What is harder: Writing fiction or writing non-fiction?

Personally, I find writing fiction to be incredibly hard.

It's one thing to describe things that happened. That just requires immense research.

It's another thing to completely create a series of events, make sure all the facts jive, and then describe it as if you've really seen it happen. No one can help you or give you details or second hand accounts in fiction.

I have found I can do personal essay pretty well, though.

Look at Phil Dick. Doesn't seem like writing fiction was particularly easy one him.

With fiction you have more free license to go anywhere you want. With non-fiction you must stay the straight and narrow or lose the whole story and perhaps your audience as well.

left or right brain ?

They employ two entirely different faculties (imagination versus intellect). IMHO

There's lots of overlap, at least for me. Non-fiction takes plenty of imagination, fiction a healthy dose of intellect.

I've written and published both, and I find non-fiction much more difficult. It's hard to get the tone right, hard to keep it interesting, hard to make sure the argument and logic are developed in an intelligent way.

I guess fiction is just my thang. I always feel like an imposter doing non-fiction. I'm perfectly adequate at it, but it's like wearing business clothes instead of my favorite dress.

It's way easier to PUBLISH non-fiction though. Standards are lower. ;-)

even made a living at it for a while....

Couldn't get and still can't get my hands around fiction. I have great stories but I have to be in the right mind to just go for it, I guess....

Apologies if you've been over this before.

but that is all I have ever written. I have done primary research and written papers for school, which is time consuming but not really difficult. It is difficult to manage the research process, but the writing is easy.

Writing a friction novel seems like it would be hard given the birthing process is involved in the mix. I have the utmost respect and admiration for artists who create a story capable of leaving lasting impressions on readers.

I prefer non-fiction, the truth is more unreal than art, in many cases.

what sort of dialogue might take place between characters ... the fiction is easy .... if for some reason... dialogue between characters does not come as easy ... then writing fiction has got to be the more difficult of the two forms.

then fiction becomes easier. If you can invent good stories and characters, but can't get them talking to each other believably, fiction is hard. It helps to be a talker yourself if your goal is effective dialogue. There are examples of novels that are mostly narrative, where the dialogue is sparse. They have more of a detached tone. Fiction that comes directly from real experiences is a good place to start, esp if your mind doesn't reel off into fantasyland very easily, eg I could not begin to write sci-fi or romance novels, but I can take off on a germ of something that has actually happened to me, and then go into the imaginary realm. Like going into another realm where "making it up" is OK.

Tip--I don't like to write non-fiction and fiction in the same week, preferably month. Set aside a period for only fiction. It's a different head and the switching system has to have time to readjust.

I don't tend to talk much at parties, given the choice. (Small parties that isn't an option, but at large ones I'm practically invisible.)

However, I think, during those times, I really get a chance to LISTEN to people. I hear how disjointed conversations often are, how they hop from subject matter to subject matter. I think if you are busy talking you don't have a chance to listen to how a conversation really flows.

And I've been told that I can write really convincing dialogue. And I do find writing fiction to be FAR easier.

Having written and been published in both areas, I'd say nonfiction took a lot more work. You do some research as you need it in fiction, but it's mostly writing about what you know and making stuff up in your head. No problem.

But nonfiction requires going out and doing exhaustive research and reporting, if you're tlaking journalistic nonfiction. These extra steps mean a lot more work, which means nonfiction is tougher by definition.

Heck, I can wake up, scratch my butt, have a cup of coffee and bang out five 5,000-word short stories just sitting in front of the computer all day. I certainly couldn't write five 5,000-word feature articles in the same amount of time.

Non-fiction takes research. I live in a fantasy world so fiction comes naturally.

With the caveat that my non-fiction is all school related, non-fiction has always seemed easier. In part,I think, becasue the langauge is a bt more restricted.

I've done both extensively. Some non-fiction projects like writing telecom courseware about ISDN or Frame Relay were really easy, others like writing courseware about 802.16 WIMAX was really hard (in fact I am STILL not done with the 802.16 course and it's been six weeks). Meanwhile Tears of Amaterasu, my historical fiction, has come with relative ease, as did Union Dues, and all of my short stories, except one or two.

Is it understanding the precise technicalities of the subject that is hard, in that regard?

Fiction writing is easily considered art by its obvious wrangling with the creative process, but, can non-fiction be also considered 'art'?

However, there are some standardized approaches that take away some of the fluidity of the writing process. This helps keep non-fiction on track while these same approaches applied to fiction make the story flat and predictable (which is what you want for non fiction but not fiction... I hope that makes sense).

Non-fiction's art, at least in my experience, is accessiblity. If you can make a topic like ATM and Frame Relay, or Code Division Multiple Access Techniques and Wireless Data readable by the everyday average schmoe, AND, perhaps more importantly, get your information across in a way that doesn't make the reader want to commit suicide before they learn anything, then it's art. There are plenty of fiction tools that work just fine in non-fiction, analogy, satire, humor, even dialogue (when necessary) can help turn incredibly boring and disinteresting material into fun-to-read and easy-to-learn from material.

The research for non-fiction is hard at first because generally there is a vast amount of information about a whatever topic you about which you choose to write. Whittling down from everything you have to just what you need is probably the hardest part. For example, the 802.16 course I am writing offers me two full length two-day lectures by two different instructors, three additional transcripts of pieces and parts about this technology from other courses, about 200 PowerPoint slides, three teaching outlines, a tape full of student questions and instructor answers, and access to a live Subject Matter Expert when I need it.

Finding out what I need and sifting through what I have requires a few steps before writing anything. I need to establish learning objectives, outline what I am going to write by unit and lesson heading (or in the case of traditional non-telecom non-fiction, chapters/topics) then read and digest everything I have on hand. To do this I gloss books and transcripts, transcribe notes from tapes, and scripple furiously in my project notebook as I work. All of this helps me get a handle on the scope of the material. From there I cull out duplicate information (of which there is always an abundance), unrelated information, personal anecdotes that can't be rewritten and used, and anything else I don't need. Then I modify my outline with little tidbits of information. When I am happy with the content outline I've already learned the material enough to develop clear learning objectives for each unit and lesson.

Now I have learned the material enough to write about it in moderate detail, so I start writing, unit by unit, lesson by lesson, using the various objectives as my "street signs" to get me through the course.

Once that's done I make a second pass through and add any information that may have slipped through the cracks (I do this by comparing the manuscript to my notes). When I am comfortable with the content depth and flow I send it off for SME review.

When writing fiction, depending on the genre, there isn't the same need to use a rigid process. I researched Tears of Amaterasu for two years before I wrote a single word. The nice thing was I didn't really know I was researching for a book until I realized I had to explore The Rape of Nanking in fiction. I had to understand the characters, but they are primary to the story. I needed to know what, for example, Japanese army training was like, what the weather was in China at the time, what the city looked like, a few good maps of the area from that time period, how many soldiers were there, what the hierarchy of the IJA was and how my characters would fit into it. I also needed a timeline of events that I wanted to put my characters in, almost all of them were historically documented in one way or another, so I had to make sure I was accurate with the descriptions. I also needed background information on Japanese culture and religion, politics and history. Luckily most of this came while I was just reading ABOUT the Rape of Nanking. It was only when I decided to write this book did I scribbled down what I new and what I thought I needed to know (that I already didn't). Research also came in other forms, I watched countless war documentaries, shows like "Tales of the Gun" which detailed all of the weapons used by the IJA during the Sino-Japanese War, movies like The Longest Day, To end All Wars, Merry Christmas Mr. Lawrence, Men Behind the Sun, All Quiet on the Western Front, etc... I read outside the Chinese/Japanese experience about, for example, the SS in Poland and Czechoslovakia, about the Australians at Gallipoli. I looked at art by Otto Dix and read poetry by Wilfred Owen and Sigfried Sassoon to explore how war affected young men. I studied the Bushido code and the Hakagiri. I looked up pictures from the Rape of Nanking, and accounts of it, online. I made contact with Rape of Nanking deniers (yes, they exist) and peppered them with questions about how they assumed it was all fabricated. I made contact with the director T.F. Mou who made a film about the rape. I wrote the DVD Extras for his film (available at all major outlets) Black Sun: The Nanking Massacre.

But I worked from no outline, no hard notes, a few glosses in a few books, and a timeline I'd created on the back of a manuscript for an ATM course (LOL... recycling!). Again though, the research was mostly passive. I had an interest in the subject long before I wanted to write about it, and I am blessed with an very good memory for detail, so I remembered just about everything I saw or read in that two years.

Hope this helps and answers some of your questions. I hope I didn't run off at the mouth too much... :)

Now, to finish my book!

What a response! Thanks.

I'm always fascinated by the creative process, and writing is such a unique form of it. It occurred to me that non-fiction could be considered art, but the reasons for it that you cited are more craft than art oriented. That's probably nitpicking, to some degree; yet it still seems like an important, if subtle, distinction.

Your method of operation is fascinating: what mental compartmentalizational talents you must have! I get overwhelmed by anything more complicated than zen koans. I would need a Jubal Harshaw army of assistants to write the historically based work you tackle. Now that is art - the process, alone!

I noticed your use of the word 'scripple'. Is that proprietary? May I use it?

I saw it, but I sort of liked the ring it had so I didn't edit it. Please employ it at your convenience.

Thanks for the compliment to my compartmentalization :)

Glad I could shed some light on the process for you. Please feel free to ask any other writing related questions. I am always happy to answer.

I've been wanting to ask you how it's coming along. I can't wait to pick it up in the store!

I was all into my girlie writing for awhile, but as I've delved back into my genealogy, I've become much more interested in melding fiction and historical fact together.

Eventually I want to write my family history. But I still have a lot more research to tie up. Once I've done that I think historical fiction will be the next logical jump.

I'm fascinated by Paris in the 20s. I'm thinking that will be my first project post family stuff.

I've been writing non-fiction for 20 years, I guess. I moved to essays about 10 years ago, because I was in a situation where research was incredibly difficult to do (before computers were common place) - very rural, with two little kids.

But a couple years ago, I took an online fiction writing class. I figured, why not give it a try? It was great! It was hard, but wonderful. I still suck at fiction, but it expanded my vision. I don't read much fiction, so I don't write it well.

That class is at www.wvu.org. It is free and runs for six weeks. If you subscribe to their newsletter, they'll send you an announcement of the next one. It was so worth it for me, butI still think fiction is harder to write.

Thanks

It's all work, but fiction is rarely done well.

I say that as a reader, not a writer.

...you're usually starting with a totally blank piece of paper in front of you--you have more to go with when beginning non-fiction--and the point of your work is already pretty much set in concrete. You don't really know what your fiction is about until you begin writing--you may THINK you know, but that often changes.

As soon as I'm handed a deadline for a nonfiction project my ODD kicks in...and I will grab ANY excuse not to write, even if it's a project I'm in love with. I'm doing it right now.

On the other hand, I'm not answerable to anyone for my fiction...and I will grab ANY excuse to dawdle, or download music, or surf DU, because I'm not under a deadline. Go figure.

But when you get in The Zone...then it's like you're not even present. You're just the conduit for the words to flow through. I have to work through the initial resistance to get there and that's a herculean effort with just about any kind of writing. Maybe fiction is easier because one doesn't have to stick to facts, or engage in to-and-fro with source material. But if you're familiar enough with the material, that's not really a handicap.

The only exception is poetry. If I'm gifted with a poem, then I drop what I'm doing (I've been known to pull off to the side of the road) to jot it down. Then the difficulty comes in the editing. To quote Verlaine, "A poem is never finished; merely abandoned."

I'll bet your fiction's pretty good, despite your difficulty with it. You're a good writer. It might get easier if you practiced or did some kick-start exercises (if you were really interested in writing fiction, which you probably aren't). I'll show you mine if you show me yours.

edited for spelling

I think non-fiction is harder because you're limited by the facts.
In fiction, you're only limited by your imagination.

It's just easier when you can make shit up. Writing nonfiction involves, you know, trying to be accurate, and looking stuff up, and trying to make your argument throrough and consistent, which slows you down.

C ya,

The Plaid Adder

I spend so much time worrying about the grammar/punctuation aspect of it that it's not fun.
It can take me two hours to write a non-fiction paragraph, and fifteen minutes to write two pages for my screenplay.

I'm surprised to see you think that. I've read your stuff and it's really good. You seem like a natural with the non-fiction.

I have a vivid, instant-on imagination. And I've spent years being the game master for role rlaying games like Dungeons and Dragons. You can never exactly predict what the players will choose to do, so you have to think on your feet and create the world ahead of them, often as the dice are rolling.

So I am good at creating complete new, functional worlds based on just a few facts and a general idea of where I want it to go. (At least I think I am?)

For non-fiction, on the other hand, I've got to do external research. Hit the libraries. Interview people, which means dealing with their schedules. What a pain.

Your results may vary.

You need to research, and plot it out a lot more(at least I do). I like fantasy, and it's easy for me to just jump into some other world and let the story flow. But everyone is different. :)