|
However, there are some standardized approaches that take away some of the fluidity of the writing process. This helps keep non-fiction on track while these same approaches applied to fiction make the story flat and predictable (which is what you want for non fiction but not fiction... I hope that makes sense).
Non-fiction's art, at least in my experience, is accessiblity. If you can make a topic like ATM and Frame Relay, or Code Division Multiple Access Techniques and Wireless Data readable by the everyday average schmoe, AND, perhaps more importantly, get your information across in a way that doesn't make the reader want to commit suicide before they learn anything, then it's art. There are plenty of fiction tools that work just fine in non-fiction, analogy, satire, humor, even dialogue (when necessary) can help turn incredibly boring and disinteresting material into fun-to-read and easy-to-learn from material.
The research for non-fiction is hard at first because generally there is a vast amount of information about a whatever topic you about which you choose to write. Whittling down from everything you have to just what you need is probably the hardest part. For example, the 802.16 course I am writing offers me two full length two-day lectures by two different instructors, three additional transcripts of pieces and parts about this technology from other courses, about 200 PowerPoint slides, three teaching outlines, a tape full of student questions and instructor answers, and access to a live Subject Matter Expert when I need it.
Finding out what I need and sifting through what I have requires a few steps before writing anything. I need to establish learning objectives, outline what I am going to write by unit and lesson heading (or in the case of traditional non-telecom non-fiction, chapters/topics) then read and digest everything I have on hand. To do this I gloss books and transcripts, transcribe notes from tapes, and scripple furiously in my project notebook as I work. All of this helps me get a handle on the scope of the material. From there I cull out duplicate information (of which there is always an abundance), unrelated information, personal anecdotes that can't be rewritten and used, and anything else I don't need. Then I modify my outline with little tidbits of information. When I am happy with the content outline I've already learned the material enough to develop clear learning objectives for each unit and lesson.
Now I have learned the material enough to write about it in moderate detail, so I start writing, unit by unit, lesson by lesson, using the various objectives as my "street signs" to get me through the course.
Once that's done I make a second pass through and add any information that may have slipped through the cracks (I do this by comparing the manuscript to my notes). When I am comfortable with the content depth and flow I send it off for SME review.
When writing fiction, depending on the genre, there isn't the same need to use a rigid process. I researched Tears of Amaterasu for two years before I wrote a single word. The nice thing was I didn't really know I was researching for a book until I realized I had to explore The Rape of Nanking in fiction. I had to understand the characters, but they are primary to the story. I needed to know what, for example, Japanese army training was like, what the weather was in China at the time, what the city looked like, a few good maps of the area from that time period, how many soldiers were there, what the hierarchy of the IJA was and how my characters would fit into it. I also needed a timeline of events that I wanted to put my characters in, almost all of them were historically documented in one way or another, so I had to make sure I was accurate with the descriptions. I also needed background information on Japanese culture and religion, politics and history. Luckily most of this came while I was just reading ABOUT the Rape of Nanking. It was only when I decided to write this book did I scribbled down what I new and what I thought I needed to know (that I already didn't). Research also came in other forms, I watched countless war documentaries, shows like "Tales of the Gun" which detailed all of the weapons used by the IJA during the Sino-Japanese War, movies like The Longest Day, To end All Wars, Merry Christmas Mr. Lawrence, Men Behind the Sun, All Quiet on the Western Front, etc... I read outside the Chinese/Japanese experience about, for example, the SS in Poland and Czechoslovakia, about the Australians at Gallipoli. I looked at art by Otto Dix and read poetry by Wilfred Owen and Sigfried Sassoon to explore how war affected young men. I studied the Bushido code and the Hakagiri. I looked up pictures from the Rape of Nanking, and accounts of it, online. I made contact with Rape of Nanking deniers (yes, they exist) and peppered them with questions about how they assumed it was all fabricated. I made contact with the director T.F. Mou who made a film about the rape. I wrote the DVD Extras for his film (available at all major outlets) Black Sun: The Nanking Massacre.
But I worked from no outline, no hard notes, a few glosses in a few books, and a timeline I'd created on the back of a manuscript for an ATM course (LOL... recycling!). Again though, the research was mostly passive. I had an interest in the subject long before I wanted to write about it, and I am blessed with an very good memory for detail, so I remembered just about everything I saw or read in that two years.
Hope this helps and answers some of your questions. I hope I didn't run off at the mouth too much... :)
Now, to finish my book!
|
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
