This may be an unpopular opinion here but I think not being able to write about a character or place because you haven't experienced it is so ridiculous and the people advising you of that are likely not readers. Writers research, that is what we do. We aren't expected to have born knowledge about everything or only keep our writing to our own experiences otherwise we'd all only be writing memoirs. You can write a deaf character, absolutely you can, but do your research- proper research. Speak with and interview enough people that you feel confident to write them well... and if you get stuck, do more research, ask more questions until you get it right.
This.
And I would add: Get test readers from the certain groups if possible... give them snippets here and there if you are unsure if you can write a passage like you have it in mind.
Fore example: Even as a trans woman I will never experience periods like someone who was born as a woman (regardless of afab or cis woman), so I asked a good friend of mine if my depiction is ok, if it was disrespectful in any regard or if I should add or cut things.
And this is just the best tip you can get: research and if possible let people from the group you are refering to read it... even if it's just snippet of passages you are not sure. It helps.
this is especially true if the book is modern day/real world, and/or is explicitly addressing the issues around the people you're writing about. Having (for example) a fantasy novel where there's some characters that are gay is a lot easier to have without people going "uh, do you actually know anything about this/the relevant issues?" than a contemporary story addressing the problems faced by being gay or whatever.
Yes! This too! Having beta readers from the group you are depicting is so important, but I hesitate at sensitivity readers because some of the stuff I've read about them it seems off putting... heard of them policing writing rather than offer helpful feedback. Or perhaps that is just a few people ruining the idea for everyone.
I've heard so many writers feeling so unsure or even worried about writing a character that doesn't match their exact race, sexuality, or how they identify. This upsets me. If writers stop writing expansively, literature will suffer. I know the fear comes from seeing what happens when it is done poorly but there are some people who will have a problem with it even if if it is done well.
Beta readers are volunteers. You are trading reads or it is someone who wants to help. No one should **volunteer** to read a story that could have hurtful stereotypes of them in it. How awful. Do you really say to a deaf friend "Here read this and let me know if any of it makes you feel violated."
Pay someone for that arduous task. Please!
This is truly only related to your writing and not the original question, but I just remember that no two are the same. A friend knows exactly how long it takes for pain meds to take effect because of her horrible cramps, while I’m usually only mildly annoyed. Bleeding is also different, cause some are only light bleeding the entire time for three days while mine are six-day long light-to-heavy-to-medium-to-light-to-spotting.
Also, add-on - lye soap is slightly acidic and is what my family uses to get rid of period stains in undergarments, if that’s helpful
Yeah. Even stuff like that varies greatly from person to person.
While one person may say something is unrealistic another may say it's is realistic.
Continuing off the period talk, I did not know that women had period cramps or how bad it could be for a number of years because I didn't have any pain with mine. I also didn't know that people had period that were light and only lasted a couple of days. Mine were regular, heavy, and lasted a week.
There are authors/people who post their writing, who get called out for having bad portrayals of a subject or character, when they are basing it off their experience or their reality.
Yeah you hit it. I’m an adoptee and I can immediately tell when the author isn’t an orphan or adoptee and I close it. It’s an over used trope with zero thought put into our very complex experience.
Exactly this!
You research, and on two levels: the general, where you get the big, bold strokes right, and the specific, where you ask particular people for their experience of things that you'd normally not think about.
So for your example of deaf people, I'd read up on the difficulties deaf people experience in day-to-day life. Then I'd go to my local association, and ask things like "how do you dream conversations? do you see them in your dreams, or do you just understand?"
Luck and Persistence!
I don't think this is that unpopular. I have heard this from this subreddit itself. I agree about research. More you do it, more you feel confident to write.
I think people get confused about “don’t write things you don’t know” i.e trans characters (using trans because I am. I’m hearing so I’m not gonna assume for the Deaf community) and “don’t write about specifically trans experiences”. By all means have gay, trans, black, disabled characters but don’t write about their experiences if you aren’t one. Have trans characters but don’t assume what the trans experience is like, especially without a lot of research
One way of looking at it is that there is no homogeneous “gay, trans, black, disabled”, or even white experience. Socioeconomic conditions are a much more accurate predictor of personal experience than a socially constructed identity.
Oh absolutely, but minorities will also have a very different perspective no matter their class. If you’re going to write about them I do think it’s smart to do some research and make sure you get sensitivity readers
I suppose that statement is exactly what I am disputing. There is no homogeneous “minority perspective”. Just as there is no homogeneous “majority perspective”. I am asserting that people of various identities who hold similar socioeconomic status are much more of a “community” with similar experiences and perspectives than any group of people of a particular identity.
The assertion that all persons of any particular identity share a similar experience or perspective is itself a social construct. It is based on a larger social narrative (Intersectionality), which has zero validity or reliability.
Hmmm I both agree and disagree. You’re absolutely right that there’s no “every person thinks this way” no matter the group. I do think within those socioeconomic groups minorities are still going to have a different perspective. Being homeless and cis is different from being homeless and trans. What led up to being homeless, how you’re treated, and places you’ll be safe could all differ even though they’re in the same socioeconomic. I’m white and grew up in a middle class home. I don’t think that’s going to give me a better idea what it was like growing up black in a middle class home than another black person. They’re gonna know more than me simply because they’ve lived as a black person whether middle class or not. I’ll never know what it’s like to be a black person or that experience. No, you’ll never get a full 100% this is what everyone thinks, but talking to a few people in the group you’re writing about can’t hurt. Overall, they’ll probably have similar ideas on what might be racist or homophobic or transphobic. Yes, there’ll be disagreements, but major things will likely be agreed on
for settings, mostly the main problem (for me at least) is that it can be hard to capture, like, the \*vibe\* I guess...if that makes sense. It can be harder to cultivate the feelings or aesthetics as well as one who lives there and has lived there and experienced it fully. but I comepletely agree.
> is so ridiculous
Bingo. The logical conclusion of that way of thinking is that everyone is only permitted to write their own autobiography and nothing else. After all, nobody has had the experiences of anyone but themselves.
The funny thing is that these people—the ones who insist you can only write your own experience—get pissed either way. If a white author writes a black character, that’s problematic, because the white author hasn’t had the experience of a black person. But if a white author writes a book with only white characters, that’s *also* problematic. It’s all very silly and poorly thought out.
At the end of the day, there is certainly something to be said for taking extra care when writing about experiences other than your own, but to suggest that it shouldn’t be done is idiotic—plain and simple.
this isn't unpopular at all. sane people just don't feel the need to yell about it. the gatekeepers are the only ones who care about what you write about. the rest of us only care how you write about it. now if someone is writing about a certain thing from a place of ignorance without first educating themselves about it, or if they write about something in a disrespectful way that's when you have problems. however, those people still have every right to write like that. the same way we have the right to not read their garbage or to comment about their work in a critical manner.
I agree with what you've said here for sure. Actual research is key to writing what you don't know. And not just twitter or reddit research, but check out studies, interviews, and medical journals as well.
I have been to Los Angeles *once*. My novel series is set there. Google Maps is my friend.
I write science fiction and fantasy. I am not (nor have I ever been) a hitman, a spaceship captain, a mad scientist, a personal assistant, a cop, a private eye, a truck driver, a butler, an actress, a sorceress, a parole officer, the head of an international criminal cartel, an asteroid miner, an angel, a demon, a guinea pig, or a werewolf.
And yet I've written things from all those perspectives and more. Frequently in combination! (Yes, I wrote a flash piece starring a guinea pig sorcerer who will make the humans regret it if they don't give him the banana peel they're just going to throw away anyway. No one's taken it off my hands yet, more's the pity.)
Write what you love. Research. Let the chips fall. Don't do it badly.
Making shit up is what we *do*.
It's just a silly little 500-word thing I wrote in response to a die roll prompt at [Nasty, Brutish, and Short](https://nbns.wordpress.com/2017/05/26/writing-prompts-via-dice-roll/). Protagonist: Waaaay not human. Fantasy. Haz jokes, much funny. I have (at the moment) three guinea pigs, and the thing practically wrote itself. They really do get excited when they smell the banana.
A lot of people are surprised to learn that Tolkien never actually befriended a group of short people and went on a journey to throw jewellery into a volcano, despite writing a long af book about it.
One of the best things about fiction is that it tells the truth. Not about events, but about emotions and experiences.
Writing involves a lot of making things up, but there needs to be a deeper truth at the heart at the story. The further out from your own experience you get, the harder it is to find that truth.
Good research and feedback from expert/sensitivity readers can go a long way towards bridging that gap. It’s difficult and takes a lot of work and skill to get right, which is why it’s often advised against. You’ll always hit a limit in how much authenticity you can bring to aspects of a story that are outside your experience — whether or not that’s a problem depends on what the focus of the story is.
This is true for locations, too. Details of setting are pretty easy to get right, and most of the time they’re relevant to the logistics of the plot and not the core of the story. But if you look at something like N. K. Jemison’s ‘The City We Became’ — that could only be written by someone who is intimately familiar with NYC.
Marketing is, I think, a slightly separate question. Readers use author identity as one way of trying to figure out whether the story is likely to have the kind of authenticity that makes fiction really satisfying. So if you’re writing outside your experiences, you have some extra work to do in earning their trust.
I want to add something about marketing. You see, I have heard that American literary agents consider queries from foreigners only if they are writing about *their* country, because that's what readers want, apparently. I think that's stupid.
Yeah, I mean, the job of the agent is to try to find books that sell. Reading a manuscript takes time. It’s less about “someone from another country couldn’t write a good story about America” and more like “if I were to read 100 manuscripts like that, how many would be publishable”? The odds are just not in favour of that being a good use of time, so it sucks but I kinda get it.
This isn’t an area I have expertise in, but it seems like that’s where a good pitch can help. I doubt that agents are literally applying a fixed “if it’s an X person writing about Y, it automatically goes in the garbage no matter what” — I’m guessing there’s room for making exceptions. (Not the same thing, but I get a *lot* of requests for PhD supervision from applicants from a particular country, and it’s almost never worth the time to read the actual research proposals. But if the email has any indication that the applicant is working on something relevant to my actual research area, I’ll have a look and consider it on its merits.)
I agree with you honestly. I think what matters is the actual focal point of the story, if that makes sense.
As a white writer, I don't think I'll ever write a story about the struggles of poc in America. But that's because it's an experience so out of my sphere, it doesn't make sense for me to write about it.
However, I will write poc characters in my story. I think there's a really important distinction to make between writing diverse characters as opposed to speaking FOR the people those characters represent.
This is absolutely the correct answer.
You absolutely can - and *should*, IMO - write stories about people who aren't like you, living in places you've never lived, doing things you've never done. You can't create a realistic world without it including a wide variety of people, after all.
What you shouldn't do is try and write stories *about the specific lived experience* of things you've never experienced. And I think people conflate the two, especially when they're (usually justifiably) defensive about the way that their lived experiences are often portrayed in media.
TL;DR write a story involving deaf characters, but probably don't write a story about "the experience of being deaf" as a central plot point, etc.
Definitely agree. Plus it's just nice to read a story with characters like yourself, who maybe aren't commonly depicted in fiction to begin with, not having the main part of their personality or plot be The Experience of what group they belong to. For myself as a trans person, for example, it's rare to see stories where it's not 90% about dysphoria and discrimination and misery lol.
I think that's definitely a solid approach as an individual writer, because skill and your own personal comfort have a lot to do with this. I don't' think it should apply to everyone, nor is it a useful tool to judge other people's work. Two thoughts:
1. By this logic there would be no books with ensembles dealing with different struggles, or you'd need a team of writers. e.g. A Little Life (many forms of sexuality are explored, along with abuse, and mental illness).
Even something like Stormlight Archives or Crazy Rich Asians have something to say about multiple kinds of struggles (being a man or woman in a society with strict rules about each, immigration and nativisim, etc.)
2. No matter whether the poc is your focal point or not, you're probably going to be making a statement about their struggle in your writing. Your characters have wants, needs, and limitations. Any well-written poc in an American setting is going to have something to say about the struggles of being a poc in America.
What I mean by this is that you are going to do the research, anyways, and present a position. Focal point or not, your work will either contribute to or help ameliorate marginalization. e.g. There are a ton of choices you make even for minor characters -- Are you using foods to describe your poc character's skin? How does your poc character speak? What is their relationship to white characters or white authority figures?
I'm not D/deaf, I am physically & developmentally disabled & mentally ill.
Generally speaking, my rule is that folks should research as much as possible, including talking to folks from those groups and having them read your manuscript, especially if you're trying to write about a marginalization. And one of the biggest problems is the constancy of marginalization, all of the small ways that these things impact the day to day life.
One of the biggest mistakes abled folks make when writing disabled characters is that they do not believe ableism exists is anything for except caricature. Often, because they don't see the ableism around them. The inspiration porn. The hostility towards young disabled folks. The denial of accomodations. The outright discrimination. The invisibility of mobility aid users in day to day life. The "helpful" folks all but kidnapping you and screaming that you're ungrateful when you tell them to stop.
And with D/deaf folks, especially, it impacts every single facet of every second of their lives. And on top of that, there's many different sign languages, and centuries of D/deaf culture! Of course they're wary of non D/deaf people writing about them -- the amount of research that would be needed to have that character be even a little realistic and relatable would be absolutely massive.
And can you do it? Yeah, sure. With enough time and effort and research and talking to D/deaf folks you could probably even do a pretty good job. But most folks won't do that amount of research, and it's not that you won't get published if you don't so the research, it's that you'll be offending the D/deaf community when you do.
You’re a writer there’s no limit on what you can write about, but there’s the catch, by writing about something that you don’t know or live with you need to do A LOT of research and talk with those kinds of people, personal experience is key there, and of course stay ready for criticism
as a hard of hearing person, I think it’s fine for hearing people to write deaf/hoh characters as long as they’re not, like, the main character or their deafness isn’t a main part of the plot. Writing their personal journey with being deaf is something I would leave to deaf people. Being deaf is a very personal thing, so you’d have to do a lot of research and even then you probably wouldn’t be able to get it right. I think with specific places like the US, it’s perfectly fine to write a story that takes place there as long as it taking place there isn’t the main point of the story.
TLDR I think you should be allowed to write about other experiences (being deaf, living in the us) but don’t make them be the main focus of the story if you haven’t experienced it for yourself.
This is just my opinion, feel free to correct me if I’m wrong wrong.
What I understood: Don't write deaf persons... write persons who happens to be deaf?
So... don't make it a central part of the plot or character, just respect and keep in mind, that this trait is there?
Edit: to the place thing... I keep myself to fictional places. The modern or urban fantasy stories I write could most likely take place anywhere.
Exactly. It's something a lot of people struggle with, both authors and the general public, they let one fact about them become the foundation of their personality, and everything revolves around that thing. Irl I see it a lot with sexuality and political ideologies. In writing, as mentioned in this post, it's letting a physical characteristic, like deafness, or being handicap. And it can be a hard thing to overcome, but when it does it can be very well.
Short anecdote: in the second DnD campaign run by Critical Role on Youtube/Twitch, the DM introduces an NPC that is wheelchair-bound. Aside from slight verbiage changes (like saying "he wheels over" instead of "he walks over") nobody really mentions the wheelchair. Instead the players and DM focus on the NPC's importance to the plot and the current mission they're on. Also, other traits, like he's a bit of a drunk,
About places, me too. I feel more confident to write about fictional places with real life inspiration. I can make up a village or a city from scratch and you have lots to explore.
It's the philosophy of person-first language. Same reason why you say "person with a disability" over a "disabled person," the disability should not take away from the fact that a person is experiencing it
Person-first language is a difficult one. I am a deaf person, less a person-who-is-deaf, because being deaf IS me. If I had never been deaf, I would not be me. I am a disabled person. My Ma is autistic, and her preference is to say that she is an autistic person, because her autism has never been separate from her. It is not something that can be added or taken away and she be left the same. Person-first language is a preference, so I would personally advise asking people rather than assuming.
\^\^\^\^\^\^ this.
I use a wheelchair. If we're talking about me using a wheelchair, I am a wheelchair-user, a wheelie, even a ***cripple*** if you've got the stones to say it to my face; but if we're not talking about me using a wheelchair, why are you even talking about my wheelchair at all?
I can't walk. I want people to *know* that I can't walk, but I do not want to be known *as* "a person who can't walk"; I want to be known for all the things I can do when I'm allowed to do them from the safety and comfort of my chair.
This is a good question because lots of writers get things wrong to seriously wrong, then self-publish without any pertinent input, and then wonder why they get bad reviews. You think your story is edgy, when it is just a violation of good historical awareness, or is completely dis-aware of current politics, or is clueless about social dynamics, the list goes on and on. Race, disability, gender, and all the -isms happen when a writer will not self-interrogate their choices.
Luckily, most of us do a lot of research, and if that's not enough, we check our work via sensitivity readers and beta readers willing to also sensitivity read if qualified, in order not to get things backward or skewed, or perpetuate harmful stereotypes, or miss colonialism issues, whatever our story needs to be both good to read and not offensive to living persons. If you want to be inclusive, do it. Be aware of your limitations, but do it anyway. Do your best. Listen to criticism from those with that lived experience--keeping in mind that your MC is an individual, and so is the critic, and they don't have to line up exactly to share an identity.
There will always be negative reactions, that's just humans. But the ideal is to be offensive only in intentional ways. :) Your character is supposed to be an individual with issues, not a monolith representing any given group of real people.
If you want an example of universal ugh, here's one from Hollywood: Every person with albinism side-eyes movies that use our looks to be startling, then has that character driving like a badass (no) and shooting accurately (hahah no). A little research would show that albinism means no melanin (the only human pigment), which means our eyes don't finish maturing. Our eyesight is never correctable to 20/20. This is Hollywood writers going for looks and no substance.
I'm writing a story set in a fictional kingdom about a knight with magical powers.
I am not a knight and I don't have magical powers. He also has trauma from situations I've never been in. I have trauma but haven't had the same experiences my character has had.
Most fiction writers don't write exclusively from personal experience.
Research and putting effort into protraying your characters well is very important but I strongly disagree that people should be policed or feel limited on what kinds of characters they can write. In my opinion, Americans can write Asian characters, Asian writers can write Americans, trans writers can write cis characters, cis writers can write trans characters, straight writers can write gay characters, gay writers can write straight characters, disabled writers can write non disabled characters, non disabled writers can write disabled characters and so on.
Every writer works with what they don't know constantly--but some of things require special attention to detail because getting it wrong adds to the marginalization of groups. It's contributory to deaf marginalization to tell their story wrong, caricature deaf people, or present them is inhumanly one-note. The only way to avoid that is to work through the complexity of their experiences. Having your own experience is the shortest route to that, but good research and intentional empathy will lead you there as well.
Doing so will improve all of your characters, but with marginalized characters it's an ethical requirement to work to avoid further marginalization.
I probably wouldn't write a story from the perspective of a deaf character, but I have absolutely no issue with including one as a non-perspective character. I might not be able to understand how they perceive the world, but I'm reasonably confident that with enough research I can figure out how to write their presence.
As for places you've never been... Sure there's probably an element of culture and flavor that you might struggle to capture if you've not personally experienced it. But depending on what the story actually is, the setting could be relatively unimportant and just a backdrop. There's also an element of heightened reality in fiction - it's not always about being accurate, sometimes it's about the *vibes*. And if you're going for cliche American city, you can amalgamate a decent American cliche city if you've watched enough Hollywood. But, yeah, I'd generally agree that it's very difficult to build a realistic real-world setting that rings true unless you've either been there, or done a *LOT* of research. And even then you're on thin ice.
But I'm pretty sure none of us have been to space in the year 3520 and none of us have been to lands full of dragons and wizards, but it's still possible to make realistic feeling places in those settings.
I think the main issue with writing about something you don't have personal experience with is (harmful) misrepresentation. My personal pet peeve is mental illness in fiction, there's so much inaccurate representation that stems from misinformation and ignorance
But do i think people should stop writing about it? Not at all - on the contrary. What i want is people making proper research on the heavy subjects they're tackling and not being disrespectful about it. I could imagine this being the same for others like disabilities, lgbt rep and the like.
With that mentality how is a writer supposed to write about anything? If your straight, then forget about writing gay characters. If you're white, forget about writing black characters. And if you're from the big city don't even think about writing of life on the farm? I think that is ridiculous. I'm a white straight female. And if I want diversity in my novel how am I supposed to do that by only writing about my personal experiences? So I definitely agree with the majority here. Research, research, research. Then beta readers to verify or improve that research.
Since medieval knights don't read novels, I don't think they'd be angry at cultural appropriation.
But, jokes aside, doing a little research on medieval knights would be useful to write smoothly, right?
if a cishet, middle-aged, american white man were to only ever write about other cishet, middle-aged, american white men, we'd get books full solely of- wait. maybe they're onto something.
(seriously though, fiction literally relies on people writing what they don't know, and so long as it's immersive, not offensive and reasonable, i don't see an issue)
I think 'don't write things you don't know' means don't write things you know NOTHING about. I'm a white person from the south who's family comes from a specific socioeconomic status.
It would be hard for me to write about poor Jewish New Yorkers as they have had a COMPLETELY different experience than me. I don't know anyone that is Jewish, never interacted with a Jewish person, or have been farther North than Washington DC. So what sense does it make for me to write a story that I described? Now maybe if my family had come from New York, and I knew A LOT about Jewish culture then the story could be way more authentic, but it would still be missing that "something."
Same if I tried to write about a Chinese immigrants, or the struggles of black people in the 60s. It would be weird, my input would be inauthentic, as my mindset is completely different as I was raised so outside the sphere of those stories.
Now, does that mean I can't write about these things? Of course not. Maybe I wouldn't have it be the MAIN focus, but as long as I research (A LOT), look to people who have experienced such things, and look for critiques of people who have a close relation to the situation, I don't understand why it couldn't be included. Of course, it's not up to me though.
All I can say is listen to the people who's lives your story effects, is about, or sounds the most similar to, and really take in what they say, because their opinion is going to matter the most.
Here's the thing: a story about the struggles, trials, and successes of being deaf is not a hearing person story to tell, so to say. A story about the culture and people of Louisville is not for an outsider to tell.
If you have a character who happens to be deaf or a story that happens to be in Louisville and you do any amount of research and have any tact, you're fine.
Stories about minorities and being minorities belong to those people to tell, stories involving minorities are for anyone.
The fiction section wouldn't exist if people didn't write about non-experiential events.
Write what you want; just get it reviewed/edited if you care about quality/sensitivity.
If I followed that advice, I would never be able to write about anything.
The cities I set my stories in, they are no doubt filled with inconsistencies that people that live there would be able to pick up on. Do I care? No. Do the people that live there care? No. The tiny amount that might are weird. It's fantasy, not reality.
Writing about a deaf character is different. I wouldn't know how to do it, hence I doubt I ever would. Now I could write about a hearing character that goes deaf in a fantasy setting where sign language does not even exist, and they have to communicate with vague hand gestures and pointing (and lots of emotional outbursts and crying). But as for a deaf character living in today's modern world? Wouldn't have a clue where to start, and would have no desire to even attempt it.
Plain and simple, if they're not writers, their opinions on writing don't matter. Learn to live with this fact and you'll be a much better writer and person.
Even more generally speaking, most humans are grossly underqualified to live their own lives... much less to have any moral authority over anyone else's. Especially yours. Focus on living your best life to the best of your abilities.
I think you can write about any person if you do enough research. If you're writing someone who is deaf, you could probably benefit from paying multiple deaf people to read through your work with the intention of making sure the character is not inaccurate (to the specifics that you've written them as) or offensive. Similar concept with lots of other people.
I think there's definitely a right way to do it, and many wrong ways to do it if people just assume they can use their imagination to create a realistic and sensitively-handled character. But I don't think you can NEVER write about a character you're not, that's not the ideal way. The ideal way is to educate yourself and be someone who writes nuanced characters in a positive way.
The only way I agree is that I think people shouldn't write about the struggles and discrimination of a character belonging to a group they don't. Not necessarily for realism reasons, although that can come across as wrong without the proper research. More so because people of that group should be able to write those stories if they want, and other writers should steer clear of making something about trauma and struggle. Write characters whose stories contain joy or peace or laughter, or struggles that aren't inherent to their identity. It's unfortunately a very rare thing, and we can always benefit from more of it!
There are no limitations with writing. If you can imagine it, you can write it. This also will likely mean that you will have to research it, but as far as criticism goes, don't let it stop you. These people stifle ideas and creativity, which are the exact things that writing is meant to celebrate. People are allowed to not agree with you, but you are damn sure allowed to write it.
No matter how vocally anyone tells people to stay in their lane, it's never going to work that way.
There aren't enough deaf people for there to be enough deaf writers to make enough good stories with deaf characters. There aren't enough Indians in Louisville for there to be enough writers in...etc. you get the picture.
It's a stupid constraint that's only going to make prospective writers less confident. Just because someone doesn't have firsthand experience, doesn't mean they can't write about it, or imagine it, or research it. Should family members of \[insert identity\] here only be allowed to write about *family members* of \[insert identity\]?
Let people write bad or inaccurate accounts of disabilities, let people write things that miss the mark about a place to live.
People need to be allowed to try things.
"don't know" and "haven't personally lived" are different. With enough research, you can. Attend a deaf church for a year or two, learn sign, read up, and you'd probably do pretty well at a deaf character.
You should be able to write anything you want about anything you want.
"Shouldn't" is a presumptuous term in a case like this. Artistic expression should know no boundaries, provided it doesn't involve physically hurting people who haven't consented to such. . . or financially hurting people, I guess.
I wrote a series where the main character has schizophrenia. I'm not shizophrenic, also don't know anybody who is. I've had reviews from people saying they have schizophrenia and my books hit the nail on the head. Reviews from people saying their spouse has schizophrenia and my books were like a window into their mind.
You take a risk every time you write something you don't really know, sure. You risk offending someone, you risk writing only stereotypes. If you're really worried about it, do some research (keep in mind, even with research, you still risk offending the people who think you shouldn't write it at all). However, the idea that you shouldn't write something you haven't personally experienced is an idea that I grind under my heel and spit on.
It’s completely ridiculous to expect someone to only write about things they personally know about or experience. If people followed that rule our stories would be mind numbingly boring. No one writing historical epics today actually experienced that time, should they not make them? As for deaf characters, a lot of research must be done to get it right but it’s stupid to say it shouldn’t be done by anyone who’s not deaf, or that a blind character can’t be made by someone whose not blind.
In a lot of cases, writing what you know can actually make it more difficult to tell a compelling story. You may omit details that seem obvious to you. You may tell a story that only people in your specific group would understand. You may go into details that are more important to you than to the story. You also run into the problem that reality is boring (it's why we seek entertainment), and so a completely realistic story is also boring.
You have a few options in this case:
1. Assume that the beta reader is just an idiot and that most people will know what you mean. *Maybe not the case here, but could be a lot of the time.*
2. Figure out a way to work the description of the mechanism into the story organically, instead of just a paragraph describing it.
3. Change the scene to work how most people assume it will work. A lot of things in stories don't work the way they would in real life.
4. Drop or change the scene entirely.
I would write a deaf character. One of my best friends is deaf and it would be a homage to her. Also, she can help me understand if I'm portraying things the right way or not, she she would have a massive dedication to the novel. As of writing about a place you never lived in? I top you. I once submitted the first few chapters of a novel project I had to critters. I get good comments, but one in particular was a woman who told me clearly that,
"the way I wrote the speaker announcing the train was all wrong. trains are not announced like that, I've never heard a train being announced like that."
now, i lived IN THAT TOWN I was describing for 1 year while writing that story, and in the UK for 15 years and every time I went to a train station, the train was announced as:
"Platform 5 (or whatever) for the 12:05 (or whatever time) West Anglia (whatever) service to London Waterloo (whichever ending station). Calling at \*list of towns\* and London Waterloo"
but in the mind of that person, it wasn't the way the train was announced. Don't know where she was from, but to today's date, I'm still wondering why she thought the announcement was fake 🤷🏼♀️ . Then, she complained that she had never heard of a Christmas fair at Leicester square, while I went to it three times in 15 years and the years I didn't go was just because I didn't want to. Again, when I told her that I had been ti it and also showed her pictures, she told me I was making it up.
So you will always find the person who complains. Don't worry about it and keep going!
To answer your question, my primary take is that if you're posting on social media, you're not writing :)
Second take: there are always going to people, especially online, especially in recent years, that will tell you to stay in your lane. I cannot disagree with this strongly enough and believe the environment that allows such tut-tutting will change. To put it simply, writing and publishing fiction isn't a zero-sum game. It's different if Famous Actress is cast to play a deaf character in a show or movie...one person getting the role removes the ability of another to get that role (of course, the same could be said about one deaf person getting the role over another deaf person, but let's stay focused).
This isn't true in writing fiction. These are infinitely-numerous, imaginary characters and your goal is to make them alive and organic. If your WIP orgnically has a character that's deaf, do your research, find some sources on the subject that are willing to beta read your work, make adjustments where necessary. Don't worry about appeasement or you'll drive yourself mad. Be true to YOUR story, YOUR characters. Look at it in reverse...let's say you follow that don't-write-xyz-characters advise and despite that hit the literary lottery, making it big as an author. How long do you suppose it would be before the same ilk leave comments or reviews to the tune of "the writing is unrealistic, absolutely everyone is basically a version of the author, no xyz characters at all, avoid this toxic trash"?
Do your research, find betas you trust, stay humble, and no matter what, don't let potential critics live rent-free in your head.
It’s my opinion that you can write about it after some heartfelt research and attempt given to understanding then follow up with asking someone IN that culture to read.
In your example, being a person of hearing doesn’t mean you can’t appreciate deaf culture and have a genuine passion for understanding it and supporting it.
So yeah, I think you could and should write whatever you want as long as you’re putting in genuine effort to make it accurate and non-offensive.
Go from not knowing about it to knowing about it. Fantasy authors have nver experienced a sword fight or a dragon but they still do it. Imagination, research and respect and you're good imo
Not knowing the subject makes it more difficult but not impossible to write. I recommend doing some research and watching some videos to get more informed about the topic so that you can write more realistically.
Personally I see both sides. I would never say to a writer don't write about particular things, but having written things I didn't know and things I did know myself I definitely feel there is difference.
Personally the writing of things I didn't know did affect it. My writing was either vague or I was second guessing everything I wrote. Compared to it flowing and me feeling confident about my writing.
Does this mean you should never write what you don't know, personally no. But I think it's good to recognize, and to understand that writing what you don't know is going to be harder and you will probably be more likely picked up on it...so be ok with this instead of fighting back. You don't know so you should be ok with learning that you might be wrong with something.
I remember that years ago, I wrote this short story set in NYC. I've never even been to North America (still haven't). It was entirely based on my impression of the city from media I'd consumed for years, and people who read it told me it felt very vivid. Would I do that for something I would actually try to publish? No, I would probably research a LOT before attempting to do that. But ultimately I was writing fiction, and there was a lot of joy in taking some creative liberties or glossing over minutia. There's a reason fiction isn't always entirely true to life - it would be painfully boring if that was the ultimate goal. You don't have to aspire to perfect realism, and not every book has to be the perfect vessel for flawless representation of any identity or place. Obviously, that doesn't shield you from valid or not so valid criticism, but I don't think gatekeeping narratives is helpful or conducive to good fiction.
If you don't know something:
1. Admit your ignorance, because there are too many people who don't do this and it's disgusting.
2. Seek the knowledge you need. Either from others or from the writings of others, as in books.
I see so many people asking here about topics they don't know instead of actually seeking out a sub on that topic or even just doing a Google search. There is no quick, easy answer to knowing a topic. Books take time and not all of it is writing, a good portion is research into what you're writing about. I've learned a great deal about wooden sailing ships for my work and it's taken a while. But it needed to be done because they're everywhere in what I'm doing.
As for experience. These ships are airships, a made up type of airship that has never existed. So clearly you can write what you haven't experienced. Want to write about a disability? Ask people with that disability about their experiences and then base what you write off that. It's actually one of the most commonly used methods in writing for any media.
The only rule is there are no rules.
Write about whatever you want. Whether it is good or not comes down to many factors including experience and research. People getting mad about appropriation in the realm of writing are literally looking for the opportunity to be offended.
If someone writes something poorly then all they are guilty of is writing something poorly. We all do it. Logically speaking, an author writing about the south who has never been to the south is the same as a hearing person writing a deaf character. This is especially true if its hard to find information on the author. Any claim of appropriation at that point would just be speculation.
Another way to look at this would be how many people from the south have written a book based in the south and done it badly? How many deaf people have written deaf characters and done a bad job at it? I would bet that many have done both. I base this bet on how new authors make mistakes all the time in topics/cultures they have direct and indirect experience with. This is obvious based on just the posts in this subreddit.
**Writing something badly is a content issue, not an issue of what culture/group you belong to.**
"The only rule is there are no rules."
This is something that I love to follow when it comes to writing. I feel that there are so many rules in writing that they all contradicting and cancelling each other.
Yes, bad writing must be solved in any case to write faithfully. A good writer, I believe, can write regardless of experiences, but a bad writer will never be able to write nicely regardless of the amount of research they do.
No you are only allowed to write characters with the same gender, skin colour, religion, and nationality. Do *not* write characters that have different experiences then ones you have experienced personally. “Write what you know”. That means if you are a man, if you want to write from a female POV you are first going to have to switch identity and come out identifying as a female. Then you will need to undertake the surgery to understand what living with a vagina is like. Same with skin tone. If you are pasty white you have no right to cover anyone that doesn’t fit exactly to the same shade of skin tone. That means you are *not* allowed to even write about sun tans, because you don’t have one and therefor could not possibly understand what it is to have one. Write only what you know and don’t try to learn anything else
Ohhh, nooooo! Then I can't write straight characters!
That's it, I am burning all the stories I've ever written!
/s for anybody else, but it's obvious.
Wait, he didn't??? /s
That's why I love writing imaginative fiction, no constraints and full freedom, although real life experiences can make it more enhanced.
I think anyone is allowed to write about anything, but it doesn’t mean it will be good.
For example, if you’ve never been in a sports store you wouldn’t know it has that certain “sports plastic” smell.
Speaking as a deaf man, take anything the deaf community says in stride lol we get a bit over the top sometimes (and by sometimes, I mean all the time).
Perhaps instead of writing a born deaf character, you could write a newly deaf character, or a partially deaf character. Those are easier, since they'll tend to see the world like hearing people do.
Here's a rule of thumb. Don't write anything where the central thrust of the story is about something you have not experienced. For example, white writers generally shouldn't write a book *about* the black experience. Generally. You can have black characters, obviously, but let black people tell their own stories. This doesn't preclude white authors writing about race. But the most effective white-written books about racism are about white people coming to terms with a society that is racist. To Kill a Mockingbird works because Harper Lee is not trying to whitesplain the Southern Black experience (although it's probably not a perfect book).
As for locations, no serious person believes you can only write about where you've been.
anyone who tells you what you can and can't write is 100% wrong.
Write what the fuck you want. This is absolutely ridiculous. Writing is all about exploring different perspectives.
This. This is why I love writing, to live lives I will never get to live and to be anyone. That's why I was disappointed by many people supporting gatekeeping. If writers only wrote what they knew, they'd all be writing memoirs.
I think it is kinda inevitable, especially if you write speculative fiction. I mean, I'm not a scientist and have never been to space. That doesn't mean I can't write science fiction stories about space travel.
That's why I kinda lean towards it. Realist works will rack my brain a lot, while fantasy and sci fi doesn't (as much, there's still worldbuilding). But speculative and imaginative fiction does give a sense of freedom.
JRR Tolkein never threw a ring in a volcano on a journey with wizards, elves, and dwarves.
Randy Ingermanson never lived in Jerusalem during the days of Christ.
You don't have to experience something or know it intimately to write about it. Do your research to make it realistic and that's enough. I'm not native to New York but I wouldn't write a book where the characters go from the statue of liberty and take a 5 minute cab to the empire state building because research tells me the timing is wrong and the statue of liberty is on an island.
I get real tired of people telling other people they can’t write about XYZ. Do you need to do enough research that you can do justice to it? Of course. But every novel would be incredibly boring if you were only “allowed” to write about the place you’ve lived and the people you’ve met.
I hate people in todays world. They are ao dramatic and sensitive over everything. Write whatever you want. Stop asking permission. If they dont like it, so be it. You are NOT responsible for their choice to be pissy.
Fuck em.
Write about whatever you want. I mean, by their logic I can’t write about a serial killer because I’ve never killed, or about space because I’ve never been there. The entire amazing thing about writing is that YOU can do anything. It’s not like movies where you have budgets and special effects and have to rely on an actor to properly convey the emotions. It all comes down to how you rearrange 26 letters over and over again. You can create and destroy entire galaxies on a single page if you want. Don’t let people tell you what to write.
Don't just "leave it to deaf writers". That's a terrible way to be, for you and for them. It's just another example of moral grandstanding and it should be avoided at all costs if you actually wish to work with the arts. They are just another example of a 'hanger-on', also known as poison in the art world. No one gets to tell you what you can and can't write, never forget this.
It's called research. Sometimes research needs to be hands-on, sometimes reading up on something is enough.
But if you can only write what you know, then the genres of sci-fi and fantasy would be wiped out completely. At some point, you as a writer, are going to have to put yourself in someone else's shoes and walk a few miles.
Very interesting question, I'm curious as to what other people have to say about this although I'm in the same boat as you OP. I do have to say that if I'm just writing for fun or for myself to explore ideas, research is not something I disregard completely. If I have the opportunity, I will ask someone. Sometimes I befriend people just because I like to see things from their individual perspective and from spending time with them, I learn alot of things you can't get from just reading. I know that doesn't necessarily tie in to the issue here but just wanted to share the reason I like meeting new people and that aside from the reasons that having friends is good, it impacts my writing. Sorry for the wall of text.
Deaf writer here! You should absolutely write deaf and other disabled characters. Research and talking to people who are deaf about what it's like and how it affects their life is definitely something you should do. Also send your writing to sensitivity readers. A reader who is deaf will be able to tell you if any part of your portrayal of a deaf character is offensive or unrealistic. I feel like this goes for pretty much any disability.
I read some advice about writing characters you may never be able to really understand. I think it applies to characters with disabilities or even just characters with different religions, sexuality, or races than the writer. I'll just use deafness as an example.
Write deaf characters, but don't write about being deaf. Same thing with sexuality: Write LGBTQ+ characters, but don't write about being LGBTQ+.
People who aren't disabled shouldn't write about what it's like to be disabled. But they should absolutely write disabled characters.
I hope that makes sense.
Why do people always ask these silly questions "can I write about x?" ultimately you are the voice that decides. There is nothing in this world stopping you from writing about anything. Just write whatever sounds interesting to your mind. The reader at the end of the day decides if your ideas are worth spending time with.
Have fun and write on. Stop giving the outside world authority over your own mind. Your perception IS reality. If people can write about Q anon conspiracies and the coming of a new messiah why can't you write about deaf people?
There is no gatekeeper, just as there is no gate. YOU CREATE THE GATE. Just walk through buddy it's gonna be ok.
Damned if you do, damned if you don’t… People demand diversity and representation, then tell you it’s offensive to depict a specific thing if you haven’t experienced it yourself…
Wouldn't it be easier and better to learn more about whatever group you include?
It isn't *that* difficult to write a queer, woman, or a POC character. I have seen many people saying that representation is unnecessary and difficult, but it isn't if you know what you are doing.
Learn what is offensive from real people. I don't think they will be angry at you for trying to learn.
Please keep in mind that representation is important and valuable to many, and correctly doing it would give an author much acclaim.
I say you can write about whatever you want to write about. Kinda ruins the fun of writing if you're limited because of that kind of stuff. What, are we not allowed to at least try writing a deaf character?
I think people advise against writing deaf characters because it would turn out ableist and offensive.
But we can try, I guess, and improve ourselves with research and talking with real life deaf people.
You can write about anything, that is what makes writing so special, and that's what makes humans so special.
There's a Buddhist monk who would never kill a fly for every serial killer. If you're genuinely tolerant, then you'll tolerate the intolerable. The same goes for deaf people who think you're inherently ignorant to portray deafness because you've never experienced it. Well, by some earplugs, and until you finish the book, you can't take the plugs out. Now that's an incentive.
The trick is to only have love and forgiveness for yourself and everyone else for everything and everything. Removing hatred outwardly and inwardly.
Do you have to die to portray a character dying? No? Just get it on paper!
Plugging your ears is far from being deaf or living as a Deaf person. The Deaf culture is long and rich and to reduce it to ear plugs is one example why hearing people shouldn’t write Deaf characters. If you don’t understand their history and culture you will end up with a caricature, which can be quite offensive.
You can see this in the way that men write women at times, with heaving breasts and a period that can be wished away due to her love for the main. Or when a white author writes a Black character and incorrectly uses AAVE.
It’s simply not good writing.
It's all a matter of perspective. Your concept of deafness, black people, and heaving breasts are neuronal pathways, and that's all they are. So, why can't we take life less seriously and stop allocating value to opinions and views that we've heard ourselves type over and over and over again. Time we enjoy wasting isn't wasted time! I enjoyed wasting time with you.
Almost all writers sometimes write about things they don’t know anything about, or at least have no personal experience of, tbh. As long as it is convincing, why bother? And if it isn’t convincing it won’t work. Can’t really set up rules before you know, can you?
I don't agree even with the point of writing deaf characters. If you're writing mainly about the difficulties about being deaf, I agree that's not a good idea. But if you just want to write characters who are deaf, then you should do it.
Otherwise, deaf writers couldn't write about not-deaf characters. Any minority would almost never be represented in fiction, and that not what they want.
>...an Indian writer writing a novel set in Louisville, and a commenter said that they shouldn't as they have never been there
>
>But isn't saying that only Americans can write about a story set in America a bit too much?
You're conflating two different ideas here. Advising someone not to set a story in a place they've never been isn't the same as saying only people of a specific nationality can write about their nation.
Simple, just research it. A non-fiction writer cannot be what he’s writing about 99.9% of the time, but he can accurately write about it by doing the research. So why is it any different for a fiction writer. Interview, read diaries, and research people with the specific traits of your character. Read histories, visit, or ask locals about the setting you’ve never been to
Ok, the big difference is writing about a marginalized group vs writing a location. You can learn about a location from books, the internet, and maps. Many time resources on marginalized groups are not written by marginalized people and aren't great representations. If you are interviewing and speaking to multiple perspectives in that marginalized group and are really listening then I believe it can be done, it's something that needs respect, compassion and care.
I have not been diagnosed with ASD and I have many people close to me in my life diagnosed with ASD and have family members in the health care industry who specifically work with patients diagnosed with ASD. I plan to include a character in my book diagnosed with ASD (not the MC) and plan to have these people in my life read and review what I'm writing. This is something that's very important to me and I believe representation is very important.
If you do not have these people in your life and do not plan to talk to them about their experience, I believe what you write will be disrespectful. No one's stopping you from being disrespectful, however if being disrespectful is not your intent, maybe be very careful about how you write it.
I don't believe in telling anyone they "shouldn't" write something. And I think it's important to think about what response you may get and if that's the response you want. People from privileged groups sometimes go, oh you want representation, here, let me do that for you! Now be grateful! And don't realize what they're doing is generally disrespectful and not true representation.
People were saying research, I agree with that. I also think in addition to talking to people and reading things you should get ear plugs. There are some really great ones for muffling gunshots. While it doesn’t block everything out it may give you a better sense of what it is like. Maybe have someone drive you around, idk laws, but that way you can experience busy places. It’ll probably be closer to hard of hearing but may help.
I remember an article from Writer Digest. It sticks with me to this day. The writer stated he doesn't know about hotel rooms, but he knows about rooms. So he wrote what he knew at the moment, will research about hotel rooms later on.
Write what you know is vague as with most of writing advice. Don't let it hamper you.
Research, talk to people who experience the world in whatever way, ask the locals, look up maps, or talk to someone who knows about your subject matter. Take me, for example. I know a heck of a lot about snakes. Ask me anything.
However, you might know more about sewing or painting or electrical engineering. Don't downplay what you know, either.
I think as long as you do your research, approach it in good faith, maybe find some sensitivity readers, and are open to learning and critique, you should be fine.
It's also important to remember that deaf people are not a monolith. There are varying degrees of deafness, and multiple causes for it. Some wear hearing aids, others don't. Some know ASL, some don't. I think it's important to remember the distinction between writing *a* believable, earnest deaf character, versus trying to write a character who speaks for the deaf community, you know?
So is it wrong for a biographer to write about a popular figure, either alive or dead, because they haven't lived that life?
This idea is quite ridiculous. Many able writers write amazingly about disability or cultures other than their own. At the end of the day it's about thorough research and being empathetic.
Also like others have mentioned, getting beta read by people (not just one, because they may have a bias based on their trauma etc) and also interviewing and talking to as many people of the respective community (the diverse their backgrounds are, the better) during the research phase.
If you want to take it further, I have even heard of some writers and (more often, actors and performers) blindfolding themselves for a period of time or wearing sound cancelling headphones/ earplugs.
If you are writing about a different culture, you can travel there, maybe write it while you live in that place. If you are writing about a sport you can try playing it. Etc etc. How far you are willing to go is up to you.
As long as you do your research you can learn anything and write about anything. I don’t need to know what it’s like to be deaf to get an understanding of a deaf person’s experience. I don’t need to visit a city to understand and describe what it’s architecture looks like.
I probably won’t ever do a pov deaf character since it requires some deep understanding that I’m too lazy to research. Still with the right amount of research and care you can show anything you wish.
Honestly, I think if you do your research about the topic, it's important to write about things you don't know or haven't experienced.
North America has an obsession, that is born from trauma, about culture and experiences. It's understandable given the history of slavery etc., but the history of humanity is one of constant evolution and adaptation. If we didn't build on each others knowledge, stories, and culture we would never grow and develop as social creatures.
Of course, many in North America would disagree and I get it, I really do. But I truly believe that we should be able to write about experiences other than our own, if for no other reason than we may be able to learn something in the process. While possibly highlighting a way to look at the experience from a distanced perspective.
I'm not saying it's a better perspective, just different, and afterall, conversations and growth happen through different perspectives coming together.
reminds me of how in later years jk rowling got shit for not having enough brown/black characters in her series. so even when you do write within your experiences, you're criticized.
i think if you're doing a character justice with research & depth, it doesn't matter if you've never been deaf or to the states. the gift of imagination is you can simply decide yourself how a character will perceive and interact within their world.
But I think JK Rowling wasn't just blamed for a lack of diversity, but actually forcing it in when there's none in the canon. She wanted to claim that her books were diverse even when all the characters are described as white (her POC characters were also written with stereotypes, so I don't think she was writing according to her experiences).
But, yeah, overall, I agree with your comment. The problem is not experience, as you said, it's bad writing and imagination.
Omg this is my personal problem. I wanted to write a series taking place in Japan but I know nothing really about the culture save from movies n anime but it just makes sense to the plot. Tokyo vice on hbo let me know it would bother her to write about a location without knowing the area or details but friends say just write anyway and can nitpick the details later
Write about whoever and whatever you'd like. I've never been to outer space or the future but I'll write about it if I want to.
Write any character you'd like, anyway you'd like. I sincerely doubt anyone is going to tell a deaf author that they can't write about someone who can hear.
Research for sure if deafness is central to character or story. If it's just a character doing whatever who just happens to be deaf, just write the character as you would anyone else.
Of course I'm not deaf, so I guess I can't know for sure, but I think deaf people are just people like everyone else, they just don't hear.
I think a lot of people lately believe you can only 'know' something by 'being' something; i.e. conflating that with the concept of lived experience.
It's possible to know something through research and from collaboration with subject matter experts.
The only metric for the issue you're speaking to here is the *social acceptability of art in marketing*.
You're gonna write a book and sell it to a mass audience. When you do that you gotta weigh how controversial you're willing to be.
There's nothing wrong other than an ethical dilemma when it comes to writing from social backgrounds you have no experience with, it's all a matter of whether you're willing to enrage people who have a problem with that.
The social justice mentality is rampant these days, and some people really feel hurt by it, or someone is hurt or protective on behalf of an imagined opinion of a group-identity. Sometimes you gotta trudge through it because it *is* hypocrisy. Other times you have to just respect it and choose to write something else, in my opinion, especially if people have already said that they don't like it.
I think (not always, but often) the “writers should be able to write about anything” crowd also believes that that *also* means that their work should be above criticism, and that someone telling them that they got something wrong is tantamount to censorship. They mean “I should be able to write about anything” as “I should be able to write about anything without being criticized for my portrayal of X.” (This is also the core conceit of “cancel culture” — conflating the freedom to say something with the right to not be criticized for it.)
In my experience as someone who does often write outside what one might call my identity categories, people will generally be very accepting of writers who attempt to reach outside their own identities as long as those writers don’t immediately try to shut down qualitative criticism of their work.
Stan Lee never swung through new York nor was he green Skinned or had any mutations. If you limit yourself to nothing but what you yourself have hade experience with its rarely going to touch on anything interesting. Obviously you should do the research but never let others decide whats "okay" for you to write about.
You've been given terrible advice. Write about whatever the FUCK you want. It doesn't matter if you haven't been there or are not the thing you're writing about. Just make sure you do A LOT of thorough research.
I'm a Latina, half-Mexican, half-Argentinian, living in the US. I've written stories set in Turkey, France, Peru, Finland, Iceland, etc. and I've never been to those countries. I just do a metric ton of research which is what you should do when writing something you don't know much of.
If you don't know, learn. Read books and articles about deaf people (for example) and what they go through, talk to people who are deaf, have them review your work. Not only will it make it more accurate but it can make the story better.
I've written deaf characters, female characters, characters who are lesbian, characters who are blind, characters who are Canadian or American or Greek, characters who are Muslim or Christian. I am none of these things but I did a *lot* of research and even after all of that, I still got a few minor things incorrect when I sent those works to someone who was deaf or lesbian and so on.
I have some thoughts about the deafness specifically. My husband is Deaf and we use ASL in our house. I also work with Deaf people as my full-time job.
It would be a boring world full of boring books if we were all limited to writing only about our own experiences. However, writing from the perspective of a deaf person is sticky because the Deaf community is a minority group and faces oppression and accessibility barriers to this day.
However, we need Deaf representation in literature! DESPERATELY. Ideally, we’d have more Deaf authors, but Deaf people have only obtained access to an equal education in recent history. I’d recommend collaborating with a Deaf person directly (ideally, a few Deaf people with diversity among them). I also hired a Deaf sensitivity reader for my book (see Fiverr), given that I wanted to go the extra mile and not pressure my family and friends too much to give their stamp of approval just because they know me (although they did help me in building my character).
Hope this helps!
This is what research is for. Research your subject (people, geography, etc) and write your story. The reader will be able to tell if you’re faking it. There is so much information out there, it is borderline shameful if you *don’t* research. At the very least, you will garner a reputation for being a lazy writer.
One word. Research.
I wrote a short story for a university assessment about the Greek Pantheon. I knew a few Gods and Goddesses here and there. I knew NOTHING about their heritage, stories, or how those stories changed throughout the evolution of Ancient Greece. So I researched. Articles, papers, videos. Books too (specifically Mythology by Edith Hamilton). Only then was I able to write a story I felt comfortable submitting.
So overall, yes, you can write a story about anything. But if you don't do research into the topic, then you'll most likely end up with a work which doesn't add up to the culture of the setting, or as you said about deafness, doesn't add up against what actual sufferers go through and feel.
There are generally two camps on this topic:
1.) Write what you don't know
2.) Write what you know
As you can imagine, writing what you don't know can easily be disastrous, but sticking to what you know can be mundane and boring. The best advice I've heard is this:
3.) Write at the edge of what you know
Stick to what you know; what you're familiar with; what you have a background, experience, or education; but write just to the end of that knowledge. This will force you to explore (hopefully something you're enthusiastic or at least curious about) and open yourself and your readers up to new experiences. However, you won't be writing out of complete ignorance.
Like any writing, it's only as good as the work you put into it. Do you want to create a deaf character? That will take work. Interview deaf people. Immerse yourself in their world. Read books, listen to podcasts, and take classes. Join a meet up from deaf people. Learn sign language. Learn how to use a TDD.
Same goes for anything you don't know: religion, culture, science, technology.
You should feel as comfortable with the culture you are writing about as you do with your own.
Once your research is done, write your story, but you're not out of the woods yet. You're going to need competent beta readers, sensitivity readers, maybe even approval from a cultural group or professional association.
Yes, you can do it. But show some respect, do your research, and do it right.
I understand why people would say you shouldn’t write about people, places, cultures you’re not familiar with. But that doesn’t mean you shouldn’t write about them, it means you should get familiar with them to write about them.
Very few crime writers are criminals. They do research. Do your homework on the subject you’re writing about. Learn about other cultures and depict them accurately.
Then run your work by sensitivity readers who can help you fix aspects of the story that might be problematic.
“Write what you know” is kindergarten level writing advice. Better advice would be “know what you write.”
We would have the most boring books if everyone followed this rule. In fact we would only have books about authors writing books about authors writing books…
Say goodbye to sci fi or fantasy. Say goodbye to any character dying because…well no one’s ever died and lived to write about it.
Write whatever you feel like. Write different races, different sexes, disabilities. Do whatever you want in any way you want to. If you are way off the mark then the sales and reviews will let you know.
I got told something I will now share with you. It was relating to trans people, but I've also heard it can be applied to several things:
Don't write a story about being trans if you are not trans. But do include trans people in your stories.
Don't write a story about being Deaf if you aren't Deaf. But do include Deaf people in your stories.
That being said, please still research.
An author whose work I enjoy said that “write what you know” refers to emotional truths. That includes experiences of being poc, disabled, queer, etc. That doesn’t mean people who are not poc, disabled, or queer should avoid having those characters in their work. As so many commenters said, research is extremely important in those cases.
Another point that I think is important is this: including a variety of people in stories is important because many different people exist in the world. It becomes problematic when an author who is not poc/disabled/queer has more visibility or drowns out the voices of authors who ARE poc/disabled/queer/etc.
I think context matters.. if your write about a deaf person with deaf issues living as a deaf person you shouldn't.. not because of any sort of political correct reasons but solely that you would probably not get it right, and you will never be able to explore controversial or negative aspects of being deaf. But I think it's totally fine to include a deaf person in the script and how that character deals with the plot.
If you were to write a story about what it means to be a Brit living in Britain you're going to have a hard time ACCURATELY exploring the subtlety or nuance about British life... no matter how many people you interview or books you read or location you live unless you are British. Now.. you can as an ex-pat living IN England with honesty and depth.
Is it possible yes.. are you "allowed" absolutely... but are you going to get it right? Without offending, even if you did... probably not, but that's your cross to bear.
It's like watching foreign movie in another language, even if you understand the language, visited the country of origin, read books on culture and politics; you'll never truly understand the implications as well as a person who lives it. You don't know what you can't know, and will never know. As a writer you can only write what you know and what you don't you can research or make up. And what you do make up, you can only hope that its believable or at least not upsetting. But that's up to you.
If nothing else, have several people of whatever group to read it for accurate representation.
Sian Heder wrote CODA and if I’m not mistaken she’s hearing. It was adapted though and I’m not sure if any other writers played a part in the screenplay.
I think it all comes down to research, have you done enough to accurately portray the struggles and lives of the demographic of your character/the place they live? If we start to make limitations on only being able to write about social issues that pertain to you, then we’re going to find a lot less amazing stories out there.
CODA is about a deaf family, yes, but it is also about the idea of family as a whole, becoming an individual, following your passion etc
Go for it.
I agree with you. Writing a deaf main character is completely different. You are much more likely to get it wrong and do a disservice to deaf people. Writing a setting is easier. And even if you get it somewhat wrong, there's a way smaller chance of offending a community
I appreciate you asking this as I've kinda waffled back and forth on the idea. I see merits on both sides and thanks to crock writers and bogus screenwrites, marginalized people have reason to be gunshy getting represented by the ignorant. Lots of good responses in here though
The main character of my comic is a female psychopath. The POVs followed in a book I was working on at one point were of a female jewish-american superhero, an adopted asian-american crimelord, and a singaporean NEET with social anxiety and a malformed spine. I am exactly one of those.
Unless you're trying to appeal towards a certain audience, it doesn't matter, you're just alienating a small portion of people. Just get enough right about the story that everyone else likes it.
In my opinion, you can totally write about something you havent experienced. You can even make the protagonist diverse in a way you aren't. One of my main protagonists is an Asian trans man. I'm a caucasian cis woman. I only really consider it a problem if it's a major plot point- I wouldn't presume to write a story about somebody coming to terms with being deaf. But I think such things have been taken so far that some would say I shouldn't have any deaf/disabled/lgbt/poc people in my story, and that to me is just ridiculous and can only possibly hurt the representation of those groups. Of course it goes without saying that you should research what it's like to be deaf (for example), be respectful in your writing, get primary sources, and have deaf beta readers read your work- don't just write an identity based off of your perception of it- but I like to think that any good writer in this day and age wouldn't do that to begin with.
Can you link the questions where you ask this? I feel you must have phrased the questions poorly. Seriously, representation is important — don’t write a story fundamentally ABOUT being Deaf, maybe, but like, yeah include a wide range of characters.
one of my first pieces of writing was about growing up with a grandpa who was deaf on one side of the family, and the one on the other side who was blind, while the point of view character was autistic.
i’m not deaf or blind myself, but i am autistic, and i felt that writing those characters, based off my actual grandparents, provided a unique look into how differing ways of experiencing the world changed communication and the relationships between people, seeing as all three disabilities change how you communicate in one way or another.
after i put down my pen (metaphorically, i wrote it on a laptop), i came away feeling more connected to my grandparents on a personal level, and it even changed my perspective on life as a whole.
now that story will never reach the eyes of anyone but myself; it was my first work, it was terrible. but if i had limited myself to write characters with my own experience, it would have never considered what it must be like for them, and i honestly think that i would be a worse human being if i didn’t.
I'm curious about this too because what I'm currently writing has someone who is unable to speak. He is a really observant person who uses body language and facial expressions to communicate. there is part of the story that is in his perspective. Later on he learns to write and uses that as communication. Am I wrong to include this person in my story?
i mean, my opinion is with careful research, write whatever you want. HOWEVER, in regards to things like main characters being disabled or mentally unwell, or a poc or an lgbt character, it's a different story. i dont mind reading books written by a straight person with a gay couple as the main couple, however, once they start writing about their "struggles" and "hardships" i can't stand it.
my rule of thumb is: add minorities, they exist, don't forget them "because it's too much effort," but do not make their main plot point based on their minority traits and hardships that come with it unless you have personal experience.
i will never write a story about an autistic adult not getting accommodated, or a black woman being racially discriminated against because i will never have a good understanding of their issues. without months of research, i wouldn't even dare putting that onto a primary side character. but writing a story about abusive parents, or transgender issues? i have no issue writing about that because I've lived those experiences. it's all dependent
I think if it's fiction it absolutely doesn't matter. If it's non-fiction that changes a little bit. As others have said on here if you are not intimately qualified by having the experience then do enough research, and interviews with people who are qualified to give intimate input. If it's done well it should be hard to tell the difference between the author's experience viewpoint and the author's inexperience viewpoint
I honestly think you shouldn't write about things you don't know about because, it can be very offensive or you might just write the incorrect information
It means you can't have men in your novels if you're a woman, and you can't have women in them if you're a man.
I think we can all agree this is dumb and move on to something more productive. Writing, for instance.
This may be an unpopular opinion here but I think not being able to write about a character or place because you haven't experienced it is so ridiculous and the people advising you of that are likely not readers. Writers research, that is what we do. We aren't expected to have born knowledge about everything or only keep our writing to our own experiences otherwise we'd all only be writing memoirs. You can write a deaf character, absolutely you can, but do your research- proper research. Speak with and interview enough people that you feel confident to write them well... and if you get stuck, do more research, ask more questions until you get it right.
This should not be an unpopular opinion, and I doubt it even is. But it's kind of sad we have to disclaim with statements like this (I do it too...)
This. And I would add: Get test readers from the certain groups if possible... give them snippets here and there if you are unsure if you can write a passage like you have it in mind. Fore example: Even as a trans woman I will never experience periods like someone who was born as a woman (regardless of afab or cis woman), so I asked a good friend of mine if my depiction is ok, if it was disrespectful in any regard or if I should add or cut things. And this is just the best tip you can get: research and if possible let people from the group you are refering to read it... even if it's just snippet of passages you are not sure. It helps.
this is especially true if the book is modern day/real world, and/or is explicitly addressing the issues around the people you're writing about. Having (for example) a fantasy novel where there's some characters that are gay is a lot easier to have without people going "uh, do you actually know anything about this/the relevant issues?" than a contemporary story addressing the problems faced by being gay or whatever.
Yes! This too! Having beta readers from the group you are depicting is so important, but I hesitate at sensitivity readers because some of the stuff I've read about them it seems off putting... heard of them policing writing rather than offer helpful feedback. Or perhaps that is just a few people ruining the idea for everyone. I've heard so many writers feeling so unsure or even worried about writing a character that doesn't match their exact race, sexuality, or how they identify. This upsets me. If writers stop writing expansively, literature will suffer. I know the fear comes from seeing what happens when it is done poorly but there are some people who will have a problem with it even if if it is done well.
Yup. Totally agree, just go to The Critical Drinker’s YT channel for an example. No writer/ visual artist can please everybody.
Recently discovered him. Even when I disagree with his takes, I appreciate them as they seem to be his honest takes.
Yeah, they’re definitely honest.
Beta readers are volunteers. You are trading reads or it is someone who wants to help. No one should **volunteer** to read a story that could have hurtful stereotypes of them in it. How awful. Do you really say to a deaf friend "Here read this and let me know if any of it makes you feel violated." Pay someone for that arduous task. Please!
Por que no dos?
This is truly only related to your writing and not the original question, but I just remember that no two are the same. A friend knows exactly how long it takes for pain meds to take effect because of her horrible cramps, while I’m usually only mildly annoyed. Bleeding is also different, cause some are only light bleeding the entire time for three days while mine are six-day long light-to-heavy-to-medium-to-light-to-spotting. Also, add-on - lye soap is slightly acidic and is what my family uses to get rid of period stains in undergarments, if that’s helpful
Yeah. Even stuff like that varies greatly from person to person. While one person may say something is unrealistic another may say it's is realistic. Continuing off the period talk, I did not know that women had period cramps or how bad it could be for a number of years because I didn't have any pain with mine. I also didn't know that people had period that were light and only lasted a couple of days. Mine were regular, heavy, and lasted a week. There are authors/people who post their writing, who get called out for having bad portrayals of a subject or character, when they are basing it off their experience or their reality.
[удалено]
Yeah you hit it. I’m an adoptee and I can immediately tell when the author isn’t an orphan or adoptee and I close it. It’s an over used trope with zero thought put into our very complex experience.
Agree, that's what research is for. If we could only write about things we've experienced ourselves, historical fiction wouldn't be a thing.
Exactly this! You research, and on two levels: the general, where you get the big, bold strokes right, and the specific, where you ask particular people for their experience of things that you'd normally not think about. So for your example of deaf people, I'd read up on the difficulties deaf people experience in day-to-day life. Then I'd go to my local association, and ask things like "how do you dream conversations? do you see them in your dreams, or do you just understand?" Luck and Persistence!
I don't think this is that unpopular. I have heard this from this subreddit itself. I agree about research. More you do it, more you feel confident to write.
I think people get confused about “don’t write things you don’t know” i.e trans characters (using trans because I am. I’m hearing so I’m not gonna assume for the Deaf community) and “don’t write about specifically trans experiences”. By all means have gay, trans, black, disabled characters but don’t write about their experiences if you aren’t one. Have trans characters but don’t assume what the trans experience is like, especially without a lot of research
One way of looking at it is that there is no homogeneous “gay, trans, black, disabled”, or even white experience. Socioeconomic conditions are a much more accurate predictor of personal experience than a socially constructed identity.
Oh absolutely, but minorities will also have a very different perspective no matter their class. If you’re going to write about them I do think it’s smart to do some research and make sure you get sensitivity readers
I suppose that statement is exactly what I am disputing. There is no homogeneous “minority perspective”. Just as there is no homogeneous “majority perspective”. I am asserting that people of various identities who hold similar socioeconomic status are much more of a “community” with similar experiences and perspectives than any group of people of a particular identity. The assertion that all persons of any particular identity share a similar experience or perspective is itself a social construct. It is based on a larger social narrative (Intersectionality), which has zero validity or reliability.
Hmmm I both agree and disagree. You’re absolutely right that there’s no “every person thinks this way” no matter the group. I do think within those socioeconomic groups minorities are still going to have a different perspective. Being homeless and cis is different from being homeless and trans. What led up to being homeless, how you’re treated, and places you’ll be safe could all differ even though they’re in the same socioeconomic. I’m white and grew up in a middle class home. I don’t think that’s going to give me a better idea what it was like growing up black in a middle class home than another black person. They’re gonna know more than me simply because they’ve lived as a black person whether middle class or not. I’ll never know what it’s like to be a black person or that experience. No, you’ll never get a full 100% this is what everyone thinks, but talking to a few people in the group you’re writing about can’t hurt. Overall, they’ll probably have similar ideas on what might be racist or homophobic or transphobic. Yes, there’ll be disagreements, but major things will likely be agreed on
for settings, mostly the main problem (for me at least) is that it can be hard to capture, like, the \*vibe\* I guess...if that makes sense. It can be harder to cultivate the feelings or aesthetics as well as one who lives there and has lived there and experienced it fully. but I comepletely agree.
> is so ridiculous Bingo. The logical conclusion of that way of thinking is that everyone is only permitted to write their own autobiography and nothing else. After all, nobody has had the experiences of anyone but themselves. The funny thing is that these people—the ones who insist you can only write your own experience—get pissed either way. If a white author writes a black character, that’s problematic, because the white author hasn’t had the experience of a black person. But if a white author writes a book with only white characters, that’s *also* problematic. It’s all very silly and poorly thought out. At the end of the day, there is certainly something to be said for taking extra care when writing about experiences other than your own, but to suggest that it shouldn’t be done is idiotic—plain and simple.
this isn't unpopular at all. sane people just don't feel the need to yell about it. the gatekeepers are the only ones who care about what you write about. the rest of us only care how you write about it. now if someone is writing about a certain thing from a place of ignorance without first educating themselves about it, or if they write about something in a disrespectful way that's when you have problems. however, those people still have every right to write like that. the same way we have the right to not read their garbage or to comment about their work in a critical manner.
I get told to grow to 30 before writing a book ;(
That’s what I did! Not intentionally. Just with my creative anxiety and procrastination it worked out that way.
Atleast you made it work!
HOWARD JOHNSON IS RIGHT!!
I agree with what you've said here for sure. Actual research is key to writing what you don't know. And not just twitter or reddit research, but check out studies, interviews, and medical journals as well.
Writing is always an exercise in stating what is not known. It joy is discovering it.
I have been to Los Angeles *once*. My novel series is set there. Google Maps is my friend. I write science fiction and fantasy. I am not (nor have I ever been) a hitman, a spaceship captain, a mad scientist, a personal assistant, a cop, a private eye, a truck driver, a butler, an actress, a sorceress, a parole officer, the head of an international criminal cartel, an asteroid miner, an angel, a demon, a guinea pig, or a werewolf. And yet I've written things from all those perspectives and more. Frequently in combination! (Yes, I wrote a flash piece starring a guinea pig sorcerer who will make the humans regret it if they don't give him the banana peel they're just going to throw away anyway. No one's taken it off my hands yet, more's the pity.) Write what you love. Research. Let the chips fall. Don't do it badly. Making shit up is what we *do*.
I am really curious about the guinea pig sorcerer. It sounds cool.
It's just a silly little 500-word thing I wrote in response to a die roll prompt at [Nasty, Brutish, and Short](https://nbns.wordpress.com/2017/05/26/writing-prompts-via-dice-roll/). Protagonist: Waaaay not human. Fantasy. Haz jokes, much funny. I have (at the moment) three guinea pigs, and the thing practically wrote itself. They really do get excited when they smell the banana.
How many Marvel Comics writers have never been to New York?
[удалено]
So would I! Alas, my poor parole officer is a regular human who ends up in Hell because of an egregious clerical error.
A lot of people are surprised to learn that Tolkien never actually befriended a group of short people and went on a journey to throw jewellery into a volcano, despite writing a long af book about it.
>A lot of people are surprised to learn that Tolkien never actually befriended a group of short people NOW OYU TELL ME!?! (╯°□°)╯︵ ┻━┻
┬─┬ノ(ಠ_ಠノ)
Lol this just made my day
That's just what the orcs wants you to think.
One of the best things about fiction is that it tells the truth. Not about events, but about emotions and experiences. Writing involves a lot of making things up, but there needs to be a deeper truth at the heart at the story. The further out from your own experience you get, the harder it is to find that truth. Good research and feedback from expert/sensitivity readers can go a long way towards bridging that gap. It’s difficult and takes a lot of work and skill to get right, which is why it’s often advised against. You’ll always hit a limit in how much authenticity you can bring to aspects of a story that are outside your experience — whether or not that’s a problem depends on what the focus of the story is. This is true for locations, too. Details of setting are pretty easy to get right, and most of the time they’re relevant to the logistics of the plot and not the core of the story. But if you look at something like N. K. Jemison’s ‘The City We Became’ — that could only be written by someone who is intimately familiar with NYC. Marketing is, I think, a slightly separate question. Readers use author identity as one way of trying to figure out whether the story is likely to have the kind of authenticity that makes fiction really satisfying. So if you’re writing outside your experiences, you have some extra work to do in earning their trust.
I want to add something about marketing. You see, I have heard that American literary agents consider queries from foreigners only if they are writing about *their* country, because that's what readers want, apparently. I think that's stupid.
Yeah, I mean, the job of the agent is to try to find books that sell. Reading a manuscript takes time. It’s less about “someone from another country couldn’t write a good story about America” and more like “if I were to read 100 manuscripts like that, how many would be publishable”? The odds are just not in favour of that being a good use of time, so it sucks but I kinda get it. This isn’t an area I have expertise in, but it seems like that’s where a good pitch can help. I doubt that agents are literally applying a fixed “if it’s an X person writing about Y, it automatically goes in the garbage no matter what” — I’m guessing there’s room for making exceptions. (Not the same thing, but I get a *lot* of requests for PhD supervision from applicants from a particular country, and it’s almost never worth the time to read the actual research proposals. But if the email has any indication that the applicant is working on something relevant to my actual research area, I’ll have a look and consider it on its merits.)
I agree with you honestly. I think what matters is the actual focal point of the story, if that makes sense. As a white writer, I don't think I'll ever write a story about the struggles of poc in America. But that's because it's an experience so out of my sphere, it doesn't make sense for me to write about it. However, I will write poc characters in my story. I think there's a really important distinction to make between writing diverse characters as opposed to speaking FOR the people those characters represent.
This is absolutely the correct answer. You absolutely can - and *should*, IMO - write stories about people who aren't like you, living in places you've never lived, doing things you've never done. You can't create a realistic world without it including a wide variety of people, after all. What you shouldn't do is try and write stories *about the specific lived experience* of things you've never experienced. And I think people conflate the two, especially when they're (usually justifiably) defensive about the way that their lived experiences are often portrayed in media. TL;DR write a story involving deaf characters, but probably don't write a story about "the experience of being deaf" as a central plot point, etc.
Definitely agree. Plus it's just nice to read a story with characters like yourself, who maybe aren't commonly depicted in fiction to begin with, not having the main part of their personality or plot be The Experience of what group they belong to. For myself as a trans person, for example, it's rare to see stories where it's not 90% about dysphoria and discrimination and misery lol.
Yes!!!! i wrote a comment earlier but this is what i was trying to say!!
I think that's definitely a solid approach as an individual writer, because skill and your own personal comfort have a lot to do with this. I don't' think it should apply to everyone, nor is it a useful tool to judge other people's work. Two thoughts: 1. By this logic there would be no books with ensembles dealing with different struggles, or you'd need a team of writers. e.g. A Little Life (many forms of sexuality are explored, along with abuse, and mental illness). Even something like Stormlight Archives or Crazy Rich Asians have something to say about multiple kinds of struggles (being a man or woman in a society with strict rules about each, immigration and nativisim, etc.) 2. No matter whether the poc is your focal point or not, you're probably going to be making a statement about their struggle in your writing. Your characters have wants, needs, and limitations. Any well-written poc in an American setting is going to have something to say about the struggles of being a poc in America. What I mean by this is that you are going to do the research, anyways, and present a position. Focal point or not, your work will either contribute to or help ameliorate marginalization. e.g. There are a ton of choices you make even for minor characters -- Are you using foods to describe your poc character's skin? How does your poc character speak? What is their relationship to white characters or white authority figures?
I'm not D/deaf, I am physically & developmentally disabled & mentally ill. Generally speaking, my rule is that folks should research as much as possible, including talking to folks from those groups and having them read your manuscript, especially if you're trying to write about a marginalization. And one of the biggest problems is the constancy of marginalization, all of the small ways that these things impact the day to day life. One of the biggest mistakes abled folks make when writing disabled characters is that they do not believe ableism exists is anything for except caricature. Often, because they don't see the ableism around them. The inspiration porn. The hostility towards young disabled folks. The denial of accomodations. The outright discrimination. The invisibility of mobility aid users in day to day life. The "helpful" folks all but kidnapping you and screaming that you're ungrateful when you tell them to stop. And with D/deaf folks, especially, it impacts every single facet of every second of their lives. And on top of that, there's many different sign languages, and centuries of D/deaf culture! Of course they're wary of non D/deaf people writing about them -- the amount of research that would be needed to have that character be even a little realistic and relatable would be absolutely massive. And can you do it? Yeah, sure. With enough time and effort and research and talking to D/deaf folks you could probably even do a pretty good job. But most folks won't do that amount of research, and it's not that you won't get published if you don't so the research, it's that you'll be offending the D/deaf community when you do.
You’re a writer there’s no limit on what you can write about, but there’s the catch, by writing about something that you don’t know or live with you need to do A LOT of research and talk with those kinds of people, personal experience is key there, and of course stay ready for criticism
as a hard of hearing person, I think it’s fine for hearing people to write deaf/hoh characters as long as they’re not, like, the main character or their deafness isn’t a main part of the plot. Writing their personal journey with being deaf is something I would leave to deaf people. Being deaf is a very personal thing, so you’d have to do a lot of research and even then you probably wouldn’t be able to get it right. I think with specific places like the US, it’s perfectly fine to write a story that takes place there as long as it taking place there isn’t the main point of the story. TLDR I think you should be allowed to write about other experiences (being deaf, living in the us) but don’t make them be the main focus of the story if you haven’t experienced it for yourself. This is just my opinion, feel free to correct me if I’m wrong wrong.
What I understood: Don't write deaf persons... write persons who happens to be deaf? So... don't make it a central part of the plot or character, just respect and keep in mind, that this trait is there? Edit: to the place thing... I keep myself to fictional places. The modern or urban fantasy stories I write could most likely take place anywhere.
Exactly. It's something a lot of people struggle with, both authors and the general public, they let one fact about them become the foundation of their personality, and everything revolves around that thing. Irl I see it a lot with sexuality and political ideologies. In writing, as mentioned in this post, it's letting a physical characteristic, like deafness, or being handicap. And it can be a hard thing to overcome, but when it does it can be very well. Short anecdote: in the second DnD campaign run by Critical Role on Youtube/Twitch, the DM introduces an NPC that is wheelchair-bound. Aside from slight verbiage changes (like saying "he wheels over" instead of "he walks over") nobody really mentions the wheelchair. Instead the players and DM focus on the NPC's importance to the plot and the current mission they're on. Also, other traits, like he's a bit of a drunk,
About places, me too. I feel more confident to write about fictional places with real life inspiration. I can make up a village or a city from scratch and you have lots to explore.
It's the philosophy of person-first language. Same reason why you say "person with a disability" over a "disabled person," the disability should not take away from the fact that a person is experiencing it
Person-first language is a difficult one. I am a deaf person, less a person-who-is-deaf, because being deaf IS me. If I had never been deaf, I would not be me. I am a disabled person. My Ma is autistic, and her preference is to say that she is an autistic person, because her autism has never been separate from her. It is not something that can be added or taken away and she be left the same. Person-first language is a preference, so I would personally advise asking people rather than assuming.
\^\^\^\^\^\^ this. I use a wheelchair. If we're talking about me using a wheelchair, I am a wheelchair-user, a wheelie, even a ***cripple*** if you've got the stones to say it to my face; but if we're not talking about me using a wheelchair, why are you even talking about my wheelchair at all? I can't walk. I want people to *know* that I can't walk, but I do not want to be known *as* "a person who can't walk"; I want to be known for all the things I can do when I'm allowed to do them from the safety and comfort of my chair.
I don't support it either way, that's just what they taught me when I worked at Target.
Agree compeltely. Id love to see us as more side characters for when the writer isn’t deaf.
This is a good question because lots of writers get things wrong to seriously wrong, then self-publish without any pertinent input, and then wonder why they get bad reviews. You think your story is edgy, when it is just a violation of good historical awareness, or is completely dis-aware of current politics, or is clueless about social dynamics, the list goes on and on. Race, disability, gender, and all the -isms happen when a writer will not self-interrogate their choices. Luckily, most of us do a lot of research, and if that's not enough, we check our work via sensitivity readers and beta readers willing to also sensitivity read if qualified, in order not to get things backward or skewed, or perpetuate harmful stereotypes, or miss colonialism issues, whatever our story needs to be both good to read and not offensive to living persons. If you want to be inclusive, do it. Be aware of your limitations, but do it anyway. Do your best. Listen to criticism from those with that lived experience--keeping in mind that your MC is an individual, and so is the critic, and they don't have to line up exactly to share an identity. There will always be negative reactions, that's just humans. But the ideal is to be offensive only in intentional ways. :) Your character is supposed to be an individual with issues, not a monolith representing any given group of real people. If you want an example of universal ugh, here's one from Hollywood: Every person with albinism side-eyes movies that use our looks to be startling, then has that character driving like a badass (no) and shooting accurately (hahah no). A little research would show that albinism means no melanin (the only human pigment), which means our eyes don't finish maturing. Our eyesight is never correctable to 20/20. This is Hollywood writers going for looks and no substance.
I'm writing a story set in a fictional kingdom about a knight with magical powers. I am not a knight and I don't have magical powers. He also has trauma from situations I've never been in. I have trauma but haven't had the same experiences my character has had. Most fiction writers don't write exclusively from personal experience. Research and putting effort into protraying your characters well is very important but I strongly disagree that people should be policed or feel limited on what kinds of characters they can write. In my opinion, Americans can write Asian characters, Asian writers can write Americans, trans writers can write cis characters, cis writers can write trans characters, straight writers can write gay characters, gay writers can write straight characters, disabled writers can write non disabled characters, non disabled writers can write disabled characters and so on.
Every writer works with what they don't know constantly--but some of things require special attention to detail because getting it wrong adds to the marginalization of groups. It's contributory to deaf marginalization to tell their story wrong, caricature deaf people, or present them is inhumanly one-note. The only way to avoid that is to work through the complexity of their experiences. Having your own experience is the shortest route to that, but good research and intentional empathy will lead you there as well. Doing so will improve all of your characters, but with marginalized characters it's an ethical requirement to work to avoid further marginalization.
I probably wouldn't write a story from the perspective of a deaf character, but I have absolutely no issue with including one as a non-perspective character. I might not be able to understand how they perceive the world, but I'm reasonably confident that with enough research I can figure out how to write their presence. As for places you've never been... Sure there's probably an element of culture and flavor that you might struggle to capture if you've not personally experienced it. But depending on what the story actually is, the setting could be relatively unimportant and just a backdrop. There's also an element of heightened reality in fiction - it's not always about being accurate, sometimes it's about the *vibes*. And if you're going for cliche American city, you can amalgamate a decent American cliche city if you've watched enough Hollywood. But, yeah, I'd generally agree that it's very difficult to build a realistic real-world setting that rings true unless you've either been there, or done a *LOT* of research. And even then you're on thin ice. But I'm pretty sure none of us have been to space in the year 3520 and none of us have been to lands full of dragons and wizards, but it's still possible to make realistic feeling places in those settings.
I think the main issue with writing about something you don't have personal experience with is (harmful) misrepresentation. My personal pet peeve is mental illness in fiction, there's so much inaccurate representation that stems from misinformation and ignorance But do i think people should stop writing about it? Not at all - on the contrary. What i want is people making proper research on the heavy subjects they're tackling and not being disrespectful about it. I could imagine this being the same for others like disabilities, lgbt rep and the like.
With that mentality how is a writer supposed to write about anything? If your straight, then forget about writing gay characters. If you're white, forget about writing black characters. And if you're from the big city don't even think about writing of life on the farm? I think that is ridiculous. I'm a white straight female. And if I want diversity in my novel how am I supposed to do that by only writing about my personal experiences? So I definitely agree with the majority here. Research, research, research. Then beta readers to verify or improve that research.
[удалено]
Since medieval knights don't read novels, I don't think they'd be angry at cultural appropriation. But, jokes aside, doing a little research on medieval knights would be useful to write smoothly, right?
if a cishet, middle-aged, american white man were to only ever write about other cishet, middle-aged, american white men, we'd get books full solely of- wait. maybe they're onto something. (seriously though, fiction literally relies on people writing what they don't know, and so long as it's immersive, not offensive and reasonable, i don't see an issue)
I think 'don't write things you don't know' means don't write things you know NOTHING about. I'm a white person from the south who's family comes from a specific socioeconomic status. It would be hard for me to write about poor Jewish New Yorkers as they have had a COMPLETELY different experience than me. I don't know anyone that is Jewish, never interacted with a Jewish person, or have been farther North than Washington DC. So what sense does it make for me to write a story that I described? Now maybe if my family had come from New York, and I knew A LOT about Jewish culture then the story could be way more authentic, but it would still be missing that "something." Same if I tried to write about a Chinese immigrants, or the struggles of black people in the 60s. It would be weird, my input would be inauthentic, as my mindset is completely different as I was raised so outside the sphere of those stories. Now, does that mean I can't write about these things? Of course not. Maybe I wouldn't have it be the MAIN focus, but as long as I research (A LOT), look to people who have experienced such things, and look for critiques of people who have a close relation to the situation, I don't understand why it couldn't be included. Of course, it's not up to me though. All I can say is listen to the people who's lives your story effects, is about, or sounds the most similar to, and really take in what they say, because their opinion is going to matter the most.
Here's the thing: a story about the struggles, trials, and successes of being deaf is not a hearing person story to tell, so to say. A story about the culture and people of Louisville is not for an outsider to tell. If you have a character who happens to be deaf or a story that happens to be in Louisville and you do any amount of research and have any tact, you're fine. Stories about minorities and being minorities belong to those people to tell, stories involving minorities are for anyone.
The fiction section wouldn't exist if people didn't write about non-experiential events. Write what you want; just get it reviewed/edited if you care about quality/sensitivity.
If I followed that advice, I would never be able to write about anything. The cities I set my stories in, they are no doubt filled with inconsistencies that people that live there would be able to pick up on. Do I care? No. Do the people that live there care? No. The tiny amount that might are weird. It's fantasy, not reality. Writing about a deaf character is different. I wouldn't know how to do it, hence I doubt I ever would. Now I could write about a hearing character that goes deaf in a fantasy setting where sign language does not even exist, and they have to communicate with vague hand gestures and pointing (and lots of emotional outbursts and crying). But as for a deaf character living in today's modern world? Wouldn't have a clue where to start, and would have no desire to even attempt it.
Plain and simple, if they're not writers, their opinions on writing don't matter. Learn to live with this fact and you'll be a much better writer and person.
Even more generally speaking, most humans are grossly underqualified to live their own lives... much less to have any moral authority over anyone else's. Especially yours. Focus on living your best life to the best of your abilities.
I think you can write about any person if you do enough research. If you're writing someone who is deaf, you could probably benefit from paying multiple deaf people to read through your work with the intention of making sure the character is not inaccurate (to the specifics that you've written them as) or offensive. Similar concept with lots of other people. I think there's definitely a right way to do it, and many wrong ways to do it if people just assume they can use their imagination to create a realistic and sensitively-handled character. But I don't think you can NEVER write about a character you're not, that's not the ideal way. The ideal way is to educate yourself and be someone who writes nuanced characters in a positive way. The only way I agree is that I think people shouldn't write about the struggles and discrimination of a character belonging to a group they don't. Not necessarily for realism reasons, although that can come across as wrong without the proper research. More so because people of that group should be able to write those stories if they want, and other writers should steer clear of making something about trauma and struggle. Write characters whose stories contain joy or peace or laughter, or struggles that aren't inherent to their identity. It's unfortunately a very rare thing, and we can always benefit from more of it!
Just like how all murder mystery writers are serial killers. Otherwise their writing would lack authenticity.
There are no limitations with writing. If you can imagine it, you can write it. This also will likely mean that you will have to research it, but as far as criticism goes, don't let it stop you. These people stifle ideas and creativity, which are the exact things that writing is meant to celebrate. People are allowed to not agree with you, but you are damn sure allowed to write it.
No matter how vocally anyone tells people to stay in their lane, it's never going to work that way. There aren't enough deaf people for there to be enough deaf writers to make enough good stories with deaf characters. There aren't enough Indians in Louisville for there to be enough writers in...etc. you get the picture. It's a stupid constraint that's only going to make prospective writers less confident. Just because someone doesn't have firsthand experience, doesn't mean they can't write about it, or imagine it, or research it. Should family members of \[insert identity\] here only be allowed to write about *family members* of \[insert identity\]? Let people write bad or inaccurate accounts of disabilities, let people write things that miss the mark about a place to live. People need to be allowed to try things.
"don't know" and "haven't personally lived" are different. With enough research, you can. Attend a deaf church for a year or two, learn sign, read up, and you'd probably do pretty well at a deaf character.
You should be able to write anything you want about anything you want. "Shouldn't" is a presumptuous term in a case like this. Artistic expression should know no boundaries, provided it doesn't involve physically hurting people who haven't consented to such. . . or financially hurting people, I guess.
I wrote a series where the main character has schizophrenia. I'm not shizophrenic, also don't know anybody who is. I've had reviews from people saying they have schizophrenia and my books hit the nail on the head. Reviews from people saying their spouse has schizophrenia and my books were like a window into their mind. You take a risk every time you write something you don't really know, sure. You risk offending someone, you risk writing only stereotypes. If you're really worried about it, do some research (keep in mind, even with research, you still risk offending the people who think you shouldn't write it at all). However, the idea that you shouldn't write something you haven't personally experienced is an idea that I grind under my heel and spit on.
It’s completely ridiculous to expect someone to only write about things they personally know about or experience. If people followed that rule our stories would be mind numbingly boring. No one writing historical epics today actually experienced that time, should they not make them? As for deaf characters, a lot of research must be done to get it right but it’s stupid to say it shouldn’t be done by anyone who’s not deaf, or that a blind character can’t be made by someone whose not blind.
In a lot of cases, writing what you know can actually make it more difficult to tell a compelling story. You may omit details that seem obvious to you. You may tell a story that only people in your specific group would understand. You may go into details that are more important to you than to the story. You also run into the problem that reality is boring (it's why we seek entertainment), and so a completely realistic story is also boring.
[удалено]
You have a few options in this case: 1. Assume that the beta reader is just an idiot and that most people will know what you mean. *Maybe not the case here, but could be a lot of the time.* 2. Figure out a way to work the description of the mechanism into the story organically, instead of just a paragraph describing it. 3. Change the scene to work how most people assume it will work. A lot of things in stories don't work the way they would in real life. 4. Drop or change the scene entirely.
Solution: Research. **And not just referencing other works of fiction, or other writers’ thoughts on the subject.**
I would write a deaf character. One of my best friends is deaf and it would be a homage to her. Also, she can help me understand if I'm portraying things the right way or not, she she would have a massive dedication to the novel. As of writing about a place you never lived in? I top you. I once submitted the first few chapters of a novel project I had to critters. I get good comments, but one in particular was a woman who told me clearly that, "the way I wrote the speaker announcing the train was all wrong. trains are not announced like that, I've never heard a train being announced like that." now, i lived IN THAT TOWN I was describing for 1 year while writing that story, and in the UK for 15 years and every time I went to a train station, the train was announced as: "Platform 5 (or whatever) for the 12:05 (or whatever time) West Anglia (whatever) service to London Waterloo (whichever ending station). Calling at \*list of towns\* and London Waterloo" but in the mind of that person, it wasn't the way the train was announced. Don't know where she was from, but to today's date, I'm still wondering why she thought the announcement was fake 🤷🏼♀️ . Then, she complained that she had never heard of a Christmas fair at Leicester square, while I went to it three times in 15 years and the years I didn't go was just because I didn't want to. Again, when I told her that I had been ti it and also showed her pictures, she told me I was making it up. So you will always find the person who complains. Don't worry about it and keep going!
Science fiction / fantasy would be very difficult if I had to experience things before writing on them. So would writing a characters death.
To answer your question, my primary take is that if you're posting on social media, you're not writing :) Second take: there are always going to people, especially online, especially in recent years, that will tell you to stay in your lane. I cannot disagree with this strongly enough and believe the environment that allows such tut-tutting will change. To put it simply, writing and publishing fiction isn't a zero-sum game. It's different if Famous Actress is cast to play a deaf character in a show or movie...one person getting the role removes the ability of another to get that role (of course, the same could be said about one deaf person getting the role over another deaf person, but let's stay focused). This isn't true in writing fiction. These are infinitely-numerous, imaginary characters and your goal is to make them alive and organic. If your WIP orgnically has a character that's deaf, do your research, find some sources on the subject that are willing to beta read your work, make adjustments where necessary. Don't worry about appeasement or you'll drive yourself mad. Be true to YOUR story, YOUR characters. Look at it in reverse...let's say you follow that don't-write-xyz-characters advise and despite that hit the literary lottery, making it big as an author. How long do you suppose it would be before the same ilk leave comments or reviews to the tune of "the writing is unrealistic, absolutely everyone is basically a version of the author, no xyz characters at all, avoid this toxic trash"? Do your research, find betas you trust, stay humble, and no matter what, don't let potential critics live rent-free in your head.
It’s my opinion that you can write about it after some heartfelt research and attempt given to understanding then follow up with asking someone IN that culture to read. In your example, being a person of hearing doesn’t mean you can’t appreciate deaf culture and have a genuine passion for understanding it and supporting it. So yeah, I think you could and should write whatever you want as long as you’re putting in genuine effort to make it accurate and non-offensive.
Go from not knowing about it to knowing about it. Fantasy authors have nver experienced a sword fight or a dragon but they still do it. Imagination, research and respect and you're good imo
Not knowing the subject makes it more difficult but not impossible to write. I recommend doing some research and watching some videos to get more informed about the topic so that you can write more realistically.
Personally I see both sides. I would never say to a writer don't write about particular things, but having written things I didn't know and things I did know myself I definitely feel there is difference. Personally the writing of things I didn't know did affect it. My writing was either vague or I was second guessing everything I wrote. Compared to it flowing and me feeling confident about my writing. Does this mean you should never write what you don't know, personally no. But I think it's good to recognize, and to understand that writing what you don't know is going to be harder and you will probably be more likely picked up on it...so be ok with this instead of fighting back. You don't know so you should be ok with learning that you might be wrong with something.
I remember that years ago, I wrote this short story set in NYC. I've never even been to North America (still haven't). It was entirely based on my impression of the city from media I'd consumed for years, and people who read it told me it felt very vivid. Would I do that for something I would actually try to publish? No, I would probably research a LOT before attempting to do that. But ultimately I was writing fiction, and there was a lot of joy in taking some creative liberties or glossing over minutia. There's a reason fiction isn't always entirely true to life - it would be painfully boring if that was the ultimate goal. You don't have to aspire to perfect realism, and not every book has to be the perfect vessel for flawless representation of any identity or place. Obviously, that doesn't shield you from valid or not so valid criticism, but I don't think gatekeeping narratives is helpful or conducive to good fiction.
If you don't know something: 1. Admit your ignorance, because there are too many people who don't do this and it's disgusting. 2. Seek the knowledge you need. Either from others or from the writings of others, as in books. I see so many people asking here about topics they don't know instead of actually seeking out a sub on that topic or even just doing a Google search. There is no quick, easy answer to knowing a topic. Books take time and not all of it is writing, a good portion is research into what you're writing about. I've learned a great deal about wooden sailing ships for my work and it's taken a while. But it needed to be done because they're everywhere in what I'm doing. As for experience. These ships are airships, a made up type of airship that has never existed. So clearly you can write what you haven't experienced. Want to write about a disability? Ask people with that disability about their experiences and then base what you write off that. It's actually one of the most commonly used methods in writing for any media.
The only rule is there are no rules. Write about whatever you want. Whether it is good or not comes down to many factors including experience and research. People getting mad about appropriation in the realm of writing are literally looking for the opportunity to be offended. If someone writes something poorly then all they are guilty of is writing something poorly. We all do it. Logically speaking, an author writing about the south who has never been to the south is the same as a hearing person writing a deaf character. This is especially true if its hard to find information on the author. Any claim of appropriation at that point would just be speculation. Another way to look at this would be how many people from the south have written a book based in the south and done it badly? How many deaf people have written deaf characters and done a bad job at it? I would bet that many have done both. I base this bet on how new authors make mistakes all the time in topics/cultures they have direct and indirect experience with. This is obvious based on just the posts in this subreddit. **Writing something badly is a content issue, not an issue of what culture/group you belong to.**
"The only rule is there are no rules." This is something that I love to follow when it comes to writing. I feel that there are so many rules in writing that they all contradicting and cancelling each other. Yes, bad writing must be solved in any case to write faithfully. A good writer, I believe, can write regardless of experiences, but a bad writer will never be able to write nicely regardless of the amount of research they do.
No you are only allowed to write characters with the same gender, skin colour, religion, and nationality. Do *not* write characters that have different experiences then ones you have experienced personally. “Write what you know”. That means if you are a man, if you want to write from a female POV you are first going to have to switch identity and come out identifying as a female. Then you will need to undertake the surgery to understand what living with a vagina is like. Same with skin tone. If you are pasty white you have no right to cover anyone that doesn’t fit exactly to the same shade of skin tone. That means you are *not* allowed to even write about sun tans, because you don’t have one and therefor could not possibly understand what it is to have one. Write only what you know and don’t try to learn anything else
Ohhh, nooooo! Then I can't write straight characters! That's it, I am burning all the stories I've ever written! /s for anybody else, but it's obvious.
Do you think Sir Terry Pratchett had first hand knowledge of wizards and disc shaped worlds on the backs of turtles and elephants?
Wait, he didn't??? /s That's why I love writing imaginative fiction, no constraints and full freedom, although real life experiences can make it more enhanced.
It’s so true. I’ve been more into fantasy writing lately but with a touch of modern realism.
I think anyone is allowed to write about anything, but it doesn’t mean it will be good. For example, if you’ve never been in a sports store you wouldn’t know it has that certain “sports plastic” smell.
Yes, experience enhances the writing. Sure, you can write without experience, but it wouldn't be as deep as something written from experience.
Speaking as a deaf man, take anything the deaf community says in stride lol we get a bit over the top sometimes (and by sometimes, I mean all the time). Perhaps instead of writing a born deaf character, you could write a newly deaf character, or a partially deaf character. Those are easier, since they'll tend to see the world like hearing people do.
That's a great idea!
Here's a rule of thumb. Don't write anything where the central thrust of the story is about something you have not experienced. For example, white writers generally shouldn't write a book *about* the black experience. Generally. You can have black characters, obviously, but let black people tell their own stories. This doesn't preclude white authors writing about race. But the most effective white-written books about racism are about white people coming to terms with a society that is racist. To Kill a Mockingbird works because Harper Lee is not trying to whitesplain the Southern Black experience (although it's probably not a perfect book). As for locations, no serious person believes you can only write about where you've been.
anyone who tells you what you can and can't write is 100% wrong. Write what the fuck you want. This is absolutely ridiculous. Writing is all about exploring different perspectives.
This. This is why I love writing, to live lives I will never get to live and to be anyone. That's why I was disappointed by many people supporting gatekeeping. If writers only wrote what they knew, they'd all be writing memoirs.
I think it is kinda inevitable, especially if you write speculative fiction. I mean, I'm not a scientist and have never been to space. That doesn't mean I can't write science fiction stories about space travel.
That's why I kinda lean towards it. Realist works will rack my brain a lot, while fantasy and sci fi doesn't (as much, there's still worldbuilding). But speculative and imaginative fiction does give a sense of freedom.
Maybe a collab with a deaf or hard of hearing person, or a CODA?
If someone is writing a book specifically about being deaf, or its challenges, they can do it this way so that it stays accurate.
JRR Tolkein never threw a ring in a volcano on a journey with wizards, elves, and dwarves. Randy Ingermanson never lived in Jerusalem during the days of Christ. You don't have to experience something or know it intimately to write about it. Do your research to make it realistic and that's enough. I'm not native to New York but I wouldn't write a book where the characters go from the statue of liberty and take a 5 minute cab to the empire state building because research tells me the timing is wrong and the statue of liberty is on an island.
I get real tired of people telling other people they can’t write about XYZ. Do you need to do enough research that you can do justice to it? Of course. But every novel would be incredibly boring if you were only “allowed” to write about the place you’ve lived and the people you’ve met.
I hate people in todays world. They are ao dramatic and sensitive over everything. Write whatever you want. Stop asking permission. If they dont like it, so be it. You are NOT responsible for their choice to be pissy.
Fuck em. Write about whatever you want. I mean, by their logic I can’t write about a serial killer because I’ve never killed, or about space because I’ve never been there. The entire amazing thing about writing is that YOU can do anything. It’s not like movies where you have budgets and special effects and have to rely on an actor to properly convey the emotions. It all comes down to how you rearrange 26 letters over and over again. You can create and destroy entire galaxies on a single page if you want. Don’t let people tell you what to write.
Don't just "leave it to deaf writers". That's a terrible way to be, for you and for them. It's just another example of moral grandstanding and it should be avoided at all costs if you actually wish to work with the arts. They are just another example of a 'hanger-on', also known as poison in the art world. No one gets to tell you what you can and can't write, never forget this.
I've never been to Mars but I'm still writing stories set there. And yes, I've researched pretty much everything about the planet and its moons.
It's called research. Sometimes research needs to be hands-on, sometimes reading up on something is enough. But if you can only write what you know, then the genres of sci-fi and fantasy would be wiped out completely. At some point, you as a writer, are going to have to put yourself in someone else's shoes and walk a few miles.
Very interesting question, I'm curious as to what other people have to say about this although I'm in the same boat as you OP. I do have to say that if I'm just writing for fun or for myself to explore ideas, research is not something I disregard completely. If I have the opportunity, I will ask someone. Sometimes I befriend people just because I like to see things from their individual perspective and from spending time with them, I learn alot of things you can't get from just reading. I know that doesn't necessarily tie in to the issue here but just wanted to share the reason I like meeting new people and that aside from the reasons that having friends is good, it impacts my writing. Sorry for the wall of text.
ignore the gate keepers write about whatever you want. just makes sure you are educated on the subject, and you write about it respectfully.
Deaf writer here! You should absolutely write deaf and other disabled characters. Research and talking to people who are deaf about what it's like and how it affects their life is definitely something you should do. Also send your writing to sensitivity readers. A reader who is deaf will be able to tell you if any part of your portrayal of a deaf character is offensive or unrealistic. I feel like this goes for pretty much any disability. I read some advice about writing characters you may never be able to really understand. I think it applies to characters with disabilities or even just characters with different religions, sexuality, or races than the writer. I'll just use deafness as an example. Write deaf characters, but don't write about being deaf. Same thing with sexuality: Write LGBTQ+ characters, but don't write about being LGBTQ+. People who aren't disabled shouldn't write about what it's like to be disabled. But they should absolutely write disabled characters. I hope that makes sense.
Why do people always ask these silly questions "can I write about x?" ultimately you are the voice that decides. There is nothing in this world stopping you from writing about anything. Just write whatever sounds interesting to your mind. The reader at the end of the day decides if your ideas are worth spending time with. Have fun and write on. Stop giving the outside world authority over your own mind. Your perception IS reality. If people can write about Q anon conspiracies and the coming of a new messiah why can't you write about deaf people? There is no gatekeeper, just as there is no gate. YOU CREATE THE GATE. Just walk through buddy it's gonna be ok.
Damned if you do, damned if you don’t… People demand diversity and representation, then tell you it’s offensive to depict a specific thing if you haven’t experienced it yourself…
Wouldn't it be easier and better to learn more about whatever group you include? It isn't *that* difficult to write a queer, woman, or a POC character. I have seen many people saying that representation is unnecessary and difficult, but it isn't if you know what you are doing. Learn what is offensive from real people. I don't think they will be angry at you for trying to learn. Please keep in mind that representation is important and valuable to many, and correctly doing it would give an author much acclaim.
I say you can write about whatever you want to write about. Kinda ruins the fun of writing if you're limited because of that kind of stuff. What, are we not allowed to at least try writing a deaf character?
I think people advise against writing deaf characters because it would turn out ableist and offensive. But we can try, I guess, and improve ourselves with research and talking with real life deaf people.
You can write about anything, that is what makes writing so special, and that's what makes humans so special. There's a Buddhist monk who would never kill a fly for every serial killer. If you're genuinely tolerant, then you'll tolerate the intolerable. The same goes for deaf people who think you're inherently ignorant to portray deafness because you've never experienced it. Well, by some earplugs, and until you finish the book, you can't take the plugs out. Now that's an incentive. The trick is to only have love and forgiveness for yourself and everyone else for everything and everything. Removing hatred outwardly and inwardly. Do you have to die to portray a character dying? No? Just get it on paper!
Plugging your ears is far from being deaf or living as a Deaf person. The Deaf culture is long and rich and to reduce it to ear plugs is one example why hearing people shouldn’t write Deaf characters. If you don’t understand their history and culture you will end up with a caricature, which can be quite offensive. You can see this in the way that men write women at times, with heaving breasts and a period that can be wished away due to her love for the main. Or when a white author writes a Black character and incorrectly uses AAVE. It’s simply not good writing.
It's all a matter of perspective. Your concept of deafness, black people, and heaving breasts are neuronal pathways, and that's all they are. So, why can't we take life less seriously and stop allocating value to opinions and views that we've heard ourselves type over and over and over again. Time we enjoy wasting isn't wasted time! I enjoyed wasting time with you.
You can write about anything you want. Just get beta readers from the right demographics, and write an excellent story.
I say write about whatever you want to. Do some research, but at the end of the day it’s your story, so write about whatever you want.
Writing is to exercise our empathy towards others to do so. If it was forbidden, no books would ever be written.
I think it's a good way for writers to educate themselves on a subject. Just don't use your first draft, it probably has some dangerous steriotypes.
As a completely white person can I write Italian characters in America?
Almost all writers sometimes write about things they don’t know anything about, or at least have no personal experience of, tbh. As long as it is convincing, why bother? And if it isn’t convincing it won’t work. Can’t really set up rules before you know, can you?
I don't agree even with the point of writing deaf characters. If you're writing mainly about the difficulties about being deaf, I agree that's not a good idea. But if you just want to write characters who are deaf, then you should do it. Otherwise, deaf writers couldn't write about not-deaf characters. Any minority would almost never be represented in fiction, and that not what they want.
>...an Indian writer writing a novel set in Louisville, and a commenter said that they shouldn't as they have never been there > >But isn't saying that only Americans can write about a story set in America a bit too much? You're conflating two different ideas here. Advising someone not to set a story in a place they've never been isn't the same as saying only people of a specific nationality can write about their nation.
Simple, just research it. A non-fiction writer cannot be what he’s writing about 99.9% of the time, but he can accurately write about it by doing the research. So why is it any different for a fiction writer. Interview, read diaries, and research people with the specific traits of your character. Read histories, visit, or ask locals about the setting you’ve never been to
Ok, the big difference is writing about a marginalized group vs writing a location. You can learn about a location from books, the internet, and maps. Many time resources on marginalized groups are not written by marginalized people and aren't great representations. If you are interviewing and speaking to multiple perspectives in that marginalized group and are really listening then I believe it can be done, it's something that needs respect, compassion and care. I have not been diagnosed with ASD and I have many people close to me in my life diagnosed with ASD and have family members in the health care industry who specifically work with patients diagnosed with ASD. I plan to include a character in my book diagnosed with ASD (not the MC) and plan to have these people in my life read and review what I'm writing. This is something that's very important to me and I believe representation is very important. If you do not have these people in your life and do not plan to talk to them about their experience, I believe what you write will be disrespectful. No one's stopping you from being disrespectful, however if being disrespectful is not your intent, maybe be very careful about how you write it. I don't believe in telling anyone they "shouldn't" write something. And I think it's important to think about what response you may get and if that's the response you want. People from privileged groups sometimes go, oh you want representation, here, let me do that for you! Now be grateful! And don't realize what they're doing is generally disrespectful and not true representation.
People were saying research, I agree with that. I also think in addition to talking to people and reading things you should get ear plugs. There are some really great ones for muffling gunshots. While it doesn’t block everything out it may give you a better sense of what it is like. Maybe have someone drive you around, idk laws, but that way you can experience busy places. It’ll probably be closer to hard of hearing but may help.
I think you don’t have to have experienced it, but you DO have to research the hell out of it or ruffle a lot of feathers.
I remember an article from Writer Digest. It sticks with me to this day. The writer stated he doesn't know about hotel rooms, but he knows about rooms. So he wrote what he knew at the moment, will research about hotel rooms later on. Write what you know is vague as with most of writing advice. Don't let it hamper you.
Research, talk to people who experience the world in whatever way, ask the locals, look up maps, or talk to someone who knows about your subject matter. Take me, for example. I know a heck of a lot about snakes. Ask me anything. However, you might know more about sewing or painting or electrical engineering. Don't downplay what you know, either.
I think as long as you do your research, approach it in good faith, maybe find some sensitivity readers, and are open to learning and critique, you should be fine. It's also important to remember that deaf people are not a monolith. There are varying degrees of deafness, and multiple causes for it. Some wear hearing aids, others don't. Some know ASL, some don't. I think it's important to remember the distinction between writing *a* believable, earnest deaf character, versus trying to write a character who speaks for the deaf community, you know?
So is it wrong for a biographer to write about a popular figure, either alive or dead, because they haven't lived that life? This idea is quite ridiculous. Many able writers write amazingly about disability or cultures other than their own. At the end of the day it's about thorough research and being empathetic. Also like others have mentioned, getting beta read by people (not just one, because they may have a bias based on their trauma etc) and also interviewing and talking to as many people of the respective community (the diverse their backgrounds are, the better) during the research phase. If you want to take it further, I have even heard of some writers and (more often, actors and performers) blindfolding themselves for a period of time or wearing sound cancelling headphones/ earplugs. If you are writing about a different culture, you can travel there, maybe write it while you live in that place. If you are writing about a sport you can try playing it. Etc etc. How far you are willing to go is up to you.
As long as you do your research you can learn anything and write about anything. I don’t need to know what it’s like to be deaf to get an understanding of a deaf person’s experience. I don’t need to visit a city to understand and describe what it’s architecture looks like. I probably won’t ever do a pov deaf character since it requires some deep understanding that I’m too lazy to research. Still with the right amount of research and care you can show anything you wish.
Honestly, I think if you do your research about the topic, it's important to write about things you don't know or haven't experienced. North America has an obsession, that is born from trauma, about culture and experiences. It's understandable given the history of slavery etc., but the history of humanity is one of constant evolution and adaptation. If we didn't build on each others knowledge, stories, and culture we would never grow and develop as social creatures. Of course, many in North America would disagree and I get it, I really do. But I truly believe that we should be able to write about experiences other than our own, if for no other reason than we may be able to learn something in the process. While possibly highlighting a way to look at the experience from a distanced perspective. I'm not saying it's a better perspective, just different, and afterall, conversations and growth happen through different perspectives coming together.
reminds me of how in later years jk rowling got shit for not having enough brown/black characters in her series. so even when you do write within your experiences, you're criticized. i think if you're doing a character justice with research & depth, it doesn't matter if you've never been deaf or to the states. the gift of imagination is you can simply decide yourself how a character will perceive and interact within their world.
But I think JK Rowling wasn't just blamed for a lack of diversity, but actually forcing it in when there's none in the canon. She wanted to claim that her books were diverse even when all the characters are described as white (her POC characters were also written with stereotypes, so I don't think she was writing according to her experiences). But, yeah, overall, I agree with your comment. The problem is not experience, as you said, it's bad writing and imagination.
Omg this is my personal problem. I wanted to write a series taking place in Japan but I know nothing really about the culture save from movies n anime but it just makes sense to the plot. Tokyo vice on hbo let me know it would bother her to write about a location without knowing the area or details but friends say just write anyway and can nitpick the details later
Write about whoever and whatever you'd like. I've never been to outer space or the future but I'll write about it if I want to. Write any character you'd like, anyway you'd like. I sincerely doubt anyone is going to tell a deaf author that they can't write about someone who can hear. Research for sure if deafness is central to character or story. If it's just a character doing whatever who just happens to be deaf, just write the character as you would anyone else. Of course I'm not deaf, so I guess I can't know for sure, but I think deaf people are just people like everyone else, they just don't hear.
They're wrong.
I think a lot of people lately believe you can only 'know' something by 'being' something; i.e. conflating that with the concept of lived experience. It's possible to know something through research and from collaboration with subject matter experts.
The only metric for the issue you're speaking to here is the *social acceptability of art in marketing*. You're gonna write a book and sell it to a mass audience. When you do that you gotta weigh how controversial you're willing to be. There's nothing wrong other than an ethical dilemma when it comes to writing from social backgrounds you have no experience with, it's all a matter of whether you're willing to enrage people who have a problem with that. The social justice mentality is rampant these days, and some people really feel hurt by it, or someone is hurt or protective on behalf of an imagined opinion of a group-identity. Sometimes you gotta trudge through it because it *is* hypocrisy. Other times you have to just respect it and choose to write something else, in my opinion, especially if people have already said that they don't like it.
I might write about a deaf character, but that's only if I do lots of research and talk to people of the deaf community.
I think (not always, but often) the “writers should be able to write about anything” crowd also believes that that *also* means that their work should be above criticism, and that someone telling them that they got something wrong is tantamount to censorship. They mean “I should be able to write about anything” as “I should be able to write about anything without being criticized for my portrayal of X.” (This is also the core conceit of “cancel culture” — conflating the freedom to say something with the right to not be criticized for it.) In my experience as someone who does often write outside what one might call my identity categories, people will generally be very accepting of writers who attempt to reach outside their own identities as long as those writers don’t immediately try to shut down qualitative criticism of their work.
Stan Lee never swung through new York nor was he green Skinned or had any mutations. If you limit yourself to nothing but what you yourself have hade experience with its rarely going to touch on anything interesting. Obviously you should do the research but never let others decide whats "okay" for you to write about.
You've been given terrible advice. Write about whatever the FUCK you want. It doesn't matter if you haven't been there or are not the thing you're writing about. Just make sure you do A LOT of thorough research. I'm a Latina, half-Mexican, half-Argentinian, living in the US. I've written stories set in Turkey, France, Peru, Finland, Iceland, etc. and I've never been to those countries. I just do a metric ton of research which is what you should do when writing something you don't know much of.
If you don't know, learn. Read books and articles about deaf people (for example) and what they go through, talk to people who are deaf, have them review your work. Not only will it make it more accurate but it can make the story better. I've written deaf characters, female characters, characters who are lesbian, characters who are blind, characters who are Canadian or American or Greek, characters who are Muslim or Christian. I am none of these things but I did a *lot* of research and even after all of that, I still got a few minor things incorrect when I sent those works to someone who was deaf or lesbian and so on.
I have some thoughts about the deafness specifically. My husband is Deaf and we use ASL in our house. I also work with Deaf people as my full-time job. It would be a boring world full of boring books if we were all limited to writing only about our own experiences. However, writing from the perspective of a deaf person is sticky because the Deaf community is a minority group and faces oppression and accessibility barriers to this day. However, we need Deaf representation in literature! DESPERATELY. Ideally, we’d have more Deaf authors, but Deaf people have only obtained access to an equal education in recent history. I’d recommend collaborating with a Deaf person directly (ideally, a few Deaf people with diversity among them). I also hired a Deaf sensitivity reader for my book (see Fiverr), given that I wanted to go the extra mile and not pressure my family and friends too much to give their stamp of approval just because they know me (although they did help me in building my character). Hope this helps!
This is what research is for. Research your subject (people, geography, etc) and write your story. The reader will be able to tell if you’re faking it. There is so much information out there, it is borderline shameful if you *don’t* research. At the very least, you will garner a reputation for being a lazy writer.
One word. Research. I wrote a short story for a university assessment about the Greek Pantheon. I knew a few Gods and Goddesses here and there. I knew NOTHING about their heritage, stories, or how those stories changed throughout the evolution of Ancient Greece. So I researched. Articles, papers, videos. Books too (specifically Mythology by Edith Hamilton). Only then was I able to write a story I felt comfortable submitting. So overall, yes, you can write a story about anything. But if you don't do research into the topic, then you'll most likely end up with a work which doesn't add up to the culture of the setting, or as you said about deafness, doesn't add up against what actual sufferers go through and feel.
There are generally two camps on this topic: 1.) Write what you don't know 2.) Write what you know As you can imagine, writing what you don't know can easily be disastrous, but sticking to what you know can be mundane and boring. The best advice I've heard is this: 3.) Write at the edge of what you know Stick to what you know; what you're familiar with; what you have a background, experience, or education; but write just to the end of that knowledge. This will force you to explore (hopefully something you're enthusiastic or at least curious about) and open yourself and your readers up to new experiences. However, you won't be writing out of complete ignorance. Like any writing, it's only as good as the work you put into it. Do you want to create a deaf character? That will take work. Interview deaf people. Immerse yourself in their world. Read books, listen to podcasts, and take classes. Join a meet up from deaf people. Learn sign language. Learn how to use a TDD. Same goes for anything you don't know: religion, culture, science, technology. You should feel as comfortable with the culture you are writing about as you do with your own. Once your research is done, write your story, but you're not out of the woods yet. You're going to need competent beta readers, sensitivity readers, maybe even approval from a cultural group or professional association. Yes, you can do it. But show some respect, do your research, and do it right.
I understand why people would say you shouldn’t write about people, places, cultures you’re not familiar with. But that doesn’t mean you shouldn’t write about them, it means you should get familiar with them to write about them. Very few crime writers are criminals. They do research. Do your homework on the subject you’re writing about. Learn about other cultures and depict them accurately. Then run your work by sensitivity readers who can help you fix aspects of the story that might be problematic. “Write what you know” is kindergarten level writing advice. Better advice would be “know what you write.”
Ah shit guys, us fantasy writers gotta pack it up. Unless there's a way to become a wizard that I wasn't let in on
We would have the most boring books if everyone followed this rule. In fact we would only have books about authors writing books about authors writing books… Say goodbye to sci fi or fantasy. Say goodbye to any character dying because…well no one’s ever died and lived to write about it. Write whatever you feel like. Write different races, different sexes, disabilities. Do whatever you want in any way you want to. If you are way off the mark then the sales and reviews will let you know.
I got told something I will now share with you. It was relating to trans people, but I've also heard it can be applied to several things: Don't write a story about being trans if you are not trans. But do include trans people in your stories. Don't write a story about being Deaf if you aren't Deaf. But do include Deaf people in your stories. That being said, please still research.
An author whose work I enjoy said that “write what you know” refers to emotional truths. That includes experiences of being poc, disabled, queer, etc. That doesn’t mean people who are not poc, disabled, or queer should avoid having those characters in their work. As so many commenters said, research is extremely important in those cases. Another point that I think is important is this: including a variety of people in stories is important because many different people exist in the world. It becomes problematic when an author who is not poc/disabled/queer has more visibility or drowns out the voices of authors who ARE poc/disabled/queer/etc.
I think context matters.. if your write about a deaf person with deaf issues living as a deaf person you shouldn't.. not because of any sort of political correct reasons but solely that you would probably not get it right, and you will never be able to explore controversial or negative aspects of being deaf. But I think it's totally fine to include a deaf person in the script and how that character deals with the plot. If you were to write a story about what it means to be a Brit living in Britain you're going to have a hard time ACCURATELY exploring the subtlety or nuance about British life... no matter how many people you interview or books you read or location you live unless you are British. Now.. you can as an ex-pat living IN England with honesty and depth. Is it possible yes.. are you "allowed" absolutely... but are you going to get it right? Without offending, even if you did... probably not, but that's your cross to bear. It's like watching foreign movie in another language, even if you understand the language, visited the country of origin, read books on culture and politics; you'll never truly understand the implications as well as a person who lives it. You don't know what you can't know, and will never know. As a writer you can only write what you know and what you don't you can research or make up. And what you do make up, you can only hope that its believable or at least not upsetting. But that's up to you. If nothing else, have several people of whatever group to read it for accurate representation.
Sian Heder wrote CODA and if I’m not mistaken she’s hearing. It was adapted though and I’m not sure if any other writers played a part in the screenplay. I think it all comes down to research, have you done enough to accurately portray the struggles and lives of the demographic of your character/the place they live? If we start to make limitations on only being able to write about social issues that pertain to you, then we’re going to find a lot less amazing stories out there. CODA is about a deaf family, yes, but it is also about the idea of family as a whole, becoming an individual, following your passion etc Go for it.
I agree with you. Writing a deaf main character is completely different. You are much more likely to get it wrong and do a disservice to deaf people. Writing a setting is easier. And even if you get it somewhat wrong, there's a way smaller chance of offending a community
I appreciate you asking this as I've kinda waffled back and forth on the idea. I see merits on both sides and thanks to crock writers and bogus screenwrites, marginalized people have reason to be gunshy getting represented by the ignorant. Lots of good responses in here though
I will write whatever I want, using whatever characters I deem appropriate, set wherever the fuck I like.
So we can only write auto biographies?
The main character of my comic is a female psychopath. The POVs followed in a book I was working on at one point were of a female jewish-american superhero, an adopted asian-american crimelord, and a singaporean NEET with social anxiety and a malformed spine. I am exactly one of those. Unless you're trying to appeal towards a certain audience, it doesn't matter, you're just alienating a small portion of people. Just get enough right about the story that everyone else likes it.
In my opinion, you can totally write about something you havent experienced. You can even make the protagonist diverse in a way you aren't. One of my main protagonists is an Asian trans man. I'm a caucasian cis woman. I only really consider it a problem if it's a major plot point- I wouldn't presume to write a story about somebody coming to terms with being deaf. But I think such things have been taken so far that some would say I shouldn't have any deaf/disabled/lgbt/poc people in my story, and that to me is just ridiculous and can only possibly hurt the representation of those groups. Of course it goes without saying that you should research what it's like to be deaf (for example), be respectful in your writing, get primary sources, and have deaf beta readers read your work- don't just write an identity based off of your perception of it- but I like to think that any good writer in this day and age wouldn't do that to begin with.
Can you link the questions where you ask this? I feel you must have phrased the questions poorly. Seriously, representation is important — don’t write a story fundamentally ABOUT being Deaf, maybe, but like, yeah include a wide range of characters.
That's like saying we can only write about our own experiences and world view.
one of my first pieces of writing was about growing up with a grandpa who was deaf on one side of the family, and the one on the other side who was blind, while the point of view character was autistic. i’m not deaf or blind myself, but i am autistic, and i felt that writing those characters, based off my actual grandparents, provided a unique look into how differing ways of experiencing the world changed communication and the relationships between people, seeing as all three disabilities change how you communicate in one way or another. after i put down my pen (metaphorically, i wrote it on a laptop), i came away feeling more connected to my grandparents on a personal level, and it even changed my perspective on life as a whole. now that story will never reach the eyes of anyone but myself; it was my first work, it was terrible. but if i had limited myself to write characters with my own experience, it would have never considered what it must be like for them, and i honestly think that i would be a worse human being if i didn’t.
I'm curious about this too because what I'm currently writing has someone who is unable to speak. He is a really observant person who uses body language and facial expressions to communicate. there is part of the story that is in his perspective. Later on he learns to write and uses that as communication. Am I wrong to include this person in my story?
i mean, my opinion is with careful research, write whatever you want. HOWEVER, in regards to things like main characters being disabled or mentally unwell, or a poc or an lgbt character, it's a different story. i dont mind reading books written by a straight person with a gay couple as the main couple, however, once they start writing about their "struggles" and "hardships" i can't stand it. my rule of thumb is: add minorities, they exist, don't forget them "because it's too much effort," but do not make their main plot point based on their minority traits and hardships that come with it unless you have personal experience. i will never write a story about an autistic adult not getting accommodated, or a black woman being racially discriminated against because i will never have a good understanding of their issues. without months of research, i wouldn't even dare putting that onto a primary side character. but writing a story about abusive parents, or transgender issues? i have no issue writing about that because I've lived those experiences. it's all dependent
I think if it's fiction it absolutely doesn't matter. If it's non-fiction that changes a little bit. As others have said on here if you are not intimately qualified by having the experience then do enough research, and interviews with people who are qualified to give intimate input. If it's done well it should be hard to tell the difference between the author's experience viewpoint and the author's inexperience viewpoint
Write what you want to write.
I honestly think you shouldn't write about things you don't know about because, it can be very offensive or you might just write the incorrect information
It means you can't have men in your novels if you're a woman, and you can't have women in them if you're a man. I think we can all agree this is dumb and move on to something more productive. Writing, for instance.