There may be writers who want to alienate their readers. (I can’t think of any, off-hand, perhaps because they’ve been so successful in achieving their goal.) But the rest of us want to draw our readers in. We want them to identify with the themes and heroes we create. In other words, we strive for universality. But oddly enough, our means of accomplishing this may be the very thing that defeats our purpose.
Early in my writing career, I wrote a film adaptation of Pearl S. Buck’s The Good Earth, a novel set in late 19th and early 20th century China. I was concerned that western audiences would be unable to relate to an obscure Asian farmer’s rise from crushing poverty to profligate wealth. Consequently, I downplayed the more “foreign” elements of the story. Result? The first draft fell as flat as an undercooked mooncake.
So I rewrote it, folding back in details I’d previously omitted: enigmatic local gods, foil papers and lucky colors, opium dens and prostitution-serving “tea houses.” To my surprise, the first studio exec who read it remarked how “universal” the story was. That was when I first came to understand the principal of:
The universal in the specific.
Readers are more interested in truth than familiarity. And to be true, writers must be authentic—fearlessly so. That is both the challenge and glory of writing. Audiences seek the universal, yes. But universality isn’t found in familiarity, it’s found in specificity. The reader seeks a vicarious experience, seeks to live in someone else’s skin for awhile. And a vicarious experience can only be created through the rich details of time, place, and character. If you’re not being specific, you’re being nothing at all.
Experiencing a life that’s different from our own is, ironically, the best way to discover how much we are alike. True stories, both real and fictional (all good fiction is true), provide the puzzle pieces that complete our picture of humanity. They help us to say, “So this is what we are.”
So don’t strive to be universal. Strive to be true. Strive to be authentic. Fearlessly inhabit the local, the unique, the specific. And you will discover that you have opened the door to…
The universal.
As a history teacher I had contempt for historical fiction. However, reading things like Jack Whyte’s CAMULOD CHRONICLES series which are profoundly authentic and rich with particulars gave me an appreciation for well-researched historical fiction. I now feel that if the story was fiction it did not matter because if it was true that’s how it would have evolved because of the authenticity of people, places and things. Or at least certainly possible. I even feel that the fictional characters would have acted the same way in a true evolution of the story’s time and place and circumstances. If I can “suspend reality” a bit, historical fiction can be a delightful and entertaining genre. On the other hand, if I am finding factual errors in the early pages the book gets tossed in the trash immediately.
Fair enough, Carl, and thanks for sharing your history teacher’s perspective.
I remember reading a book about writing historical fiction, and the author stated, that if you are reading a well researched historical fiction book, then you are reading history!
Carl, What if the author plays with a date to fit the narrative, but acknowledges that in an author’s note. I’m not talking big well-known stuff, but say, a sailing date, or the port a vessel sailed from. Does that pass or get trashed?
If in author’s note that would be acceptable but I’d prefer a story adjustment to fit actual time and place. I’ve read some high quality historical fiction and have been so impressed with the authenticity of the particulars but understand things like conversation between characters would be projections and estimations and a reasonable creation of the author. The author cannot go back in time to be a fly on the wall or tape-record those things. If it was Monday not Tuesday or rainy not sunny, well, it would not matter and I am not so learned that I’d catch every detail manipulation esp if I was engrossed in the story. I suppose there are different opinions about this but you raise a good question. Then I recall movies of ancient times and we are lucky if there is any accuracy at all. Hollywood has a unique sense of accuracy and Hollywood history is not the same as textbook history and the point on that is to be entertained not earning or teaching college credit.
Thanks for your thoughts, Carl. You make interesting and relevant points.
Just the other day I heard the marketing forces which pushed Hollywood Studios to make those block busters, Cleopatra, Ben Hur, Spartacus, et al. I can’t remember the reason now. I guess at the time the average punter wasn’t reading enough Roman history to question the content.
These days I rush home from a movie “based on a true story” and factcheck (to the degree Wikipedia is a reliable source). I find they often switch dates and conflate multiple players into one charismatic character. That is understandable ‘cos of their 90 minutes to entertain, but also concerning when people repeat the contents as true history.
With books, I wonder if it is about reader’s expectations? A novel can be fiction and called historical because of the time period in which it is set. You’d expect the author to get the setting, dress, etc correct, but not exact.
But if your central character is well-known, let’s say, Houdini, for example, then you’d expect more accuracy even if you are marketing the book as a novel, and not a biography.
It certainly is a hot topic. A recent book (A Room Made of Leaves) by a leading Australian author – Kate Grenville – sought to give Elizabeth Macarthur a voice by proposing she wrote letters which have since been discovered. (I wouldn’t expect you to know who Elizabeth was.) Many readers did not realise that was pure invention, even though Kate makes it clear she was going down the “what if” route.
https://kategrenville.com.au/books/a-room-made-of-leaves/
As for my own little effort, it is a novel, loosely based on real events, and by incorporating those into one character’s experience (for the purpose of entertainment) I had to either shift one event a year forward, or several others a year backward. So I took the least worst option, but I think I will fess up in an Author’s note. Just in case…
Might be time for Mitch to kick me off his post 🙂
Gwen, Gwen, how could you? ;>)
oooops. Don’t know what came over me 🙂
Hollywood in a nutshell: “When the legend becomes fact, print the legend.” ~’The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance’
or, let’s not ruin a good story with the facts!
Sometimes I think “based on a true story” is a very broad and therefore inaccurate and misleading statement. If a tree was in someone’s backyard well that may be the only thing true in the story.
Haha. Very droll.
A great story and wonderfully humorous, informative and helpful post. Thanks, Mitch!
My privilege, Wynne!
Wish I could give this post more than one “like.” Well-said.
Aw, thank you, Babsje.
Good advice. I read The Good Earth as a teen. It was SO far removed from my American world, but I really enjoyed it.
Truly expressed. Drawing readers in is a skill hardly writers have…
Beautiful insight. What a great share. Thank you
My pleasure, Howard.
Interesting and returns us to that place of practical advice regarding writing what you know and using sense perceptions 😀
“The Good Earth” is my favorite novel by Pearl S. Buck. I agree that specificity is the key to universality in the stories we tell.
Very good advice, Mitch. Thank you!
My pleasure, Kellye!
Thanks for your great advice!
My pleasure, Kathy!
Good advice Mitch! I will use what you have shared and incorporate it into my Linux Blog. I looked up ‘authentic’ because I wanted to be sure what it meant. It means undisputed origin; genuine. I believe that honesty is the best policy…..you agree?
I do, Cora.
I’m glad we see eye to eye on that!
I couldn’t agree more! (You’re channeling my first creative writing prof.) This is a lesson beginning writers need to internalize.
I loved The Good Earth! Is there a movie ?
Yes. Well-made and a big Academy Award winner in 1937, it’s a bit dated now, especially with caucasian actors playing Asians.
Amazon Prime has it.
“There may be writers who want to alienate their readers. ” I might be one of these, subconsciously so,
This is the worry, isn’t it? I hope I’m not alienating readers but I can’t be sure.
If truth is stranger than fiction, and fiction is based on truth, then we’re on the right path. Thanks for being so thoughtful to other writers, Mitch.
Always, Nancy. I’m a fan of non-fiction, as well as fiction.
Excellent point Mitch. Thank you.
My pleasure, Bob.
This is a wonderful post, as a writer I’m loving the advice to be real, honest and universal in my writing. Go, you good thing! Thanks, Mitch xx
My privilege, Janet.
That’s an interesting observation. Strive to be true rather than familial.
A few sentences from https://theintuitivewritingschool.com/ “To be authentic in your writing is to tap into the emotions present in your story. As you’re writing, think about how you felt, how you’re feeling now, and what thoughts were running through your mind as you retell an experience. Emotions connect. Readers can sense honest feelings.”