Write What You Know, Know What You Write: Does It Apply to Settings?

“Write what you know” sounds redundant. Obviously, people will write about their experiences, their world and what is familiar to them. Otherwise, the writer is expected to do some serious research. It is assumed that, unless an author is setting his novel in his hometown, he/she will travel to the cities described in his/her book. But is that so necessary in fictional works?

Certain genres seldom benefit from autobiographical experience, and require more research than others (i.e. historical novels). In Fantasy and Science Fiction imagination is much more important than empirical knowledge. There is no way that J.K. Rowling ever visited Hogwarts or that Tolkien travelled to the Middle Earth.


Visiting Pompey might give you a feeling of what the natural setting was back then, but it won´t tell you how Ancient Romans lived and thought in the days before Vesuvius erupted. Visiting modern New Orleans won´t tell you how it was in the Antebellum. When I returned to my hometown, of Viña del Mar, twenty-three years after I had left for the States, I found most buildings and familiar places gone or changed. Discussing the feeling with my father, he told me that the town that I had known was twice as different from Viña in his childhood. Therefore, when I began writing a novel about Viña in the Forties, I relied much more in old books and my Dad’s memories than on the landscape I could glimpse from my window.

Everybody knows that Margaret Mitchell was a proud daughter of the South. Born and raised In Georgia, she grew up hearing family stories about the Civil War and Reconstruction periods. She did ample historical research as well, and yet historians are baffled, because Clayton County where she places Tara, the O’Hara’s home, used to be a farmhouse area. In the mid XIX century it was inhabited by small planters, and what they called “plantations” were rural backwoods homes. No Neoclassical palaces or landed aristocracy around. However, Peggy pits the scenery with large buildings standing on Greek columns, surrounded by vast cotton fields. This is a case of literary geographical license that none of us, GWTW lovers, mind.


Dan Brown’s critics have found many geographical mistakes in The Da Vinci Code. Is it another case of geographical license or Brown just forgot tiny details of Parisian streets? To be quite honest, I feel that nowadays, you don’t need to travel to a place in order to create a location. Thanks to YouTube videos, and tourist albums all over the Internet, you can get a feeling of topography place that sometimes a trip won´t give you. Moreover, if you are dealing with historical geography, a trip to the modern equivalent of your location could actually hinder you.

In my last novel, my alter ego Violante travels from Andalusia to Portugal. The natural barrier, in that region, is the Guadiana River. Nowadays, a bridge lets you do the crossing, but since my novel takes place in the early 30’s, I had to do a bit of study. It turned out that previous to the bridge’s construction, there was a ferry service. Excellent! Not so fast. Further exploration told me that ferrying people across the Guadiana was a post Spanish Civil War phenomenon. In the early Thirties, travelers had to rely on local boats and rafts to get to the other side.

And that brings us to one of my favorite writers, Jules Verne, better known as the “Father of Science Fiction.” This XIX century Frenchman managed, in pre computer days, to draft a novel per year, ending up with a list that included worldwide bestsellers and beloved classics such as Around the World in 80 Days, Journey to the Center of the Earth, and 20,000 Leagues under the Sea.


Verne combined adventure stories with scientific elements, some uncannily prophetic. But the most remarkable touch of Verne´s fiction was that although he set his novels in exotic countries, from the Amazonian jungle to China, he never traveled outside Europe. He did research through magazines, newspapers and his well-provided library. So far, nobody has disputed his geographical accuracy.

Recently we had a similar case with the award-winning The Tenderness of Wolves. Stef Penney sets her debut novel, a historical thriller, in the XIX century Canadian wilderness. The odd part was that Ms. Penney, an agoraphobia sufferer, had never been to Canada.


In this day of reality shows, we are obsessed with a sort of “realism” that implies, when it comes to writing, to rely strictly on personal experience. That is fine but does it leave room for imagination? What do you think?

Interview with Agent Chelsea Gilmore

Dear Readers,

I have a treat for all of you! Not only has the charming Chelsea Gilmore from Maria Carvainis Agency granted me this interview, but also, she has agreed to stop by the Sisterhood blog to answer any questions our readers may have! So what are you waiting for? Set your fingers on your keyboards and type away!

Enjoy!

Chelsea, welcome to the Divine Secrets of the Writing Sisterhood!

Q: How did you get your break in publishing?

A: I often joke it was dumb luck. While I’d always dreamed that there was some magical job that paid you to read, I never actually thought it existed! I’d been working at a legal recruiting company for about a year, (which was not at all what I wanted to be doing) when I saw a posting online for a position at Oxford University Press. I submitted my resume, got an interview, and was shortly thereafter hired as the Assistant to the VP/Publisher of the Higher Education Group. I held that position for about a year, and then moved over to Editorial, where I worked for over two years. It was a truly fantastic experience—I got to dabble in editorial, marketing, sales, etc. until I found my “niche.”

Q: What genres do you represent?

Women’s fiction, literary fiction, middle grade/YA, historical fiction (and romances), mysteries/thrillers—just about anything and everything! The only genres I don’t deal with are science fiction, children’s/picture books, and inspirational stories.

Q: What type of Women’s Fiction (or any of its subgenres) appeals to you the most?

A: I definitely gravitate more toward literary projects, but I’m a huge fan of women’s fiction in general, so I’m happy to look at just about anything.

Q: Back when you were an editor at Avalon Books you had to acquire books that didn’t have any graphic violence, sex, foul language or extramarital affairs. Are you following the same parameters for the books you take on as an agent?

A: Absolutely not, and I couldn’t be happier! While there is certainly much to appreciate in terms of the “family friendly” writing that Avalon publishes, I love being able to read anything I like, without any specific “rules” or guidelines dictating what’s OK and what’s not.

Q: What are your top three authors of all time? What are your top three books?

A: This is an extremely difficult question to answer! I think I really have phases when it comes to authors and favorite books—it really depends on my mood. Three authors that I continually come back to are: John Irving, David Sedaris, and J.K. Rowling. To keep things interesting, I’ll choose three books not written by any of these folks. She’s Come Undone by Wally Lamb; Let the Great World Spin by Colum McCann; and The Help by Kathryn Stockett.

Q: Please tell us what a day in the life of a literary agent is like.

A: My days typically consist of reading, emailing clients, doing research on publishing houses and editors, and keeping abreast of the dailies from sources like Publishers Lunch, Mediabistro.com, etc. I look online for exciting and popular blogs, big news stories and articles, etc. Of course, each day is slightly different from the day before, depending on what’s on my plate. I also attend conferences throughout the year, participate in the judging of contests, do guests blogs such as this, and generally try to keep my name out there.

Q: Please tell us about Maria Carvainis Agency. How many agents and interns work with you?

A: Maria and I are the only two agents. We have a fantastic assistant, Lyndsay, who helps with everything from query vetting to manuscript reading to filing royalty statements. We also currently have two incredible interns: Aviva and Tali, who help us out immensely. Martha Guzman is our sub-rights and contracts manager, and she is wonderful—extremely detail oriented, thorough, and always busy!

Q: About how many submissions do you receive per week? What do you look for in a query letter and what is the best way to submit to you?

A: On average, the agency receives about 250 queries per week. Of that, we probably request anywhere from 10 to 20 full manuscripts per week. In terms of queries, I’m mostly looking for solid, clear, and intriguing writing. An ideal query letter should focus mainly on the book itself, with a bit of personal info about the author. An indication of genre and audience, as well as a summary of the main characters and overall plot are the most important, key elements. The best way to submit your query is through good, old-fashioned snail mail. Send a query and up to ten sample pages to:

Chelsea Gilmore
Maria Carvainis Agency, Inc.
Rockefeller Center
1270 Avenue of the Americas
Suite 2320
New York, NY 10020

Q: What is one of the most common problems you see in the manuscripts you receive?

A: There is not one specific problem that I would say is common. Generally speaking, the version of your manuscript that you submit should be as clean (i.e. free of grammatical errors/typos), and well-written as possible. Sticking to a format of single-sided and double spaced is also very helpful. Also, try to be consistent with things like character names, tenses, etc.

Q: Would you take on a client based on his/her potential even if the manuscript is not ready to be sold?

A: It really depends. As a general rule, I only read completed manuscripts and prefer that the novel be as perfect as possible before signing. I am more likely to offer an author suggestions for revisions to see if he/she is capable of taking direction and notes for a re-write before offering representation.

Q: What do you think is the ideal/manageable number of clients for an agent? And how many do you aim to have?

A: I don’t think there is a formula to agenting in terms of number of clients. Maria and I pride ourselves on giving each of our clients individual attention. I think it is important for any agent to not overextend themselves to the point where they are unable to do their utmost for each client. That said, we currently have about 40 or so active clients, and I think we do an excellent job of handling each one.

Q: Could you tell us what the process is like from reading a query letter to signing a client? Have you found any clients at conferences?

A: After reading a query, if we like your work we’ll request your full manuscript. If we find your writing strong, and feel that we can sell your work, we then inquire as to what other projects you have lined up. Ideally, we want to work with writers who have plans for a long career, with multiple book ideas. If we like not just your current novel, but the plans for future work, we will then send you an agency agreement and begin the process of submitting your novel to various editors/publishers. I have found clients at conferences—it’s quite rare, but it does happen!

Q: How often and how do you communicate with your clients?

A: All the time! For clients with projects currently out on submission, there is a lot more day to day contact. For clients who are in the process of writing (or re-writing) a novel, I am here for support, to be a sounding board, etc. As I said before, Maria and I pride ourselves on giving each of our clients individual attention—we’re here when they need us, and keep the lines of communication open. Most communication happens over email and phone calls.

Q: How much marketing/self promotion is expected from a writer aside from internet interviews/blogs?

A: It really depends on the writer. I think it’s particularly important for new writers to have a solid presence online—in blogs, on Twitter, Facebook, etc. I think every author, regardless of popularity/success, needs to be capable of self-promoting. This can be in the form of book signings, blogs, book trailers, etc. Because competition is steep, and our attention spans are waning, every author needs to be diligent about keeping their name and novel(s) out there. One bit of advice that I often give in terms of blogging is that only blog if you can commit to writing a minimum of twice a week. If you feel that your schedule only allows you to update a blog once a month, it is probably better to not have one. It is also incredibly important for non-fiction authors to do a lot of self-promoting and marketing. Your platform as a non-fiction author is your lifeblood, and therefore maintaining a solid online presence is an absolute must.

Q: How are the International/Film Rights handled in your agency? Do you have someone who specifically deals with that area?

A: We do have someone who handles our foreign and other sub-rights (including film)—Martha Guzman. The agency has a very successful record of international sales. While film deals do not happen often, they are a handled by the agency.

Q: Is it true that advances are getting smaller for first time authors? In your experience, do authors more often than not exceed their advances with debut novels?

A: Yes, this is true. Advances are getting smaller in general, and especially for first-time authors. It is difficult to say whether or not authors exceed their advances with debut novels—sometimes yes, sometimes no. While big advances are great, the more important factor is staying power—do you have a publisher that will help grow your career? Will your publisher solidly promote and market your work, thus trying to keep you from getting stuck mid-list?

Q: There seems to be an ongoing controversy over the “chick lit” genre. Do you have any insight/opinion on the subject?

A: Not really. I love solid chick lit as much as the next gal. I think there are a few trends happening at the moment—middle grade and YA fiction are hugely popular, paranormal is still hot, and literary fiction is on a slight upswing. I think that it is easy for a lot of folks to look down their noses at so-called “chick lit,” and demonize it for lack of substance, being superficial, etc. But in fairness, a lot of chick lit encompasses the thing many readers love best about a good novel: escapism. When faced with a recession, political drama, etc., a lot of readers just want to disappear into the pages of a novel, and chick lit can be a real balm in that aspect. Trends come and go, and no one can predict what will be popular next, so if you have a chick lit novel that you’re dying to write, by all means write it! You never know what might appeal to an agent, editor, or reader on any given day.

Q: Finally, does your agency have a website and if not, are there any plans to build one?

A: The agency currently does not have a website, but we are certainly considering creating a very basic one with information on submissions. I’ll keep you informed of any progress!

Thank you, Chelsea, and best of luck to you in all your upcoming projects!

Pink covers.

‘When something can be read without effort, great effort has gone into its writing.’
--Enrique Jardiel Poncela, Spanish playwright and novelist, 1901-1952

There is a difference between being able to adequately assess whether or not the writing behind a project is good, and dismissing an entire sub-genre out of hand. Why is it that those projects which avail themselves of the rich trove of archetypal characterizations and plotlines and those which garner critical acclaim often congregate at opposite ends of the continuum?

To put it another way, why are the pocketbooks of the masses open for the presumably inferior devices of ‘commercial’ writing while the more refined eye of the intellectual elite appears to delight— if in a muted, ironic fashion— only in stories which regularly eschew the time-honored hero’s journey altogether?

Put yet another way, why is it that the Katherine Heigl vehicles and the Nancy Meyers projects consistently rake in the bucks while the depressing— arguably demoralizing— films and genres of literature mostly concerned with meeting Waterloo are often leagues ahead in racking up the ‘serious art’ brownie points? Why is there a disconnect between what the average heart races to consume— again and again— and what the above-average intelligence scrambles to approve of? And— perhaps most importantly— can we, as writers, heal the breach?

Is it tone? Is it execution? Or is it subject matter? Is it the difference between tying up all the loose bits at the end with a tidy bow and leaving the characters flailing in a vat of angst and lack of resolution that determines the credibility conferred upon a work? Is it all of these things? Is it any of them?

Perhaps it’s compression, the sense that if the writing is swiftly and methodically touching all of the mile markers— the call, the reluctance to answer, the introduction of allies, obstacles, heightened stakes, the turning point, the moment of grace with— on celluloid— the gratuitous close-up, the dark moment which more often than not smacks of contrivance at the end of act two chased by the scene with a manufactured sense of urgency as it barrels toward resolution— that leaves certain readers/viewers cold with the awareness that attempts at emotional manipulation are underway. Well, naturally, all experience of art is an exercise in emotional manipulation. The question then becomes is the manipulation seamless or do the seams show? And my question to you— as the writers responsible for many of these journeys— is why do the seams show more consistently in the stuff that sells?

I recently watched a Katherine Heigl film with the express purpose of dismantling the experience in order to study it. There was a row of women behind me in the theatre who laughed a lot. They peppered my viewing experience with exclamations of, ‘Oh, snap!’ and— in the moment that the boy does in fact return to the girl at the end of act three— ‘I knew it!’ When the lights went up, they cheered.

In other words, these women were moved enough by unapologetically formulaic premise, plot and execution to grow noisy and applaud— though it must be said that, personally, I gave Heigl herself a fair amount of the credit. In any event, the consumers got what they paid for. And as I sat there in my movie bucket seat next to a fellow scribe along for the experimental ride, a jumble of thoughts rushed through both mind and heart— the most salient of which were, for whom am I writing? And why?

Is my writing trying to be an artful interpretation of human experience? A commentary that is ethical in nature? Moralistic? Subversive? Sublime? Is it trying to emerge as something which pulls a more visceral punch or something that—perhaps, finally, by unabashed design— simply goes down easy? I know I want my readers to feel, but how do I want them to feel? Do I want them to laugh? Cry? Both— often? Or do I want them to think? Do I want to rout expectation or do I want to take them where they’re paying me to lead— straight through the reliable climb of escalating emotion and down a safe descent into surprising inevitability? Can I even decide— with authority— and, if so, do I have the chops to carry out any intentions with excellence?

Though a novelist, the bulk of my night stand material— say, 85%?— is non-fiction. When it comes to story, you might call me immoderately particular. I like a smart read, but not one that is too heavy. I’m partial to sharp banter between expertly-drawn voices but not too many graphic scenarios (or any, really.) I like to read characters stripped of their complacency but not of their dignity and— if at all possible— with a light touch. I favor subtlety but not authorial conceit. I like to laugh but not at the expense of substance and I like to grow but not at the (total) expense of levity. But perhaps most of all, I like to be left on an auspicious— but not hackneyed— note.

Which leads me to wonder, is it possible to write a book that can translate to a two-hour capsule— easily consumed with a side of popcorn and Junior Mints— which at the same time does not inspire the roll of a more discriminating eye? Because to imagine that a description like ‘bubble-gum pink’ covers the scope of the contemporary female living— largely through accident of birth— in an industrialized society as she grapples with vocation, love and progeny is both an indignation and a challenge.

So— in the end— does the onus of responsibility land on us as writers to execute these reputedly bromidic arcs in such a way that the dismissal of the erudite is not a foregone conclusion? Forgive me, as I seem to be all questions, today— and with precious little in the way of answers— but I’m stumped, and have been so for a rather annoyingly long time.

Perhaps you can shine some light along the way?

Until next time, dear reader.

Your,
-Aurora