Research, writing, and reality.

[lagilman]

This past week, I wrote a scene (snippet here) wherein my hero attempts to craft (or 'incant') a new spell by blending two already existing spellwines and reworking it. I wrote the scene to suit what I needed, using what I had already established about the world, the magic, and the character, and then went on to the next scene. Normal day in the writing-mines, yes?

And then, this morning, I was reading about the follow-up and fall-out from recent EU attempts to reclassify how a rose wine may be made, and I realized that I might -- or might not -- have written the scene with Jerzy under the influence of what I had read previously about the proposed changes. It's not a direct correlation, and the idea is a basic enough one that an apprentice winemaker/magician might easily come up with it on his own... but there are elements in both that make me wonder.

I'll never know for certain if I came up with it on my own, or was repurposing real life events to suit my plot-needs. And that's how it should be, IMO. Research is not meant to be plunked down on the page, for all to marvel at. It should be integrated in service to the story -- not on the page, but in the writer's mind [consciously or not] well before the words are actually written.

The most basic form of this has been called the "iceberg" rule -- that the reader should only see the bit of research that pokes through the surface of the plot, and not be aware of the remaining 9/10th hidden by the ocean. My name is Laura Anne Gilman, and I endorse this rule.

(And how do I feel about the proposed change in the real world winemaking? Well, the way Jerzy's experiment ends should give you some clue....)


Meanwhile, in Life in the City news, I met a friend for dinner last night, and afterward ended up in the bar @ Blue Fin, where we drank, and mocked the tourists walking by on 42nd street (BF has a full-glass wall, the better to people-watch), and entertained our waitress enough that she brought us free desserts.

Summer in NYC. It's a beautiful, if occasionally scary thing. Tourists, we mock because we love. Also, because some of your sartorial choices are... dumbfounding. Really. And Stacy and Clinton are right: No miniskirts after 40, please. Or after 170 pounds. Also: mother-daughter matching anything is never a good idea. Srsly.

Comments

[mevennen.livejournal.com]

>and entertained our waitress enough that she brought us free desserts.

Only in New York!

I once sat in a cafe near the Chelsea Hotel and did wonder vaguely why everyone seemed to be wearing leather, since they were clearly heterosexual couples from out of town. Turned out they were attending a S&M weekend.

Some of the clothes were...inadvisable.

[lagilman]

Only in New York!

Good snark is appreciated here, I have noticed that... (sadly, there is much bad snark also let loose. Snark should not be mean-spirited, just pointy).

[svilleficrecs.livejournal.com]

"Tourists, we mock because we love. "

And because about half of them like to amble at 0.5 miles an hour in 7 abreast groups, stop at the top of subway steps to check their maps and fail to understand the concept of sideWALK, not sideStand-in-a-huge-cluster-in-the-middle-of-the-thoroughfare-and-gawk-and-talk-and-block-traffic-and-then-look-at-me-who-has-to-get-to-times-square-adjascent-work-like-I'm-the-jerk-for-bumping-past-them.

Er... or maybe that's just me ;)

[lagilman]

*looks innocent of ever bitching about Slow-Moving Tourist Herds*

[fakefrenchie.livejournal.com]

I thought this was endemic to city dwellers. City dwellers in France think they have the right to block traffic on any sidewalk, just because!

[smoemeth.livejournal.com]

NYC in the summer is simultaneously awesome and ZOMG maddening. You can find parking much more easily and weekday traffic is actually manageable ... but the DAMNED TOURISTS are EVERYWHERE.

(Yes, I spent much of this past week in the city, can you tell? :})

[camille-is-here.livejournal.com]

I don't know how you explain to a tourist, aside from a smack upside the head, that their baggy camp shorts are not appropriate dress for a four star restaurant. Or, for anywhere, actually.

[6-penny.livejournal.com]

Ditto for the species when observed on Cape Cod. I once had to detour around a large clot overflowing the street corner in Woods Hole and inadvertantly overheard a debate on the ferry to the vineyard - schedules and time involved - which finished with one colourfully and very unfortunately attired person stating that it would be faster and cheaper to TAKE THE BRIDGE.
I walked way out in the street to get around them in case it was catching.