's a shame, but it can't be pinned on their own inexperience.


EDIT:

To add, the beauty about sex, and writing, is that 99% of the time you don't write about every single little detail- and while you're in the act you don't remember it, either. Next time you get laid try and remember every single motion you make and that of your partner. As he's kissing your neck, what are your toes doing? Your fingers? Your stomach? What about how you feel? Where are his ankles right now?  Okay, fifteen seconds later when you're on your back, what's everything doing now? How about the sheets? Your clothes? What if you're also conversing? 

You can't put the entire experience all into writing. That'd be one long scene! 99% of the time, writers don't, which leaves the field open for anyone to connect the dots, however specifically or broadly they want to. You don't need to draw on all that stuff you can't remember. Virgins can pull it off just as well.


----------



## Tettsuo (Aug 27, 2013)

I would advise you talk to people who are in, or were in relationships.  Have a frank and honest discussion about the good and bad aspects of their relationships to get a realistic idea of what the experience is like.  Grab a range of people, young and old, single and married, heartbroken and happy to get their perspectives.

Research whatever topic you don't know about from personal experience whenever possible.


----------



## Lewdog (Aug 27, 2013)

Sintalion said:


> A spouse who can afford a little something on the side, and a spouse who forgives their partner for writing instead of working. ;-)
> 
> What you're trying to do there is say that the good writer is in fact  bad (IE: not a good writer), and the bad writer is in fact good. The  point is, when you write well, that's it. You suspend the reader's  disbelief. It goes no further than that. You're either good enough to do it or you aren't, and that has nothing to do with how many partners you may or may not have had. Not all romance novelists who write about threesomes and orgies have actually experienced them (and additional partners is _very _different from having just one).
> 
> ...



Oh I remember my moves, especially the ones that work.  The important things however, that I remember and how it felt at the time, are things that can never be described by someone that has never experienced it.

Do you remember the first time you looked into someone else's eyes, deep into their eyes, and told them you loved them?  Do you remember that feeling?  Did they say they loved you back, or did they just keep staring at you?  How did that moment feel?  Are you starting to see what I mean?  Those are moments I'll never forget, and I can't quit equate those moments to any other in my life.


----------



## escorial (Aug 27, 2013)

Live it write it.


----------



## Gamer_2k4 (Aug 27, 2013)

Lewdog said:


> Those are moments I'll never forget, and I can't quite equate those moments to any other in my life.



And that's the important thing to take away from this.  When writing scenes of any sort, but especially love scenes, emotions, feelings, and MOMENTS are what matter.  Without those, the most detailed descriptions come across as rote and lifeless.  Emotion is what separates creative writing from technical writing, and it's what makes, "The look on her face and the sparkle in her eye made him realize this was all he'd wanted, and all he'd ever want," better than, "She gripped him tightly as each thrust sent waves of pleasure through her."

The best writing is the most honest writing, and deep truth shines far more brightly than shallow description.


----------



## Myers (Aug 27, 2013)

Gamer_2k4 said:


> "She gripped him tightly as each thrust sent waves of pleasure through her."



That might work if you could somehow get the word "member" in there.


----------



## Terry D (Aug 27, 2013)

Remember, this is a discussion thread, not a creative one. Please keep the content 'G' rated.


----------



## Myers (Aug 27, 2013)

I'm just wondering if people who have been in love and made love etc. believe that it's so special that people who haven't can't possibly write about it in a way that's convincing. Because saying that you could fake it makes it somehow less special.

On the other side of the coin, maybe people who haven't had that experience are just spooked because they're convinced they can't pull it off. Maybe they're over-thinking it, worried that they're going to be found out by all these people who know better and who think it can't be done or that you have to keep it dialed back.

Well, I say go for it. Use your imagination and what you've observed, read in books and seen in movies. Throw it all in a blender and pour it into a scene or two or a short story. And don't hold back. Then ask people for opinions. You might be a lot better at it than you think.


----------



## philistine (Aug 27, 2013)

Myers said:


> I'm just wondering if people who have been in love and made love etc. believe that it's so special that people who haven't can't possibly write about it in way that's convincing. Because saying that you could fake it makes it somehow less special.
> 
> On the other side of the coin, maybe people who haven't had that experience are just spooked because they're convinced they can't pull it off. Maybe they're over-thinking it, worried that they're going to be found out by all these people who know better and who think it can't be done or that you have to keep it dialed back.
> 
> Well, I say go for it. Use your imagination and what you've observed, read in books and seen in movies. Throw it all in a blender and pour it into a scene or two or a short story. And don't hold back. Then ask people for opinions. You might be a lot better at it than you think.



I haven't actually read any hardcore romance books, though would it be naive to assume that the interaction between the characters (especially those in some sort of deep relationship) is explored quite deeply, and that the nuances present from their interaction are educed with some detail?

Concerning my earlier posts on the subject, I was thinking more along the lines of the behavioural changes one will most certainly exhibit toward another when they have some relationship experience under their belt. It goes without saying that a guy with his first girlfriend, in the overwhelming majority of cases, will play his cards poorly in comparison to the guy who has had multiple long-term relationships with a variety of women. 

I think whether people view sex as some special deal or not is irrelevant. The reality is, there are things one cannot know unless they have _a posteriori_ knowledge of something. That applies to playing golf, fly fishing, oil painting, upholstery, and, yep, you guessed it- romantic interaction.


----------



## Myers (Aug 27, 2013)

philistine said:


> The reality is, there are things one cannot know unless they have _a posteriori_ knowledge of something. That applies to playing golf, fly fishing, oil painting, upholstery, and, yep, you guessed it- romantic interaction.



Really? I bet if had been observing, reading and watching movies about fly fishing my whole adult life that I could write about it in a convincing way. Are you saying you couldn't?


----------



## philistine (Aug 27, 2013)

Myers said:


> Really? I bet if had been observing, reading and watching movies about fly fishing my whole adult life that I could write about it in a convincing way. Are you saying you couldn't?



As I mentioned earlier, it's a possibility. There's also a sizable likelihood that your work wouldn't compare to someone who wrote a similar piece who ACTUALLY had a lifetime of fly fishing under their belt.


----------



## Myers (Aug 27, 2013)

Providing the person who ACTUALLY had a lifetime of fly fishing under their belt can write.

I can't prove my point because I've gone ahead and spoiled things by falling in love and getting married etc. But I'd tell the OP to write it, do your best and see what happens. Then ask for opinions.

That's because I’m not in the business of discouraging people or telling them they shouldn’t write about something based on personal opinion. I’ll leave that up to you.


----------



## philistine (Aug 27, 2013)

Myers said:


> Providing the person who ACTUALLY had a lifetime of fly fishing under their belt can write.
> 
> I can't prove my point because I've gone ahead and spoiled things by falling in love and getting married etc. But I'd tell the OP to write it, do your best and see what happens. Then ask for opinions.
> 
> That's because I’m not in the business of discouraging people or telling them they shouldn’t write about something based on personal opinion. I’ll leave that up to you.



I didn't explicitly say that one shouldn't try. I was merely playing the voice of reason that is research, and, if you can, actually experience what you plan to write about.

I know you think that's such a *gasp* crazy idea, though it often works to great effect.


----------



## gmehl (Aug 27, 2013)

Fly fishing?  Golf?  How about murder?   Although, perhaps, the practitioners of both sports may have contemplated it from time to time.... 

Getting back to the OP if I may, perhaps the answer lies in the purpose the characters and their relationship play in an overall plot.  The specifics of a romantic encounter might vary widely depending on what the writer sees as the purpose of it in the story rather than an autobiographical reminiscence?


----------



## Terry D (Aug 27, 2013)

There are nuances to any activity which only practice, or at least experience, will impart to an individual. A writer with experience has his, or her own data set to draw upon when writing. If the story calls for writing about something with which the writer has no first-hand experience then the author needs to rely on research, imagination, and his/her skill with the language. It really doesn't matter if it's sex, war, romance, murder, grief, longing, or snowboarding. A skilled writer can sell it. Building that library of pseudo-experience is one of the reasons reading is so valuable to writers. We can vicariously experience that which we have yet to physically know.


----------



## J Anfinson (Aug 27, 2013)

gmehl said:


> Fly fishing?  Golf?  How about murder?   Although, perhaps, the practitioners of both sports may have contemplated it from time to time....



Off topic: Didn't O.J. Simpson enjoy fly fishing and golf?


----------



## Jon M (Aug 27, 2013)

Terry D said:


> If the story calls for writing about something with which the writer has no first-hand experience then the author needs to rely on research, imagination, and his/her skill with the language. It really doesn't matter if it's sex, war, romance, murder, grief, longing, or snowboarding. A skilled writer can sell it.


And I think when people say, _write what you know_, it is not so much about that one time you were madly in love with that one girl, but being a perceptive individual and getting down to the core emotions, understanding that so much of our experiences are the same and only differ in the specifics. In that sense, to _write what you know_ is rather easy once you have a grip on human nature, what motivates people.


----------



## Myers (Aug 27, 2013)

philistine said:


> I didn't explicitly say that one shouldn't try. I was merely playing the voice of reason that is research, and, if you can, actually experience what you plan to write about.
> 
> I know you think that's such a *gasp* crazy idea, though it often works to great effect.



Where did I say or imply that having actual experience isn’t _preferable_ to not having any experience, or that it’s a crazy idea? That’s a no-brainer.


----------



## Lewdog (Aug 27, 2013)

Once again, I'm not trying to discourage the author to write, but like I said before, keep things simple until there are life experiences to draw from.  If I sucked at making pottery, but I enjoyed it, I'm not going to go out and tackle the most difficult and complex project there is.  Why would I want to waste a bunch of my time putting out a big pile of steaming Lincoln logs, when I can just keep on making quality small projects until I know what I'm doing?


----------



## philistine (Aug 27, 2013)

Myers said:


> Where did I say or imply that having actual experience isn’t _preferable_ to not having any experience, or that it’s a crazy idea? That’s a no-brainer.



It wouldn't be outrageous to assume that your posts heretofore on the subject implied that you were in favour of book research, as opposed to actual experience.

Perhaps you might choose your words better?


----------



## Myers (Aug 27, 2013)

philistine said:


> It wouldn't be outrageous to assume that your posts heretofore on the subject implied that you were in favour of book research, as opposed to actual experience.
> 
> Perhaps you might choose your words better?



Ha ha ha. Yeah, I'd say it would be pretty outrageous. It's clear that I was saying a lack of experience is something you can overcome; not that "book research" is preferable. No one in his right mind would suggest otherwise.


----------



## philistine (Aug 27, 2013)

Myers said:


> Ha ha ha. Yeah, I'd say it would be pretty outrageous. It's clear that I was saying a lack of experience is something you can overcome; not that "book research" is preferable. No one in his right mind would suggest otherwise.



...and the easiest and most effective way to overcome lack of experience is to get some. I've already said one COULD write a convincing piece of work without having any first-hand experience, though they'd be mad to try and fill in the blanks using secondhand research instead of just going out there and diving right in. I don't know why anyone would suggest blagging it through a bit of reading when the better and much more proven alternative yields better results.

It seems to me like opting for the snow shovel when you have a snowmobile parked in the driveway.


----------



## Myers (Aug 27, 2013)

Yes, of course. And everyone can just run right out and get some experience in romantic love and sex. Or fly fishing or sky diving or international spying. It's just that easy. Thank you for your amazing insight!


----------



## Lewdog (Aug 27, 2013)

philistine said:


> It seems to me like opting for the snow shovel when you have a snowmobile parked in the driveway.



I don't know what the laws are in the UK, but in the US when it snows you have to clear a path for the mailman.  I'm not sure if you can get fined for it, or if the mailman can just skip your house and not deliver your mail...but you still need a snow shovel.  OR you could just pay little Jimmy from down the street to clear your driveway and sidewalk for like twenty bucks, or invest in a snow blower.  The snow blower would probably be the better long term invest, but that depends if you have the money to afford the cost of one up front, or good enough credit to finance one.

Now if I lived in Mexico all my life, I probably wouldn't write a story about snow removal and the pains and hazards of doing it, without living somewhere that I experience the occasional snow that is heavy enough to require removal and not just letting it melt away.


----------



## Terry D (Aug 27, 2013)

philistine said:


> ...and the easiest and most effective way to overcome lack of experience is to get some. I've already said one COULD write a convincing piece of work without having any first-hand experience, though they'd be mad to try and fill in the blanks using secondhand research instead of just going out there and diving right in. I don't know why anyone would suggest blagging it through a bit of reading when the better and much more proven alternative yields better results.
> 
> It seems to me like opting for the snow shovel when you have a snowmobile parked in the driveway.




Who is suggesting "blagging it through a bit of reading?" That's a very shortsighted view of what has been suggested. Great novels have been written by writers who experienced what they write about. Other great novels have been written by writers who did not experience what they write. One such example is John Steinbeck's, The Grapes of Wrath. Steinbeck spent the depression living in a house provided by his father in Monterrey California, and living off his father's money as well. He did OK with that book. 

Since there appears to be some confusion,  my point about reading is that through studying how other writers deal with unfamiliar territory, we can improve our own techniques. Perhaps some writers can't dip into that well of imagination, or maybe they lack the skill to use language to lend verisimilitude to research. That's a shame. If all writers had that problem we wouldn't have any fairy tales, or fantasy, or science fiction, or historical fiction. I'm thankful for the Bradburys, Ecos, Tolkiens, and Carrols.

By the way,  Franz Kafka never turned into a cockroach.


----------



## Lewdog (Aug 27, 2013)

Terry D said:


> By the way,  Franz Kafka never turned into a cockroach.



So say you, but I bet he was on some sort of drug that helped him think he had when he wrote _Metamorphosis.
_
(This response will become quite funny in a few weeks so put it in the back of your mind Terry.)


----------



## philistine (Aug 27, 2013)

Terry D said:


> Who is suggesting "blagging it through a bit of reading?" That's a very shortsighted view of what has been suggested. Great novels have been written by writers who experienced what they write about. Other great novels have been written by writers who did not experience what they write. One such example is John Steinbeck's, The Grapes of Wrath. Steinbeck spent the depression living in a house provided by his father in Monterrey California, and living off his father's money as well. He did OK with that book.



I'm taken to hyperbole, don't read that literally. 

Also, one swallow does not make a summer. It is said most writers do not choose their subjects; rather, it is the opposite: that their subjects are more often than not things they already have an intimate knowledge of. 



> By the way,  Franz Kafka never turned into a cockroach.



Thanks for clearing that up. I was at wit's end trying to wrap my head around it.



Myers said:


> Yes, of course. And everyone can just run right out and get some experience in romantic love and sex. Or fly fishing or sky diving or international spying. It's just that easy. Thank you for your amazing insight!



Which is why, and as is often said on here, one should write what they are already readily acquainted with. It's nice you saw fit to blow that all out of proportion though.


----------



## Myers (Aug 28, 2013)

philistine said:


> Which is why, and as is often said on here, one should write what they are already readily acquainted with. It's nice you saw fit to blow that all out of proportion though.



I wasn’t referring to writing what you already know, but rather your idea that if you lack experience, then you should just go “get some.” That’s not the same thing at all, because depending on the subject, it might not be practical or possible.

Otherwise, the point has been made several times that with imagination, empathy and due diligence, a talented writer can overcome a lack of experience. I’d add courage or self-confidence to that; at least enough to ignore the people who say you shouldn’t do it.


----------



## shadowwalker (Aug 28, 2013)

I have never flown in a hot air balloon. I have, however, stood on a high cliff and looked down at the world below. I have ridden a single-speed bike down a long steep hill. Combine the two and I know the emotions I would feel in that hot air balloon. I know the feelings involved in a variety of relationships and no, you don't have to have experienced them to be able to write about them. Which is why I stated the OP should talk to people who are in relationships, read autobiographies/twitter feeds about them, yada yada yada. There's nothing so exceptional about the emotions involved that make them any harder to write than the emotions involved when slowly strangling a person to death.

As to sex scenes, experience doesn't mean diddly as far as the writing of one.


----------



## Myers (Aug 28, 2013)

You can probably learn all you need to know about sex just by watching Miley Cyrus' performance at the VMA.


----------



## Alabastrine (Aug 28, 2013)

Myers said:


> You can probably learn all you need to know about sex just by watching Miley Cyrus' performance at the VMA.



If that is true, then crud...I've been doing it wrong


----------



## Myers (Aug 28, 2013)

Alabastrine said:


> If that is true, then crud...I've been doing it wrong



If it was true, I'd probably become celibate. Yech.


----------



## Alabastrine (Aug 28, 2013)

I concur!!


----------



## Myers (Aug 28, 2013)

And celibacy would be wise just from a practical standpoint; so you don't pull a back muscle or sprain your tongue.


----------



## Ftc10 (Aug 29, 2013)

I agree with you. I am no stranger to research when I want to write about something that isn't a first hand experience. I am an observer and I have considered my friend's relationships or circumstances in the past but I for some reason I'm just stuck...


----------



## Lewdog (Aug 29, 2013)

shadowwalker said:


> I have never flown in a hot air balloon. I have, however, stood on a high cliff and looked down at the world below. I have ridden a single-speed bike down a long steep hill. Combine the two and I know the emotions I would feel in that hot air balloon. I know the feelings involved in a variety of relationships and no, you don't have to have experienced them to be able to write about them. Which is why I stated the OP should talk to people who are in relationships, read autobiographies/twitter feeds about them, yada yada yada. There's nothing so exceptional about the emotions involved that make them any harder to write than the emotions involved when slowly strangling a person to death.
> 
> As to sex scenes, experience doesn't mean diddly as far as the writing of one.



So you can write a good sex scene if you have stood on a cliff watching people have sex down below?

:lol:


----------



## Ftc10 (Aug 29, 2013)

The only thing I learned from that performance is that Miley Cyrus lacks honest friends, a mirror, and self respect. And the ability to twerk...and the body to fill out the "outfit" she wore...


----------



## shadowwalker (Aug 30, 2013)

Lewdog said:


> So you can write a good sex scene if you have stood on a cliff watching people have sex down below?
> 
> :lol:



Only if they got there on bicycles...


----------



## Lewdog (Aug 30, 2013)

shadowwalker said:


> Only if they got there on bicycles...



If they are heterosexual wouldn't they ride unicycles?


----------

