I don't know some people who don't buy books by female authors. I find it baffling. I keep recommending such books to them, and I know they'd like them if they'd give them a shot.
A gifted writer should be indistinguishable from another gifted writer, at least concerning their ability to get into characters. If I can't get into the head of a female character I'm not a very good observer of life, and I'm not a very good artist in general. Artists should be capable of understanding their characters, how they'd react to any situation. My body will never experience childbirth, but it's never had a piece cut away by a broadsword either. Still, I could write about either.
I was going to let it go, but I'm up late and want to procrastinate for a minute. It might also be a good discussion.
But I don't agree that everybody needs to be that good. I think that might be setting the bar unrealistically high in the wrong areas. As an analogy, there's a lot of great actors who can only play a certain type of character. 99% of Harry Potter narrates the mind of just one character. You can do a lot of great writing without being a world class empath. Lots of people with a varied life have plenty of their own emotional experiences to draw from for a few characters, and those few characters might be all you need to develop a great story.
I don't disagree Devor, but I think you misunderstand me. I'm not claiming everyone has to be great or that they require some special empathy skill. Rather, that good writing makes it difficult to determine gender from the work alone. Also, that I find it difficult to swallow that gender grants some predisposition for writing experiences physically or culturally reserved to a particular sex.
Also, that I find it difficult to swallow that gender grants some predisposition for writing experiences physically or culturally reserved to a particular sex.
I used to be a proponent of this advice, but no longer. There are a multitude of ways you can learn or experience life. We certainly don't need expertise in a field or activity to write about it effectively. Does it lessen the learning curve? Sure, I'll grant that much. The "write what you know" advice assumes that, from experience, you'll make less technical errors and the writing will be more detailed. However, that depends entirely on the writer. Tom Clancy (RIP) never served in the military, or in any governmental service. John LeCarre (The Spy Who Came in from the Cold) was a British intelligence operative, as was Ian Fleming (James Bond creator). All three of the writers are held in high esteem with regard to their portrayal of espionage and realistic portrayals of government operations (although Fleming's Bond strayed into the fantastical).There's something to it though. I'm sure you've all heard the advice "write what you know" and I'm sure you agree that it makes sense in a way...
Yes, I know. I was just trying to elaborate with example.I used the "write what you know" as a way to link into "know what you don't know".
If that is true, your research in the subject matter is lacking. If it's in your story, you should have the knowledge.The things you're aware you don't know are things you can research and learn about. Things you don't know you're ignorant about you will keep being ignorant about. Chances are this ignorance will show through when writing about these things.
Fair enough.Yes, I know. I was just trying to elaborate with example.
Definitely. The issue is with things you're unaware you don't know enough about.If that is true, your research in the subject matter is lacking. If it's in your story, you should have the knowledge.
Can you give an example of this?The issue is with things you're unaware you don't know enough about.
Can you give an example of this?
Myself when I joined here.
I was quite convinced I was a gifted, talented and awesome writer. I just needed to sit down and actually get my story written and everyone would love it. I posted some things here on the Showcase forum, expecting people to praise me for how good it was. That didn't happen. Instead I ended up with a list of advice relating to things I'd barely even heard of (passive voice, active prose, tension, etc.).
The more I started digging into it the more I discovered I had left to learn.
If I hadn't come across this site I might have just blundered on blindly and eventually self-published a glorious contribution to the bad reputation of self-published fantasy.
I might have stumbled on some other site, but I might not. The issue is I thought I was awesome and I never really stopped to question it until someone else questioned it for me.
I don't know if you've ever tried learning a second language? It's similar. At first you get to a point where you're fairly confident with it and then all of a sudden you get past that point and you realize how insanely much you have left to learn.
Okay, now I understand you and it seems we're talking about different things.
What I'm referring to is a specific item, procedure, or event you include in a story, like how to operate a particular weapon, or how to perform a Caesarean section. If its in your story, you should have the knowledge to write about it intelligently & accurately.
A practical example would be the knight in full armor. There's this popular misconception that the armor of a mounted knight is so heavy that they can't walk on foot or get up on their own if they fall over. I bought into this for a long time without realizing it's incorrect. I like to think I've got a clue on things, but there may very well be other things like the armored knight that I take for granted but which are incorrect.