Hi all (just renewed my subscription)!

I'm starting to research my second novel (first one is still in first draft); I've had the idea in my head for two years now and have just got round to starting the research (hence the subscription renewal). The genre (tech-thriller / crime) of the novel requires a lot more research.

I picked up some good research skills when I was writing my dissertation at university. This time I'm planning to write a detailed document that will include a scene-by-scene, chapter-by-chapter plot outline, extensive character profiles, bibliography and a lengthy section of research for each technological aspect of the novel (it's quite technical as it involves space travel and yet-to-be developed technologies). When my research is done I will have almost everything I will need to write the novel right up to a summary of each chapter.

Is this a bad way to research? Should I try and be less rigid and see where the flow takes me? I know research is important but am I being too pedantic? I can't help thinking without this level of research it is difficult to write something that is technical yet credible. Michael Chricton always seems to pull it off and he usually has hefty bibliographies at the end of his novels.

Hey Dr Q

My advice for what it's worth is go with your instincts. You are never going to know if something works or not until you try or somebody else does and tells you about it.

You may be opening up a whole new avenue or diving head-long into a dead end.

But whatever happens you will come out of the experience with and understanding and a perception that you didn't have before.

Is that worth the risk?

Best

Prosp

I think it's a great way to go if you can trust yourself to know when you need to follow your instinct off-piste. I've hit problems with too little research, and with too much. I'm not sure there's a right answer. For me it works best when I do the research, put it aside while I plan roughly enough that I'm not wedded to it, and then write to the plan, letting the research come in via the seive of my memory - though the notes and books are always there to check things afterwards. If I'm veering away from what I've researched, I will quickly check that the new idea is possible, ever since I had to re-plot a novel because I discovered the broken leg would have taken much longer to mend than I'd thought.

Emma

I think the slight risk of this approach is that you find yourself shoehorning material into the novel simply because you spent so long researching a particular area and can't bear the idea that the time spent was wasted. On the other hand, if you already have a clear concept, you can focus on researching only the areas that are strictly relevant.
Tony

if you already have a clear concept, you can focus on researching only the areas that are strictly relevant.

True, but you have to do some research before you can begin to shape your ideas into a plan. And some of the most valuable discoveries are the ones you didn't know you were looking for; they're the books either side of the one the library catalogue search told you about, they're things you hear in the train going to your ostensible research goal, they're stuff not on the map or in the guidebook that you only find when you get there.

I'm slowly evolving a system whereby I do general research beforehand, as much reading round a subject as making notes, then plan and start writing the first draft, and end up with a manuscript and a list of things to find out/check/explore. Then there's another bout of more focussed, relevant research, which feeds into the second draft.

Emma

I'm slowly evolving a system whereby I do general research beforehand, as much reading round a subject as making notes, then plan and start writing the first draft, and end up with a manuscript and a list of things to find out/check/explore. Then there's another bout of more focussed, relevant research, which feeds into the second draft.

I like the sound of that Emma, that makes sense to me. I am going to adopt that strategy.

Best

John

Yes, I like that too, Emma. In fact I've started the process with The Fifth Daughter. I set off writing that with a fairly loose idea in my head about how I wanted it to go, but so many times I came to points where I had to stop to check the facts, I ended up with 30k words of mess. So now I'm reading as much around the subject as I can lay my hands on. The next stage of the research will involve going out for lots of meals… gee it’s tough…

I don’t think there is one right answer to this. If we don’t do enough research, it shows. If we do lots and try to include it all in the ms, it shows. Finding the balance is a challenge.

DrQ, I see from your question that, while you're planning to spend all this time researching for your second novel, your first one is still in first draft. Why is that? Are you perhaps subconsciously worried that all this research is a displacement activity to avoid getting on with some writing?

Dee

that all this research is a displacement activity to avoid getting on with some writing?

Hitting the nail on the head as usual, Dee. I think many writers would admit that the research often feels like the easy bit, and researching instead of writing is a trap: 'I can't start until I've found out...'

The reverse situation can also have its problems, though. I started this new novel before - in a sense - I was ready. It has made it slower to get on with the first draft, because I keep having to stop and read round something, which makes it harder to keep going, and harder to get the pace of it all right. The bigger risk is that what I've just read then goes into the novel too undigested, because it hasn't gone through the seive of time and my memory since I read it. But I hope and trust it'll all come out in the wash.

Emma

Q. Is this research too extreme? A. I think so.

I once met a guy, a published writer, who had written a very well received historical novel set in the 18th century. I asked him how much research he did and whether he found it hard to stop doing the research and start writing. He said he didn't bother doing much research at all. He just reminded himself that rooms were lit by candles at night - and he concentrated on creating an atmosphere for the book based on that, which I believe fitted the theme of his story. He said one of the things the book was praised for was the authentic historical background - but basically he'd just approached it from a filmic point of view, getting the visual right. He'd also borne in mind that everyone travelled everywhere by horse-drawn carriage, etc. Having said that, he was an awesomely well-read and knowledgeable person, who probably had a reservoir of knowledge in his brain already.

Good story, Roger. Yes, it's often the commonplace things - how dimly lit rooms would be after dark, for instance - that take modern readers most successfully aback. Getting the visuals right is necessary, but there's also the tactiles, tastes, smells (history, I keep having to remind myself, is extremely smelly), the mindset, the morals, the religion, the world view, the language... After that, there's certainly a need to leave your research behind. Rose Tremain says she makes things up - even weirder food than really happened, say, or medicine - purely to get herself beyond the plodding, literal truth. (I think I do it by not making notes, so only the interesting stuff sticks) She only spent two weeks in Denmark to research Music and Silence which lives and breathes so authentically it's one of my favourite historical novels of all time. But yes, it would depend how much you know already - what's common knowledge to one writer another might only discover in deep research.

Emma

Has anyone read Sarah Waters' The Night Watch'? I was knocked out by her description of the bombing raid. Jacqueline Wilson recently recommended it for a summer read in one of the Saturday papers. What she said was that Waters is a great fan of Dr Who and maybe she has her own Tardis, so authentic was the detail and atmosphere in her book. I wonder what research she did for this.

I'm saving it up as a reward for finishing my first draft. I know I've read a review which said that some of her research was in the fiction of the period, as among other things she gets right, the way people talk is very authentic, which was interesting. We think of research of facts and events and places, but not always turns of phrase and vocabulary.

Emma

For me, turn of phrase is more important than anything else. It's what we deal in - language!! It really jars on me when you hear some 40's spiv on a TV drama saying" 'No way!' or 'Absolutely!'

Where has Dr Quincy gone?