Write what you know...or not

Seeing Marina Abramovic's 512 Hours

Many creative writing experts/books tell you to "write what you know!" Seems a logical idea doesn't it at face value anyway. But if you unpack it and think about it seriously, it is really quite limiting because how much do you actually know and how interesting would it really be to another person? To be honest if people had only written what they knew a lot of the best books would never have been written. For example, if J K Rowling had written only what she knew could she have written the fabulous Harry Potter series that purportedly got so many children back into reading? My glorious nemesis and friend Foucault says there is no point writing anything unless the author is going to learn something. Well you're not going to do that if you already know it and I have to say I agree with him With all four novels that I have written so far I have learnt something new from the research I have undertaken, whether it was from sleeping on the streets, visiting drug rehabilitation centres or doing all the incredible research with horses or looking into the past for my latest WIP.

So let's be real and take that phrase for a walk and expand it a bit just like Cec Murphy suggests by saying 'write what you know, write what you want to know more about; write what you're afraid to write.' Now to me that seems far more sensible and reflects what we really do. It challenges you as the writer to expand your ideas and actually gives you so many options to write what you want. Now more recently I came across another idea which was once again a variation on a theme and that was 'writing what you feel.' Another interesting idea which seemed to open out all sorts of possibilities.

However, what they all seem to forget to mention is one vital factor. Not once do they mention story. And to me that seems quite a crucial element. It doesn't matter what you don't know, do know, want to know or even how much research you've you done if you have no story, nothing will really happen. Get that story first and then think about what you do or don't know. Be open to respond to where the story takes you.

The photograph is an example of being willing to respond to the story. 512 Hours was Marina Abramovic's durational performance in 2014 at the Serpentine Gallery. You went in and had to leave everything outside, bags, watches, phones. Inside you were given headphones so you could hear no noise and were taken in to the rooms. Nobody spoke unless you were the priviledge few that MA spoke to (yes I was one she had a couple of conversations with moments I will treasure) There were some chairs and benches in some rooms. In one room you could separate black rice from white rice and count it. MA would walk amongst the people occasionally taking people's hands and placing them at various places in the room. Sometimes even making them face a wall. At other times walking up and down with them.Always in silence. I had read about the exhibition. I knew what to expect. Or put it another way, (and this is slightly tenuous but trust me you'll see what I mean ) 'I'd write what I know' but actually when I was in the room and I opened my eyes and took in everything, I started to open my mind, I stopped just knowing and started being. The stories then began to flow. In other words, for me, writing what you know is not enough, if that makes sense.

 Just because it is 9 o'clock on a Saturday...

Write What You Know...Really?

A child's shoe found at Auschwitz
Seen at the Museum of Peace, Caen

Write what you know is something you often hear being told to aspiring writers. But I believe if writers wrote only what they knew we would have a very limited number of books, which are likely to be very boring. For example did JK Rowling attend a school for wizards? Did Stephenie Meyers have an intimate knowledge of Vampires? Of course not, what could be argued is that JK knew about school stories and Meyers knew Dracula. There are many others I could list too but that is not the point of this post.

My dearly beloved nemesis Foucault suggests that it isn't worth writing a book unless it teaches the author something. This I can empathise with. All the novels I have written so far have taught me something. Even subjects I thought I knew inside out I have learnt more while researching. Milan Kundera develops this idea further when he states  in his Jerusalem Address: The Noel and Europe that 'great novels are always a little more intelligent than their authors.'  Sounds surprising and unlikely doesn't it? I have a very lively group of second years with whom I had a very interesting debate about this comment yesterday. I suggested that perhaps it could mean that as novelists we make our stories more intelligent by leaving questions on the page (yes a Blanchot idea that I have previously mentioned) for the reader to answer because as writers we should withdraw from the text and leave it as 'witness not authority' (Foucault). The moment we step into the realms of it being an authority means a story is going to be didactic, which will cause the reader, more than likely, to switch off. I believe a book should be a challenge to write and you leave, having written the story, knowing more than you did before, something the reader should also experience.

I know that all sounded a bit highfalutin didn't it? what I suppose I really mean is that whatever you are writing you must make sure you write the best you can and that you research your piece. I marked an historical piece recently that had a phone call in the middle of it. The piece was set about 30 years before the phone was even invented. It is slips like that that can really destroy a piece for the reader. They stop 'suspending disbelief' as they start thinking if that's wrong what else is. Research is so important. The photo above comes from a trip to Caen that I took while researching my PhD novel. Little did I know then that some of that research and, in particular, the visit to the Museum of Peace, would be so useful for my latest novel. I love doing research but am also aware that you have to know when to stop. I have known several people who were so busy researching every detail of their story they actually never got round to writing it.

As those of you who follow this blog will know a month ago I typed 'The End' to my latest novel. It has been sitting in a metaphorical drawer. I will be going back to it very soon to add in the light and shade, fill in the colour. Part of that will include the research I have done which will mean I can add tiny details that just add credibility to my story and make it more intelligent than me, while leaving questions on the page for the reader.

What I would suggest is a better recommendation for writers is not necessarily to write what you know but to write what you are interested in. Paul Klee suggests that drawing is taking a line for a walk, I would suggest with writing it is taking your words for a walk. See where they take you, you might be surprised. Have a fun weekend everyone.

This week's sound track is Reel Big Fish with Take On Me. It is a song I very much associate with my sons as this is a band they have been to see many times. There used to be a lot of car singing and dancing to this song many moons ago. They are grown and flown leading very happy lives that is still surrounded by music. I know this would form part of their sound track so it is for them and for their future.