I was on a Zoom call with an author friend of mine who writes biographical historical fiction – the type of stories I love to read! During our conversation, the topic of research came up along with a story of a woman who spent twelve years researching everything she could find on a particular historical figure and never actually wrote the book.
That chat prompted today’s question: How much research is enough?
You can read many posts on A Writer of History on the topic of research: techniques, sources, interweaving research and writing, and so on. But let’s consider the balance between researching and writing. 5 years to research and 1 year to write? That balance seems out of whack. What about 3 months to research and 2 years to write? Understandably different authors will choose a balance that works for them.
What do readers have to say on the topic?
In general, readers are quite critical of research that overwhelms a story with excessive detail. On the other hand, readers want novels that allow them to learn about a historical time period while transporting them in time and place. This suggests providing enough detail to bring the past to life and to present characters that are compelling without interfering with the pace and drama of the story.
A delicate balance indeed.
However, if you actually want to produce a novel, you need to get on with writing it. Below is an approximation of my writing process. While the diagram makes it look tidy, I can assure that it is not a ‘tidy’ process at all! I can also assure you that the process for my first novel was much more torturous than the process for my fifth historical novel.
Like other authors my research process involves a wide scan of an era or point in time – let’s say the siege of Paris which I wrote about in Paris In Ruins – plus deep dives into the topics of particular relevance to the story: Paris life in 1870, the political situation in France, Franco-German conflicts, the role of women, the technology of war, siege conditions, Napoleon III. You might find a few blog posts of interest:
Often, I’ve sketched out the bare bones of a story idea before beginning my research. That sketch helps me determine the deep-dive topics.
I also research as I write, often diving down the proverbial ‘rabbit hole’ of research while in the midst of a chapter because I realize that I don’t know enough about a particular aspect to create the authenticity required.
Of course, serendipity plays a role. While writing a twist in the plot occurs to me or a new character or a shortened timeline. I explore the thought looking for possibilities while asking myself whether it will strengthen the story and its appeal to readers. Such twists may require further research or make some of the research I’ve already done irrelevant. That’s the reality when writing historical fiction.
Andrew Noakes, founder of The History Quill, wrote an article titled 10 Essential Research Tips for Historical Fiction Writers. On the question of knowing when to start writing, Andrew said: “The truth is you’ll probably never know for sure. After all, there’s no truly objective way to measure it. But it helps to make a list of questions you think you need the answers to before you begin writing. Once those have been answered satisfactorily, you’ll know the time for writing is near.”
I’ve never thought of creating such a list of questions. Might be a good idea for the next novel.
FOR MORE ON READING & WRITING HISTORICAL FICTION FOLLOW A WRITER OF HISTORY. There’s a SUBSCRIBE function on the right hand side of the page.
M.K. Tod writes historical fiction. Her latest novel THAT WAS THEN is a contemporary thriller. Mary’s other novels, THE ADMIRAL’S WIFE, PARIS IN RUINS, TIME AND REGRET, LIES TOLD IN SILENCE and UNRAVELLED are available from Amazon, Nook, Kobo, Google Play and iTunes. She can be contacted on Facebook or on her website www.mktod.com.
12 Responses
All good advice. For both historical fiction and nonfiction, I feel I can stop when I keep coming across the same information. There may still be a few lovely nuggets left unfound, but maybe I don’t need them.
Many thanks for stopping by, Carolyn. Do you write non-fiction?
This post hits home. When I started to write my book, I did a great deal of research on the era and early places where the protagonist lived. As I moved on in the action, I researched the detail of what the place looked like, was my detail of events correct, etc. My point: I research as I go along, but before I move my protagonist from one place, situation or activity to another. Saves time needlessly researching stuff that won’t be necessary.
Interesting point of view, Sheila. As the setting changes, so does the research. How much do you do at the beginning stages?
Research. Is daunting yes. But the woman who never wrote her book was intimidated with writing her book anyway. Writing an historical is plain scary. The “what is.” Will drive you insane. Writing an historical is an olympic challenge. Question is…are you up to the challenge? And this makes research a treasure hunt
Writing an historical is plain scary … so true, Judith. Many thanks for sharing that thought.
I think it’s fair to say the research is never entirely done, but has to take a back seat to the story. Even then I sometimes have to stop writing for a quick dive into fashion or health issues. Somewhere in the process, the magic happens, and the story becomes clear.
Let the magic happen!!! Thanks, Sandra.
I think a great deal of this depends on what I can only think to call “having a sense of history.” I don’t fully know what that means, but I have seen very clearly that some writers have it and some do not. I’m not entirely sure what it consists in, but it has something to do with appreciating the nature of the differences between past and present and being able to make connections.
I remember once in a writing workshop reading a manuscript of an historical novel in which the author has a stage coach spinning its wheels in the mud. We are so used to stuck vehicles spinning their wheels, but that is because our vehicles have power driven wheels. A stage coach was drawn by horses. There was no power applied to turn the wheels and they would not under any circumstance spin on their own without forward movement.
This is an example of what I mean by having a sense of history. Without a sense of history, the anachronism would never occur to the writer as something that required research. All the research in the world can only answer those questions that you think to ask. I don’t know the exact method for developing a sense of history, but I’m sure it involves much wide reading. A narrow focus on the details of a single place and time is not going to develop it.
A writer with a mature sense of history, then, needs to do far less research to write a particular book, because they will know what questions they need to ask and will be able to focus their research accordingly. A writer without a mature sense of history, on the other hand, could spend five years digging into the minutia of a period or event and still end up with a stage coach spinning its wheels in the mud.
Love this notion of sense of history, Mark. I imagine that the more you write of a particular era, the more that ‘sense’ develops. Many thanks for adding to the discussion.
Great post, Mary. My approach is similar although planning isn’t my forte! It’s also difficult to know which topics will be important until you get going. The previous comment on ‘sense of history’ is interesting too. I don’t tend to include a lot of descriptive detail (clothes, furniture!) but many of my readers praise my ability to ‘transport’ them to another era. I guess the background research, relevant or not, feeds in in some way. I also find primary sources (I have written mainly Victorian period) are invaluable in giving a sense of the feel of the time and place.
Many thanks, Ali. The notion of being transported in time and place is so critical to a novel’s success. Even a small detail can be helpful in this regard. For those of us who write about more recent eras, we are fortunate to have easier access to primary sources.