To be a successful working author, at some point in time you need to write about things that don’t already exist in your mind.
Even Christian writers are not immune to this. If you write about something in the Bible and never learn the context or study the actual meaning of the text, you might be missing something important. Relying on memory or thinking, I know this stuff, can be dangerous.
Successful books are often about something not already in the author’s head. Hence, the title of this post.
I believe the root of some “writers block” is when someone writes only what comes to mind and runs out of easily recalled material. They haven’t looked outside themselves, so they need to get out and accumulate new information.
In general, those in academic pursuits don’t have this problem since their entire profession is to learn new things continually.
I wholeheartedly agree that aspiring Christian authors should write their own story. It is good practice and relatively easy since they know everything in the story and don’t need much research.
However, a second book can present a problem when you must take your perspective and worldview out of the house and find something new to write about.
Novelists have this challenge in everything they write. They need to visit the town serving as the backdrop of their book. They need to study the historical period in which they write. They need to have firsthand knowledge of things they didn’t know before.
Nonfiction writers should be equal parts investigative journalist, historian, and writer. If you dive into a subject without the background work, it will be apparent you are writing on thin ice and run out of material quickly.
Children’s book writers need to be storytellers and teachers. If they sit down to write without those elements, the story and text will likely miss the intended target. Age appropriateness is a big issue.
Almost ten years ago, I asked in an agency post if you were Writing Out of Order. That was a different take on this same subject, focusing on platform development; but the underlying point of today and in 2015 is the same—you don’t just sit down and write a book without a significant number of things preceding it.
To exercise your brain a bit, especially if you are a writer of nonfiction, here are some questions to ponder:
- What book would you write without personal stories or anecdotes in it?
- If you could write a biography of one person you have never met, who would that be?
- If you could study and write about one historical event or period, what would it be?
- What major societal issue could you study for two years and then write about?
- If you could travel to one place in the world to gain perspective, where would that be?
When writers look outside themselves for material, discovering an endless reservoir of inspiration and material, their books become much more interesting to a wider audience.
After I took to writing,
quite soon did I find
something oh so frightening,
that I was out of my mind,
thinking that I could compete
with Tom Clancy and the Greats,
living a full life replete
with metaphoric spinning plates
of new projects and interviews,
the purchase of a baseball team,
my love life always in the news
(it’s Claudia Schiffer, look and dream!),
but success at end has been low-rent,
and I am far more than content.
Barb beats Claudia Schiffer six ways to Sunday,
I totally agree. In fact, I wrote a blog this year for a writers’ conference called “Write What You Don’t Know.” That’s how we grow as writers.
Though I am a writer of fiction for the most part, with a few nonfiction stories that have been published in Chicken Soup books and magazines, one person I would be completely excited to write about would be my dad’s uncle. I never had the chance to meet him, but really wish I could have. He served in WWII and always wanted to fly a plane. That was his passion. However, he was colorblind. They found out that because he was colorblind, he could spot camo while others couldn’t.
I was so fascinated, and still am, the first time and all of the subsequent times I hear about his life. I’d love to write about him and, hopefully after a lot of research, will.
Katrin, Jack Nicklaus, the golfer, is red-green colorblind. Since the flags that mark the hole on many courses are red, he had to adapt his depth perception paradigm to the reality, and to his limitation.
Please do write about this. You could bring hope and inspiration to a lot of people.
Fascinating Katrin! I’d love to read about this- do it!
Even though I have a few decades of history to draw from, I’m not blessed (cursed?) with an eidetic memory. So…even things from my lifetime require research. Google is a few touches away and I can search the world and the solar system/galaxy/universe! Oh, the places you’ll go! And grow! Wow!
Write about what you don’t know, very interesting. Well I certainly don’t know why Jesus is called the second Adam. I know that it cannot be that Adams life was a prophecy of the one who was to come, and that the scripture 1 Corinthians 15:46 says “However, the spiritual is not first, but the natural, and afterward the spiritual.” I do know that this scripture is in direct reference to Adam and Christ and that the word “Natural” in The Bible Concordance translates as “sin natured.” Thus meaning first the sin natured man, then the spiritual or righteous man. But I don’t know that this is a platform to interpret Adams prophetic connection to Christ (the second Adam.) It has to be a coincidence that Adam was put into a deep sleep and the woman formed from his side and that Jesus was put into a deep sleep called death and a soldier pierced his side and out came Blood and Water the two emblems of the cleansing of the bride of Christ.
I don’t know that when God brought all the animals to Adam and none were comparable to him that it was the “natural”backdrop of the Spiritual when all of the angels were brought before Jesus and none were comparable to Him. You know, the angels with wings and horns It resembled animals. But I do know that Adams woman fell to sin and Adam partook of her sin, and the second Adam took the sins of his bride that she might be redeemed. The first Adam did so in the natural /sin and they were banished from the garden.
The second Adam did it in the Spirit/ righteousness and we are invited into the garden. I don’t know that every act that Adam committed is like a photograph negative that prophesied of the spiritual one who would commit the same acts in righteousness. First the Natural/sin then the Spiritual.
I don’t know that the entire Old Testament is written in this prophetic manner and that understanding this prophetic paradigm opens up a clear understanding of the Old Testaments prophetic intent. But it certainly would answer why the sins of David turned out to be the biggest victories for Israel. Bathsheba means water it is where we get the word bath. He sent Israel to take the city of Raba (which means water) a City that they failed to conquer in the taking of the promised land and after he repents of his sin the city then falls, and when he numbers the men that carry the sword (blood) all wars ended. But it is interesting that his sins represented the Water and Blood The emblems of the cleansing of the bride of Christ. Then Solomon arose the King of Peace as a picture in type of the risen Savior. What was Solomon sin to be then mimicked in righteousness by Jesus? The many women he took as wives as a picture of the gathering of the bride of Christ?
I will continue to right about what I don’t know, but what I do know is that not reading submissions on theology from un-credentialed writers will never give you an ear to the cry in the wilderness.