What "Writing What You Know" Actually Means: The Fear of Failure and Doubting Oneself.
I felt compelled to write this because I feel that the view on this praxis is slightly warped. Differing approximations include "Writing what you know explains why so much literature is about boring privileged men" and "My life is boring, why would I write about it?" and my personal gripe: "Why would I write about what I know? It's limiting."
It's important to me because said warped view is routed in self-consciousness. Something that I'm a big fan of pushing in writers is alienating the self-doubt in your head. It isn't about creativity or the lack thereof, it's about realizing that you have more ideas than you think.
My Own Case
I know this because I am a victim of it too. I want to be absolutely perfect and non-copying. Nothing I make can be similar to anything ever made previously. Everything has to be new, fresh and original in the truest sense of the world. This has followed me for years because I would come up with something I thought was my own idea but then I would see my idea in another popular piece of media and throw the baby out with the bathwater.
This is, of course, bogus. You can't live your creative life like that. It just isn't feasible. The reality is that I'm self-conscious and paranoid about people saying something like "Well, it's just like X except there is Y and there isn't Z" which is projection. I think that about other things because I have literary brainworms. I am so enraptured by the study of story beats and the composition that it's hard not to view everything so nakedly. It's reductionist.
What Does This Have To Do With Anything?
I am saying, in a roundabout way, that writing about what I know is not good enough. I do not trust or rely on my own ability to turn up with the goods. This is demonstrated by the fact there are nine finished drafts on this account that I will not publish because I don't think that they are good enough. But here's the thing: They might not actually be good enough.
But failure is a part of the process and me, not publishing any of it, is a fear of failure and, therefore, a fear of progression.
TL;DR: I too have notions of self-doubt in my creativity.
I know right? The great thomcantsleep with <100 followers who you have never heard of in your life
Write About What You Know... What Do I Know?
My life experience is this:
I have autism spectrum disorder.
I come from a working class home:- A self-employed father and a mother who always worked in bars or factories.
I'm Scottish but living in England.
I'm bisexual and introverted.
I have wrestled with anxiousness and paranoia.
I have a social trauma due to being raised by the internet.
What the fuck is that? That's nothing. Writing about what you know is bad. That's not that far away from me! I have depression too! Boring!
Here Is Why You're Wrong
Funny thing about inspiration is that it is always there in our brain. We just have to realize that it's there with other stimuli. The paradigm "Write What You Know" isn't inspirational. It's a building block for a world or a character. How would that world react to that character? How would that character react to that world?
Every main character that I've ever written has been autistic, shy and has some kind of social trauma. Limiting? No because the settings have all been vastly different and, as a result, the stories have all been different. This is where the self-anaylsis ends before I enter masturbatory territory.
A Case Study: Khaled Hosseini
It has been zero hours since I mentioned Khaled Hosseini's The Kite Runner.
If you don't know, Khaled Hosseini grew up during a transitional period for Afghanistan so a vast amount of his books surround Afghanistan past, present and future. The Afghan identity is commentated on as a culture in how it interacts particularly with Western culture. He often delves into the many perceptions of the country and how they've changed, weaving in tragedy that is semi-autobiographical. The Kite Runner is a great example of this.
It depicts the rapid decline of Afghanistan due to political intervention from Russia and the United States and analyses the class structure and how that in itself has changed. Hosseini is quoted as feeling "survivor's guilt" as he was able to seek asylum during these interventions.
Now... I am not suggesting you have yourself a tragic upbringing because it will be interesting to write about. I am suggesting that your upbringing is more interesting than you might think and that you are thinking about it too closely. Hosseini didn't publish The Kite Runner until he was 38 years old so it would be safe to say he has seen A LOT of shit before putting his foot on the gas. I am not saying you wait until then to start either.
Start off in a smaller way.
The Root of the Problem...
There are two explanations at play here:
You apply too much weight to the phrase "Write What You Know": It's not meant to be taken as "You should write your own biography about your life down to the last detail" - What if you lead this life except something happened differently? Who would that person be?
We end where we start - self-doubt and a resistance to it. "Limiting" and "Boring" and the first quote I used (which is just plain wrong). The only limiter to your own project as a creative person is yourself. You are beating yourself up in thinking the story you have inside you isn't interesting and not worthy of putting pen to paper.
If you don't end up putting pen to paper, you'll experience the fear of failure that I detailed halfway through the article where I nearly lost you with my rambling.
Addressing Creative Resistance
There is only one way: Write.
The problem with all these cheesy paradigms and soundbites is that they are true. You have to allow yourself to make something. Even if it objectively fucking sucks, YOU HAVE TO DO IT. You can't make something and expect it to be good straight away. WRITE ABOUT WHAT YOU KNOW.
FUCK AROUND AND FIND OUT.
you might learn something :)
