How to research for writing a book?

[krishna_lit]

I am in need of knowing about the different ways of performing the research/study for writing a book. Please describe some of the ways that you people know of or follow for your own works. Or if there are any books that one should get their hands on before penning one on their own, please mention that too, like "On Writing" by Stephen King.

Thank you, guys!

[Emil Miller]

Are you intending to write a book yourself? If so, I would suggest that your best method to understanding how books are written is to read as much as you can and see how books are constructed through what others have written . I don't think self-help manuals are of much use and I doubt that many of the writers we read today ever had recourse to them. It would be difficult to believe that a Dickens or Hemingway sought to learn their craft from ready-made construction kits but we can be certain that they had a good grasp of the language and had also assiduously read their forerunners.

[EvoWarrior5]

I think that what he / she meant is more of an issue with factual knowledge. If I wanted to write a book about, say, the civil war in Britain in the seventeenth century, I'd need to know as much about that time as I could possibly find out. Not only how it went and such, but also the culture of around that time and possibly clothing and other imagery to create the setting, etc.

So what I think krishna wants to know is how to find out about those things before writing a book. Evidently you can always look on the internet, or you could look up other books of around the same era or roughly the same setting or subject (if you can find one of those). That is probably the best way, I would think (haven't done it myself yet). I am also still interested in how other people do it though. :)

But then again I also may have misinterpreted it. Sorry if so.

[krishna_lit]

So what I think krishna wants to know is how to find out about those things before writing a book. Evidently you can always look on the internet, or you could look up other books of around the same era or roughly the same setting or subject (if you can find one of those). That is probably the best way, I would think (haven't done it myself yet). I am also still interested in how other people do it though. :)

But then again I also may have misinterpreted it. Sorry if so.

No no you've said it very well. You're right, one should know about the culture of the times and places of which one is intended to write about... Thnx great point of advice... :)

[PeterL]

It depends on what kind of a bok one wants to write.

You might want to read several "How yo write a ____" books. At some point you will become heartily sick of those things. Then you can start an outline and work from that.

[Nate]

stanley kubrick is known to have been a great researcher; he claimed to have read over 200 books on napoleon in preparation for a biopic that never came into fruition. there is a huge book out that shows all the research and preparation he put into the film and i think it provides useful insight for anyone interested in taking on a project like a film or a novel.

http://www.amazon.com/Stanley-Kubricks-Napoleon-Greatest-Movie/dp/3836523353/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1380304413&sr=8-1&keywords=kubrick+napoleon

[Calidore]

stanley kubrick is known to have been a great researcher; he claimed to have read over 200 books on napoleon in preparation for a biopic that never came into fruition. there is a huge book out that shows all the research and preparation he put into the film and i think it provides useful insight for anyone interested in taking on a project like a film or a novel.

http://www.amazon.com/Stanley-Kubricks-Napoleon-Greatest-Movie/dp/3836523353/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1380304413&sr=8-1&keywords=kubrick+napoleon

Although Kubrick tended to go to ridiculous extremes. I think one can have nearly as much authenticity as Kubrick without being as obsessive. There's always a point of diminishing returns on the effort/results curve.

[Nate]

but that's what it takes to make something as elaborate as 2001 or barry lyndon. there are lots of stories of him wasting effort on inconsequential details (i think most of them are exaggerated), but he was a compulsive worker and highly attentive to detail, and i think those are attributes that separate the top tier from the second raters.

[mona amon]

stanley kubrick is known to have been a great researcher; he claimed to have read over 200 books on napoleon in preparation for a biopic that never came into fruition. there is a huge book out that shows all the research and preparation he put into the film and i think it provides useful insight for anyone interested in taking on a project like a film or a novel.

http://www.amazon.com/Stanley-Kubricks-Napoleon-Greatest-Movie/dp/3836523353/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1380304413&sr=8-1&keywords=kubrick+napoleon

And if you are Dan Brown, all you have to do is go to Wikipedia! :D

[JBI]

Making a cue card database of everything. One of my professors showed me his - he has averaged 26 cards a day for three years. The cards are quite beefy too. He said when the great scholar Qian Zhongshu was editing a selection of Song poetry he supposedly made a room full's worth. Now we do it digitally. In general, read everything. You can approach it like a science - read half come up with an argument, read another pile, start writing, read another pile, and then finish. Then upon revision you can keep reading. Make sure to keep track of how your original work was "intended" and how your end product "turned out". This will give you an idea to your process and development throughout the course of writing.

[JBI]

but that's what it takes to make something as elaborate as 2001 or barry lyndon. there are lots of stories of him wasting effort on inconsequential details (i think most of them are exaggerated), but he was a compulsive worker and highly attentive to detail, and i think those are attributes that separate the top tier from the second raters.

Well, the same is said of Monty Python, with the writers being the Oxbridge bunch. It's an interesting idea of the scholar as artist in terms of cinema, most of that isn't visible to the general view. The same could be said of Kill Bill as a synthesis of other works in the genre.