Sunday, August 12, 2018

A Reader's Question About Setting


LUCY BURDETTE: A friend of JRW (name suppressed to protect the innocent, LOL) wrote me recently with a question about setting. She wondered how the Reds would answer, but I thought lots of you might like to weigh in. So here goes...

Here's the dilemma: suppose you come up with a whole story that you like, pretty high concept. BUT for some reason in your head it is based in a place you don't know very well. Would you develop the character in a setting you knew better, assuming the plot points would work the same (and adapting to do so) or would you stick to the way it plays out in your head and research the area? Boy, I hope that makes sense. It feels like such a fanfic question. 🙂 But I suspect the reason the setting is stuck in a place I don't know is the idea came to me while watching TV. Not the same character, but loosely based on one.

LUCY again: I use real settings, including of course Key West, and find the more I immerse myself in them, the easier it is to write. But there are drawbacks such as what if reality doesn't work for the story? And what if you get something wrong? And what if reality changes?

What do you all think?


21 comments:

  1. Wow, that’s a tough question, Lucy.

    I think that knowing a place, being able to put that reality into the telling of the story, allows an author to bring the setting to life in a special way. That said, these days it’s so easy to get a great deal of information without actually visiting or touring a particular place. With all that’s available on the Internet and with satellite maps that let you actually see an area, it’s probably possible for a writer to put in some setting “specifics” even if they’ve never been to that place before. That may not offer the same depth in the setting as having that first-hand knowledge, but it may solve your friend’s dilemma . . . .

    ReplyDelete
  2. I'm a great fan of listening to my inner voice. There's stuff going on up in the attic or down in the basement that I'm only vaguely aware of, but when it does bubble up to the surface it's important. So I say, if a story speaks to you about a particular setting, go there. Give yourself time to explore it. Maybe adapt your character to have the same level of knowledge you have, so if he/she gets something wrong you can blame it on that. But go there. Breathe the air. Find a coffee shop where the locals go. Watch the people who live downtown flow through the post office every morning to get their mail. Figure out how it works. There is no substitute.

    And, yes, I know all the excuses: You don't have enough vacation time; you can't afford it; you hate to fly; you really should visit your mother; the family wants to go to Disneyland this year. Screw all that. Something about that place is speaking to you. Just go.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Love that suggestion Gigi, of adapting your character so she's at the level of knowledge you are. then mistakes are her fault, not yours!

      Delete
  3. I totally agree with Gigi - if you are telling a story that happens in a real place then you must be familiar with that place and you can only be truly familiar if you actually go there and walk the streets or climb the hills of that place. Go to the grocery store and chat with the locals.

    ReplyDelete
  4. As a reader, I’m greedy. I want characters who are real to me in the story and I want the story to be set in a place that comes alive on the page. I would think that it would be easier to achieve this if you - the writer- actually know the setting because you’ve actually spent time there. Or invent a setting and spend time creating it; then have your characters live in it. Regardless, authenticity must surely be grounded in first-hand knowledge. I’m with Gigi — forget Disney World: go where your characters are!!

    ReplyDelete
  5. I find it difficult to write about a place I've never been. I need to smell the gritty streets and hear how the locals talk. I wrote a historic story about Cape Cod during WW2 and did lots of research about how much a pay phone cost (a nickel) and what sized container the Army use for gasoline, but I knew the setting intimately (beach, birds, fish, architecture, the smell of salt air).

    ReplyDelete
  6. I would say there's something compelling about a setting that comes to you in such a way--if you adapt it to fit someplace you already know, you will (a) have a different story already, and (b) lose that sense of discovery and excitement of learning a new place--a sense that could make this story come alive for your characters and your readers.

    ReplyDelete
  7. With the exception of one short story ("The Far End of Nowhere" set in a fictional WV town), my settings are all real. I take trips where I can and others I know because I live there (Pittsburgh) or grew up there (Buffalo). Although I did have to do a lot of research for 1942 Buffalo.

    I think the story comes to you in a particular setting for a reason. You might try roughing out a scene or two in a different setting and see how it goes.

    My $0.02 adjusted for inflation.

    Mary/Liz

    ReplyDelete
  8. Setting is so important to me, Lucy. I couldn't write the story unless I felt really comfortable there. And since characters are so much a product of their setting, it has to be right and real. I do lots of research including going to the place, reading tons of books, biographies etc.

    ReplyDelete
  9. If it’s a real place then you have to be familiar with it otherwise someone who’s been there is going to notice the errors. However, places do change and that’s beyond an author’s control unless of course they are setting a piece in the past.

    ReplyDelete
  10. From this reader's viewpoint, it either makes a huge difference that the writer gets the place particulars right -- or none at all. If I've been there, then I want authenticity. On the other hand, if I haven't, I don't know the difference.

    Therefore, in my humble opinion, and since you can't select your audience, I think you should be very familiar with the setting. I don't object to fictitious details, as in a church on the corner where there is neither church or corner, but please get the real stuff right.

    Thanks in advance and happy mid-August.

    ReplyDelete
  11. I think I have to agree with Gigi, and then Flora. You've had a gift if a story is speaking to you in that way, and those sorts of gifts should never be turned down. Learn as much as you can about that place, and then is there's no way you can possibly manage to actually visit, see if you can fictionalize it a little so that if you make a mistake it won't be obvious.

    I want to hear what our own Jenn McKinlay has to say, since she set a book, the first in her Hat Shop series, in Notting Hill in London, without actually going there. I couldn't believe when I read that book that she hadn't been! So it can be pulled off successfully if you really do your research, and then just use all your writer's tools--what does it look like, smell like, sound like, and you may be able to extrapolate those from things that are already familiar.

    ReplyDelete
  12. To be honest, chances are I haven't been there either. I hate when writers use so much local shorthand for places and things that I'm not familiar with. Things like "I walked into Tammy's Tea Shop," Then they don't describe the Tea Shop. Never having been there I can't fill in the blanks that locals can. I also hate books that feel like a tour guide. And if it is in the past, there is no time machine to go back and experience it. Research is the best alternative. It is great if writers can to go a place to write about it, but you certainly don't have to. There are so many resources these days. I have a series of blog posts coming up on that topic. You can make a place feel real with careful selection of details without going too far down the research rabbit hole.

    ReplyDelete
  13. I would say: just write the story, and see how it comes out. I would say, stop wearing about that question. And write. Can’t even imagine, at this point, where it might go.

    ReplyDelete
  14. When an author's note at the front of the book states that some locations in the actual place where the story is set have been tweaked to fit the story line, I am fine with that, whether or not I'm familiar with the place.

    DebRo

    ReplyDelete
  15. I've done both. I write about real and made up places. It really depends upon what the story needs and whether I want to be tied to a "real" place and its history or not. Interesting question!

    ReplyDelete
  16. Setting in a book can be - perhaps should be - a character. So think which "setting character" you want, then do everything you can to make that character interesting, depthful, see how it influences the world around it, and the characters in it. Then, of course, write.

    ReplyDelete
  17. As a reader, I want the setting to feel real even if it's a made up place. I would think even if it's a made up place you would still need to research the general area, so you can keep the local customs, speech, etc authentic.

    ReplyDelete
  18. Go with your gut, do the research, and try to visit. Have you been any place similar in terms of climate, population, culture? Draw on that. I need to really feel the place where my books are set to make it authentic, but people write about space convincingly never having been there! Don't let the unknown put you off. As Hank said, you never know where you might end up. Think of it as an adventure for you, the writer, that may pay off big time for your readers.

    ReplyDelete
  19. I am a big fan of setting and it becoming as another character in a book, whether I've been to the location or not. (I hope to talk a bit about books with setting I love on the reviewers' panel at Bouchercon.) Of course, if I've been there, and the author's descriptions take me back there just like I'm walking the streets again, it's so satisfying. I'm talking Lucy/Roberta and the Key West series. Then, there are those (Deborah Crombie) who write a setting that entices me to visit, and, yes, I'm still plugging for a London tour of Debs' series. Peter May and his books set in the Hebrides of Scotland leave me longing to visit there, too, and his setting is completely one of the characters. The story just couldn't take place somewhere else.

    Having said how important setting can be to me, I have to do a 180 and admit that there are some stories where I find the setting not so important, but the story still stands strong. In other words, the story could pretty much take place in many different locations and still be a compelling story. So, while I love a setting that enhances or even drives a story, I can also enjoy a story independent of it. Favorite is setting enhanced though.

    If I were writing a story that had come to me with a particular setting, I would stick with that setting and research it. Of course, the best research would be to visit the place and get some local color. If that's just not possible, then reading as much as possible about it, including pieces from those who live there and/or have visited.

    When the importance of setting comes up, I do have to recall and point out that Diana Gabaldon had never set foot in Scotland when she wrote the first Outlander book, and I don't have to tell you how that turned out. Of course, after the first book, she has made many trips to Scotland, but the success story of that first book is quite something.

    ReplyDelete
  20. Some books' settings really stand out, either because I've been there or because the author did a great job or both. Edgar Rice Burroughs was never in Africa, Mars, Venus or the other places he wrote about, and he got them all wrong but I remember the Tarzan, John Carter of Mars, and others very well. He even wrote a language for one Tarzan book. I'd say write the best you can. It is called fiction!

    ReplyDelete