Write What You Know: Right? Or No?
When I was an undergraduate in creative writing at LSU, there was one mantra that all of my professors repeated time and again, write what you know. Realizing that their wisdom far outranked mine, I continued to focus on writing southern fiction with whimsical, sometimes a bit loony, characters that resembled relatives and acquaintances from my childhood. (No offense to my relatives or acquaintances.) For many years, I clung to this philosophy to write about only what I knew—Louisiana landscapes, eccentric southerners, realistic worlds with characters bound by blood, religion, and, of course, great food. However, there was something missing from this rule: imagination.
Now that I've settled on writing in the fantasy genre, I’ve been pondering this Writing 101 rule lately and wondering if I’ve completely turned my back on the idea. I suppose the answer is yes and no. Just like most things in life, there is no black and white. Yes, my writing is saturated in sultry southern settings. Yes, my characters tend to be eccentric, pensive, and a bit sarcastic (like most people I know). However, I do not always adhere to what I know. For example, in my novel RISING, one thing I set out to do was to create evil creatures I had never heard of in literature or myth. I specifically wanted to create something I did not know. I wanted them to be from my own imagination and not from something I'd heard of already. Does this make me a bad writer for straying from the old adage?
When you think about the genre of fantasy, you really must consider all things in possibility that extend from what we know. Middle Earth is nowhere in the known world, though the Shire resembles the rolling moors of England and Ireland. Hogwarts is nowhere in the known world, though there are similar mysterious castles perched on deserted cliffs in Scotland. So, perhaps we should write what we know would feel genuine to the reader, even if we’re writing about unknown, fantasy worlds that could never exist. What do you think?
Now that I've settled on writing in the fantasy genre, I’ve been pondering this Writing 101 rule lately and wondering if I’ve completely turned my back on the idea. I suppose the answer is yes and no. Just like most things in life, there is no black and white. Yes, my writing is saturated in sultry southern settings. Yes, my characters tend to be eccentric, pensive, and a bit sarcastic (like most people I know). However, I do not always adhere to what I know. For example, in my novel RISING, one thing I set out to do was to create evil creatures I had never heard of in literature or myth. I specifically wanted to create something I did not know. I wanted them to be from my own imagination and not from something I'd heard of already. Does this make me a bad writer for straying from the old adage?
When you think about the genre of fantasy, you really must consider all things in possibility that extend from what we know. Middle Earth is nowhere in the known world, though the Shire resembles the rolling moors of England and Ireland. Hogwarts is nowhere in the known world, though there are similar mysterious castles perched on deserted cliffs in Scotland. So, perhaps we should write what we know would feel genuine to the reader, even if we’re writing about unknown, fantasy worlds that could never exist. What do you think?
No comments have been added yet.
