Tips for Writing Good Gay Fiction

[Mann Ramblings]

One of my main pet peeves as a reader is an author writing about a subject or from a perspective that they are completely clueless on. It is so easy to tell from the beginning in gay stories whether or not the author truly knows about the subject in their story.

 

One of the most common examples of this is an author who tries to tell a story from the point of view of the popular, starting quarterback jock character. It is almost painful for me to read stories like this where it is so glaringly obvious the author never was one himself and never hung around one a day in his life. You can insert this into any kind of common character you find in gay fiction, not just jocks.

 

Seriously, you can write about things you aren't personally familiar with, but at least take the time to do some basic research to make it sound semi-believable to those of us who are familiar with it. I only write what I know about because I want my stuff to sound authentic, and I want the reader to think it mimics what they would see in real life in similar situations. But I really don't think that even with a lot of research an author can pull off an authentic sounding story that revolves around a theme they are not already personally familiar with. Thats just me though.

 

One way to work around not having a working knowledge of a subject it to pair up with a beta reader who is familiar. A beta reader with that kind of knowledge can help undo the "that would never happen" moments that can plague a story. It's still more difficult to write those kind of subjects, but you have a proper chance to do it justice by combining that with the additional research an author should do under those circumstances.

 

There is a thread pinned in the Writer's Corner forums titled "Skills Research and Assistance" giving a list of people who have volunteered to help authors over various subjects to help with just such a circumstance.

[Graeme]

One of my main pet peeves as a reader is an author writing about a subject or from a perspective that they are completely clueless on. It is so easy to tell from the beginning in gay stories whether or not the author truly knows about the subject in their story.

I agree, though there can be scales of annoyance with this. Sometimes the part they're clueless on is sufficiently minor that it doesn't really matter and I just apply a suspension of disbelief.

 

One of the most common examples of this is an author who tries to tell a story from the point of view of the popular, starting quarterback jock character. It is almost painful for me to read stories like this where it is so glaringly obvious the author never was one himself and never hung around one a day in his life. You can insert this into any kind of common character you find in gay fiction, not just jocks.

While a reasonable complaint, just a word of warning -- things don't always work the same in all places. Taking a real-world example, I used to do software development. We would talk to a customer about how something would work, and write software to match the work processes for that customer. I don't know how many times we were told 'everyone does it this way', only to find that the second customer didn't, and we would have to change the software accordingly....

 

There are, however, certainly areas where there is a limited number of ways of doing things and it really shows when the author doesn't know that.

 

For me, the most common example of this problem is an author who extrapolates the way things are done in their country to other countries. I notice this especially when a non-Australia author includes Australian characters or try to set part of a story in Australia, because most don't get it right....

 

Seriously, you can write about things you aren't personally familiar with, but at least take the time to do some basic research to make it sound semi-believable to those of us who are familiar with it. I only write what I know about because I want my stuff to sound authentic, and I want the reader to think it mimics what they would see in real life in similar situations. But I really don't think that even with a lot of research an author can pull off an authentic sounding story that revolves around a theme they are not already personally familiar with. Thats just me though.

I agree, but a lot depends on the level of detail being used. For example, I don't play Australian Rules Football, and only have a passing knowledge of the current game. By keeping things in my current story to a moderately high level, I've hopefully given the readers not familiar with the game a feel for what it's like, without alienating the readers who do know the game. I deliberately chose to keep the playing positions down to Forwards, Midfielders and Defenders, rather than going through the full gauntlet of Full Forward, Forward Pocket, Centre Half Forward, Half Forward Flank, Centre, Wing, Full Back, Back Pocket, Centre Half Back, Half Back Flank, and then dealing with the different skills required for each position.... (NB: Yes, I'm leaving out the three follower positions of Ruck, Rover and Ruck Rover -- let's not make this too complicated)

[Cia]

Whoa now, I wrote a gay baseball player... did I screw that up? To be fair, I did play softball and I rode the bus with the baseball players, and I was a bi teen, if a girl. So I'd hope I wouldn't be too far off. I notice medical things quite a bit. I'm sorry, but you're not going to have someone break a bone and be right as rain the next day. Or have a person with a broken nose kissing ANYONE for quite a while. Some might have sex, but they're damn sure gonna hurt afterward, especially for any surgical patients, or people with rib injuries that are affected by breathing or muscle contractions of the abdomen.

[Thorn Wilde]

I guess this all comes down to the 'write what you know' thing, which I seem to remember we've discussed in this forum before, as well. Neil Gaiman once wrote something very clever about writing what you know, but since I appear to bring him up in every other writing discussion on here I'll try to express my point in my own words.

 

Of course you should write what you know. That's why Tolkien wrote about Hobbits, because he knew about them. He was the only person on the planet who did, in fact. It's why Frank Herbert wrote about spice, and the Kwisatz haderach. And it's why countless authors write about school, and work. They know about them. I wouldn't dream of writing about something I know nothing about... But I can learn. 

 

In Nemesis, I had Dave be a football player (soccer, for you who call that other game football ), even though I've never played football. I also had him be popular, even though I've never been especially popular. In Lavender & Gold, Ben is a famous actor, even though all my acting experience comes from a handful of school plays. Marcus is a law student, later a lawyer, Jacob is a journalist and writer, and the main character in Pretty Boys is a sociopath. But how boring would it be if all my characters were speccy, nerdy musicians? I write enough of those as it is. So, now I do know about playing football, being popular, coming out in Hollywood, English law, journalism and crazy people. Some of it comes from research, and some of it comes from the sort of empathy you have to develop if you're going to at all be able to write main characters who aren't exactly like yourself.

 

The next story I'm writing is a detective story. It's a challenge since I 1) don't read a lot of mystery novels, 2) don't work in law enforcement and 3) know very little about criminology. But I'm using what little I do know to research what I don't, and with a little bit of help from people who know more than I do I'm hoping that I'll be able to come out the other end with a story that contains a bare minimum of artistic license and is a fun read for both people who know about these things and those who don't.

 

How many writers on this site have never been in a long term relationship? How many have never come out to anyone? How many are straight women writing about what it's like to be a gay man? If we could only write about things we are intimately familiar with on a personal level, there would be far less diversity of storytelling, and far fewer excellent stories, here on GA.

Edited February 23, 2014 by Thorn Wilde

[Mark Arbour]

 

 

How many writers on this site have never been in a long term relationship? How many have never come out to anyone? How many are straight women writing about what it's like to be a gay man? If we could only write about things we are intimately familiar with on a personal level, there would be far less diversity of storytelling, and far fewer excellent stories, here on GA.

 

I agree with you, but I'm going to go back to Tetrefine's original post on that: 

 

Seriously, you can write about things you aren't personally familiar with, but at least take the time to do some basic research to make it sound semi-believable to those of us who are familiar with it.

 

 

I think that's the key:  research.

[Thorn Wilde]

I agree with you, but I'm going to go back to Tetrefine's original post on that: 

 

 

I think that's the key:  research.

 

He did say that, but he also said:

 

 

 

But I really don't think that even with a lot of research an author can pull off an authentic sounding story that revolves around a theme they are not already personally familiar with.

 

If this were true, most writers would write about people sitting in the dark with computers or typewriters, staring at the wall.

[TetRefine]

You do have a point Thorn. Maybe its just me. Personally, I don't think I could write a believable '40-year old lesbian from rural Alabama' character and have it come off as realistic because I am myself none of those things. Maybe I just draw off personal experiences in writing more so then other people. 

[Mark Arbour]

You do have a point Thorn. Maybe its just me. Personally, I don't think I could write a believable '40-year old lesbian from rural Alabama' character and have it come off as realistic because I am myself none of those things. Maybe I just draw off personal experiences in writing more so then other people. 

 

Yeah, that's what they all say.  The beauty of the internet...you can hide behind the anonymity.  Maybe you really are a 40 year old lesbian from Alabama.    Makes me glad I'm bisexual. 

[TetRefine]

Yeah, that's what they all say.  The beauty of the internet...you can hide behind the anonymity.  Maybe you really are a 40 year old lesbian from Alabama.    Makes me glad I'm bisexual. 

 

This song describes my true personality perfectly.

 

Edited February 24, 2014 by TetRefine

[joann414]

This song describes my true personality perfectly.

 

Where did you find my demo Matt?    "Redneck woman" lol

[Adam Phillips]

A few more thoughts on the topic.

 

1) I'm not against cliches per se, although I found Nick Archer's essay amusing. You've heard literary types say there are only three stories anyway, and while that's not entirely true, it's more true than many writers would like to believe. It's when the cliche seems pointless, when the author doesn't have anything to say that interests me, that his or her cliches start to irritate. When you're in the right author's hands, even when he/she takes you somewhere you've been a thousand times before, the trip is worthwhile. Because he/she will invariably bring something to the trip that will feel fresh and new. Or because he/she finds something worthwhile or emotionally engaging about telling an old, old story.

 

2) I hate technical ineptitude. There are so many ways to be inept. Grammar, syntax, and punctuation matter...but so does the flow of your prose. You can get individual sentences right, one after the other, and still mangle narrative writing. A while back I read a gay-themed novel entitled Ancient Prejudice, Break to New Mutiny (I know, that should have told me all I needed to know). It was a gay-teenager take on Romeo and Juliet. The author was so inept and did so many things wrong it actually offended me. He probably commited every crime on Nick Archer's list, actually. Additionally, his mechancs were so bad it was hard to read. I've never read another thing of his. He's written 3 gazillion books and gets plenty of 5-star reviews at Amazon. Go figure.

 

Another thing: When you use an idiom or a "saying," for God's sake, get it right! I can't tell you how many of those I've seen mangled at GA. Some of them crack me up; others just leave me shaking my head at the author's cluelessness. I saw a funny example of this in a TV commercial a while back. It was for an air freshener or room deodorizer or something. The voiceover said, "Nobody says, 'Wake up and touch...see...taste...the roses'; they say, 'Wake up and smell the roses." Uhh, no. They don't. They say, "STOP and smell the roses." Or they say, "Wake up and smell the coffee." Moron. I notice a few weeks later that the ad was changed. Don't embarrass yourself; get your sayings--and your idioms--correct.

 

Also, don't use a word you only think you know.

 

3) I hate it when writers have an interesting story but their writing is flat. I'm reading a Kindle First novel right now called The Rented Mule. The storyline is reasonably intriguing, but I'm thinking the author's secret identity is Captain Obvious. Find a way to say it that doesn't make the reader go, "Duh." Beyond that, I'm jarred by something in the novel I'd never noticed in third person narration before: In a given scene, sometimes the author will describe the thoughts and motivations of one character, and then switch over to what the other person was thinking. When this began to annoy me, I started thinking, "Why is this bothering me? Isn't getting into the heads of the characters an advantage of third-person narration?" But then I began to realize that I don't know of any other third-person novel that doesn't stay with one person's interior within a given scene. I could be wrong, but for some reason, at least in this novel, it really irritates me, and I'm thinking there's something about it that messes with the focus of the scene.

 

4) Finally, I'm not crazy about "narrative" writing that has no story arc. I'm all for experiments and new approaches...but I'm not crazy about 300 pages that don't move forward in some fashion resembling Freytag's pyramid: Exposition, Conflict, Rising Action, Climax, Falling Action, Denouement. Or something along those lines. A story can't just be a series of "things-happening" that then chops off at the end for reasons that are more about the author's whim than the internal logic of the story. If you don't have a structure like that, then it becomes difficult in a discussion to tell what said story is "about." And if you can't do that, then I'm not altogether sure you have a story. There's something satisfying about a narrative that has a start, a section that rises, a high point, and a descent, all of which have an interrelated internal logic. I'm surprised at the number of authors whose basic approach is: 1. Start with a scene with some drama. 2. Add another scene with the same characters. Add more drama. 3. Add more characters and repeat the first two steps. 4. Keep going. Repeat steps One Through Three.  5. In this way, construct your entire novel as a chronological slice of your characters' lives. 6. Find some place to stop, and then stop.

 

Are you kidding??

 

Okay. That's all I got this time out. 

Edited February 26, 2014 by Adam Phillips

[methodwriter85]

 

I think that's the key:  research.

 

    indeed it is. Mark's recruited people for a variety of research on things he doesn't know. He uses me to get the point-of-view of someone who came of age in the 2000's, because he has characters that are my age. He's gotten someone with a lot of knowledge about figure skating to help him craft a storyline about a character who's becoming an elite figure skating- now THAT has taken a lot of research. And his massive undertaking of a 9.11 story was incredibly well-researched.

 

    Mark's team has tried to help him create a world that feels like the characters are authentic and true to the time period...it's been a blast helping him.

[Adam Phillips]

    indeed it is. Mark's recruited people for a variety of research on things he doesn't know. He uses me to get the point-of-view of someone who came of age in the 2000's, because he has characters that are my age.

 

Who does he consult when he needs to get the point of view of someone normal who came of age in the 2000s?

[methodwriter85]

Who does he consult when he needs to get the point of view of someone normal who came of age in the 2000s?

 

   Blue.

[Graeme]

A few more thoughts on the topic.

 

1) I'm not against cliches per se, although I found Nick Archer's essay amusing. You've heard literary types say there are only three stories anyway, and while that's not entirely true, it's more true than many writers would like to believe. It's when the cliche seems pointless, when the author doesn't have anything to say that interests me, that his or her cliches start to irritate. When you're in the right author's hands, even when he/she takes you somewhere you've been a thousand times before, the trip is worthwhile. Because he/she will invariably bring something to the trip that will feel fresh and new. Or because he/she finds something worthwhile or emotionally engaging about telling an old, old story.

Some clichés exist because they are common in real-life. The danger, to me, is believing that that's all that occurs in real-life. I remember meeting a young, male, blond aussie surfer who really was your clichéd young, male, blond aussie surfer... who also had an extremely strong interest in Salvador Dali art. I remember being told of how, after being drunk for three days straight, he asked the people he was staying with if they'd like to go with him to the local art gallery. He was the cliché...plus more.

3) I hate it when writers have an interesting story but their writing is flat. I'm reading a Kindle First novel right now called The Rented Mule. The storyline is reasonably intriguing, but I'm thinking the author's secret identity is Captain Obvious. Find a way to say it that doesn't make the reader go, "Duh." Beyond that, I'm jarred by something in the novel I'd never noticed in third person narration before: In a given scene, sometimes the author will describe the thoughts and motivations of one character, and then switch over to what the other person was thinking. When this began to annoy me, I started thinking, "Why is this bothering me? Isn't getting into the heads of the characters an advantage of third-person narration?" But then I began to realize that I don't know of any other third-person novel that doesn't stay with one person's interior within a given scene. I could be wrong, but for some reason, at least in this novel, it really irritates me, and I'm thinking there's something about it that messes with the focus of the scene.

I've read a few, only a few, print novels where this is done. Yes, I find it jarring, too, though I can still enjoy the stories. I believe it's okay to transition from one person's thoughts to another during a scene, but doing so only once. I've seen that occur a lot more often. That is, you start in third person from the viewpoint of one character and end the scene with the viewpoint of another. Jumping back and forth, though, can make it hard to read at times.

[methodwriter85]

Who does he consult when he needs to get the point of view of someone normal who came of age in the 2000s?

 

     Oh, and like I said before Adam, don't forget that I know where the bodies are buried. :evil:

[Adam Phillips]

     Oh, and like I said before Adam, don't forget that I know where the bodies are buried. :evil:

 

I'm aware of a very smelly corpse myself, so don't go getting all "threatening" with me.

[methodwriter85]

I'm aware of a very smelly corpse myself, so don't go getting all "threatening" with me.

 

I can go nuclear option, dude.   Good thing we both know we'd never go there.

[LJH]

Folks, please tell me what the word GOT, GOTTEN AND GETTING does? Am I the only one in this whole friggin world who thinks that this word is the king of all mindless verbs? Arise King Got! Why oh why am I like gobsmacked whenever I see it in a story.

 

He got up, and when he got to the door he realized he should get going.

 

He got the dishes washed, then, getting the towels, got the dishes dry.

 

Can someone please tell me how King Got helps in fiction.

 

Such an ugly, useless verb!

[layla]

Because I know I make the "He got up" mistake, is it supposed to be He stood up?

[joann414]

To be honest, it's been years since I was in college or even had to worry about grammar or dialogue.  My works consists of mostly math and simple addresses.

 

Although I wrote a lot when I was younger, I didn't remember a lot of the basics.  Ask Cia, Louis, or Cassie.  They helped me put my mind back into the flow and grammaticism of the story as well as the plot of he story.  I still make many grammatical and dialogue mistakes.  The point I'm getting to is the most helpful thing I've learned is to observe other's work and read and make yourself listen to what reviewers say to a writer.  A lot of reviewers point out basic mistakes to the author.  Why is that so important to me?  These people are only reviewing the story.  Imagine what an editor will find.  That's why to put a good story out there, I know I need an editor.

 

My knowledge of the gay genre is from friends and a lot that I've read on this site...posts as well as stories.  I just try to write my own way.  It's relatively simple and may be boring so some.  When I'm ready to take risks, I'll try to step it up a bit.  Until then, I just want it to be interesting and entertaining without a lot of mistakes to take away from the story.

[LJH]

Because I know I make the "He got up" mistake, is it supposed to be He stood up?

 

Layla -  it's not a mistake at all.  It depends.  Did he climb out of bed? Was he seated? If he got out of bed, got simply says something happened, but not how it happened.  There is no harm in got and gotten and get and getting if it's used sparsely, but when I find it in every paragraph I want to like throw the book against a wall, lol. 

 

 

  The point I'm getting to is the most helpful thing I've learned is to observe other's work and read and make yourself listen to what reviewers say to a writer.  A lot of reviewers point out basic mistakes to the author.  Why is that so important to me?  These people are only reviewing the story.  Imagine what an editor will find.  That's why to put a good story out there, I know I need an editor.

 

 

 

 

I agree  Jo Ann.

 

Read - all kinds of fiction, even poetry and nonfiction.  Note flow and rhythm.  Separate good writing from bad writing.  Make notes on index cards about plot and story construction and character building.  Try to do this with everything you read and soon plot and structure will be burned into your mind.  You can review these index cards at any time when you write. 

Record your observations - When you spot something in a novel that works, get excited.   Jot it down and look at them from time to time. If you ever want to write a novel that readers can't put down,these notes are like gemstones. 

Assimilate - learn the technique that looks promising and practice it.  Write a scene that uses this technique. Out of your head and onto the page. From assimilation to tranformation. Makes you a better writer. 

Continue to learn - Grow, writing is a growth process.  Plan your attack  for strengthening your work. Who are your most unforgettable characters? Read them again. Analyze them. Compare them with your own characters. Now create more characters for your next story. 

 

Four simple tasks, so important in a writer's life. 

Edited March 7, 2014 by LJH

[Cia]

A great way to get away from got up: He rose, He jumped up, He tumbled out of bed, barely making it to his feet. Make it interesting. Do your characters mince, stomp, sashay, stalk, tiptoe to answer the doorbell instead of 'get the door'? Do they grab, swipe, reach, snag, or snatch a cup out of the cupboard instead of get a mug? Do they make a snack, order takeout, slather peanut butter between two slices of bread instead of getting something to eat?

 

There are so, so many ways to write actions. There are endless ways to write... period! And I'll echo Louis with a comment I shared with an author just last week. Go back to a story, or a chapter, you recently enjoyed and read it again. Look beyond the images the story creates in your mind. How does the author mix dialogue and narration? How do they characterize their people? What types of words themselves does the author choose?

 

A lot of times authors tend to write the same style they prefer to read, which means you're learning when you're reading. It's like research. It must be done, right? At least, that's the excuse I use when I get to a great part of a book when the family is bugging me for dinner: "I'm studying, just give me 10 more minutes!". LOL

[layla]

Thanks Cia! i have been trying to expand my descriptions. One thing I've done lately is go back and reread the stories I've completed and taken note of some of the things that were repeated, or fell flat, so i could avoid making the mistakes in the stories i'm currently working on. 

[Cia]

Always be mindful of the image you want to project and the scene when you choose descriptive words though. Shades of meaning matter. I once read an eBook where the female main character strolled over to the dead body of one of her lovers. Oh yeah, you're dead and I'm distraught, let me  my way over to you so I can beat on your still chest and demand to know why you left me. Yeah...