Research and Fiction – How to Research When Something Doesn't Exist

My first thought upon answering this question is, that it does exist – in the writer's imagination. And therefore, it is to the writer's own experience, own memories, own observations and wisdom that we look, to conduct our research. But my second thought is this: when, as a creative writer, you are writing about something that doesn't exist, what is the most desired outcome? It is this: that your reader must – while he is reading your book – believe in it. During the process of engaging with your story, your reader must feel, react, respond, exactly as if this thing does exist. So how do we achieve that?


We make use of a device with a well-established name: "the willing suspension of disbelief". It's what happens when we are absorbed in a Doctor Who story, or a tale of Arthur and Merlin. It happens to all those who read and love "The Lord of the Rings" or the Narnia stories… and of course all successful novels in the fantasy and science fiction genre. As we read, we believe. That's not because we actually think Middle Earth is real, or it is indeed possible to walk through a wardrobe of fur coats into a snow-laden forest. It's because – in view of the powerful story-telling – we willingly suspend our disbelief.


The magic the author uses to achieve this may be found, essentially, in psychological reality. And that may be expressed through truthful characterisation, and classic story structure. Both of these are so important precisely because they correspond to psychological realities in the lives of all of us; and so we recognise them. These are the archetypes that Carl Jung referred to. They may also be identified as "the tropes" of any particular genre; in other words, the expectations that readers have of this genre, whether or not they are consciously aware of them: the hero, ally, trickster, mentor, wise fool, common man,maze,death-trap,moral trap,hazardous journey,riddle, inmost cave,trophy of conquest.


Such is our faith in classic story structure, that we will believe the story-teller on the basis of it. When we as readers see it is there, we can let our guard down, we can enter into whatever the story-teller has for us, and we can say, "I believe the promises this author makes. I want to know the answers to the question she poses; and I believe she will provide satisfying answers which will reward all the time I spend reading this story."


SC Skillman



[image error] [image error] [image error] [image error] [image error]
 •  3 comments  •  flag
Share on Twitter
Published on October 17, 2011 02:30
Comments Showing 1-3 of 3 (3 new)    post a comment »
dateUp arrow    newest »

message 1: by Lance (last edited Oct 20, 2011 02:12AM) (new)

Lance Greenfield On a related subject, and I may have asked you this one before, how do you deal with changes of names of people and places when you are basing your stories on real life and events?

This problem has stopped me from making progress with a book about all of the ridiculous people that I encountered during my military career, and the actions and events with which they were associated.

I wrote parts of the book, and then used "search and replace" to make changes, but the stories lost all of their life and reality for me.

Some of it was OK, but the main character, whose nickname was Plug, fell to pieces if I changed his name. There was the story about how he came by that name. There was the sory about how the Kenyan soldiers mis-heard his introduction an insisted on calling him Frog, and the appropriateness of that moniker.

Then there is the issue of who might sue me, but I may be persuaded that that would be publicity!

You can see that this is a difficult one for me, and I would appreciate any advice on the matter.


message 2: by S.C. (new)

S.C. Skillman The first thing that came to mind when I read your description "all the ridiculous people that I encountered during my military career" was Joseph Heller's "Catch 22" - a perfect example of ridiculous people in a military setting (and a book I love). Interestingly, I think the reason why "Catch 22" works so well (for me) is that the characters are so colourful & exaggerated.

I would say that if your characters lost their life and reality for you when you changed their names, that means you haven't sufficiently entered into them imaginatively. I think you need to relocate them in your imagination, & give yourself permission to enter their hearts & minds, as if you knew them as well as you know yourself. And this means making them composite characters, including aspects of other people you've met in the past, etc. Also I think you need to trust your own ingenuity to devise new names which achieve the effect you desire. As long as you think of these people as "out there" & relate to them as "other" then they will not live as fictional characters. I've done this myself in the past - tried to use words people actually spoke, base a character entirely on an actual person, & it just doesn't work. It's really strange, but it just limits everything, makes it flat & unconvincing and mediocre.

I hope this helps!


message 3: by Lance (new)

Lance Greenfield Yes. That's good, thank, Sheila.

I think that I need to move several steps sideways and re-invent Plug and Frog. Shame though. The title in my mind has always been "Plug and Other Ridiculous Military Idiots."

Also, you hit upon something which strikes home with me: Catch 22, Spike Milligan's military moires, MASH 4077th, Virgin Soldiers, Blackadder Goes Forth . . . and so on. These are all marvellous books/scripts in my mind. And often too close to the truth for comfort!


back to top