Ggthjy

The amount of research I'm doing for my novel is staggering. To the point where my spouse says I need to write a companion book (or a blog) just talking about the research! Sometimes I research for hours simply to include one line.

I live in terror of having my characters eat a food that didn't exist in that time and place! Okay, not really. But that is in fact the level of accuracy I'm going for.

Food is one example. I describe in detail the first meal my time travelers have when they arrive in ancient Egypt. The second meal I wrote more sparsely and my critique group jumped on me. They wanted more! This makes sense because the Exodus (yes, the Exodus) is starting in a few days and the contrast between the rich assortment of food they ate in Egypt vs the manna and quail they have in the desert is an important part of the story. Though my group wasn't thinking of that, they just liked my food descriptions.

I'm also researching clothing, housing, furniture, songs, linguistics, hair styles, ethnic groups, landscape, plants, makeup, musical instruments, dance styles, footwear, brickmaking, agricultural practices, domesticated animals, wild animals, weather, metalworking, joinery, midwifery, medicine, and so much Torah I say it's like having 20 bat mitzvahs (only that's a huge underestimate).

In addition to using beta readers (and some basic common sense), how do you balance the amount of research you're doing with how much ends up in the work? Some times it's easy, because the research makes subtle changes you incorporate, other times it's harder to figure out.

Include exactly as much detail as you need for the story to make sense. If the group complained about you changing your descriptions simply because they liked the rich description of the foods, they were doing you a disservice in terms of their critique. The reader should like the description of the rich foods in Egypt more than the description of foods eaten in the desert while fleeing. That's good writing.

I know it's vague and not immediately useful to say "use as much detail as you need", but that's really the best way to do it. Any time you're tempted to add in some historical research bits, consider the tone of the story and what you're trying to express, and whether or not those details add to the story, or simply distract.

In this case, having read some of your previous questions, it seems like conveying some historical information is important to your story, so I would certainly err on the side of more detail-- but never to the point that it fails to serve plot.

I think you're conceptualizing this wrongly. The research doesn't end up in your work, it informs your work.

The amount of research you do ends up affecting the fabric of your book, how real it feels, how multilayered the world is, how unexpected the details, and connections. But NO piece of research should ever be included in your book just because you know it. Your research is there so you have something to draw on whenever you need it. To put it another way, you aren't doing research to put it in your book, you're doing it to pull your book out of it.

As far as how much research you need, it needs to be enough that your world feels compelling and real, but not so much that it's stopping you from writing. If it isn't interfering with your writing, no amount of research is "too much." If it inspires you to write richly detailed prose, that's all to the good. But if you're shoehorning it into the book, not because it belongs, but just to show off your knowledge, then it's "too much." And if you're spending all your time researching, and you never actually write the book, that's "too much" too.

I set "levels," and don't include technology beyond the level. Often I only research a word, in an online etymology dictionary, to see when it originated. e.g. "linen" comes from "linum" which is the Roman word for the flax plant, which provides the fibre for "line" (thread). Done, linen predates the time period of my story, thus is allowed, the production of line and fabric is a potential industry.

Basically, although I use modern English words to make it easy for my readers, I don't allow any words that have origins past my cut-off date. If they don't trace back to Old English, or pre-Cutoff, I don't use them, and certainly not any technology they involve.

As for the rest of the research I do, it is often cursory, I look up a few relevant things that prove a point and quit. I intentionally do not take any notes, if I can't remember it for fifteen minutes, it isn't worth remembering. For example, I am not truly interested in all the possible sword types that exist, I don't want to choose one from an array of hundreds, I want one sword that is not too heavy and suitable for a woman to carry. So I am not immersing myself in the history of swords, I am looking for ONE THING to describe, and I know it when I see it.

In fiction, my goal is only to present the sense of the time, I do not feel compelled to be historically accurate. If I give a woman sword X, I don't really care if there is a reader out there that is going to claim I should have given her sword Y. Because sword X is a real sword, I saw it. Maybe that is what her father used to teach her self-defense, and that is her sword of preference. Would a father teach his daughter self-defense? I think it is a pretty radical claim that not ONE father of the time would ever do that! To me it is plausible HER father did that, and -- as always in my fiction -- it is okay to follow exceptional people that do not fit the standard mold, no matter what time period I am writing in.

I research only what I feel is necessary for the page or scene or character. I research with that in mind, and I stop the minute I am convinced I found it. I want to be accurate, but I don't want to write a history lesson or explain why I am accurate. I feel like that kind of exposition stalls the story.

So to answer the question more directly: Nearly everything I research ends up in the book, in the sense that I don't research something unless I really need to write about it, and although I may discover things I didn't know in the process, I don't turn the research into an idle learning process just because it is fun, I stay focused on the goal and the scene, and don't learn any more than is necessary. It is my time to write, not procrastinate by learning a bunch of stuff that will never make it into my story.

Now, that said, I am a discovery writer so I may discard scenes even if they contained a researched item. But at the time I am, say, looking to see medieval footwear, I find that and get out and write about it. I just tried it! It took about one minute to find a history of the shoe from neolithic to modern times, and two more minutes to find medieval shoes specifically, with plenty of ideas of earlier shoes. Roman sandals could be worn today and look normal. Medieval shoes could be basically moccasins with leather or string ties; but you can get fancy with pointy shoes, or even cork soles. Cool. Let's write. That's what my research looks like.

You need to satisfy your readers.

Depending on genre (and subgenre), as well as many other aspects, the book may attract different kinds of readers. One kind may look for the story and wouldn't mind any anachronisms, the other kind would appreciate historical and technical accuracy and even rely on the book to expand their knowledge.

So, if you want the ancient history buffs to enjoy your book, you need to do a lot of research (or show that you are already an expert in that area). There maybe aren't too many of them, but if they would praise your book, that support may prove to be crucial for the success. And if you do a lot of research, don't be afraid to show it off. For example, find a way to stress the fact that the food choices of your characters are not random, but rather enforced by what was available at the time and place of your story.

On the other hand, if you want your book to be just an easy read, limit your research to just a minimal level. Focus on other aspects, like plot and characters.

"How much research is too much" is a difficult question. If you target your book to the history buffs, that crowd can be nitpicking and unforgiving. You may be already familiar with online communities of history enthusiasts - so try to guess what level of accuracy in a novel can be satisfying.