There is always one.....

Hi all :)

Well, the book talk went well, in the sense that I didn't trip over my own shoes or stumble my words, and and even my APPALLING Scottish accent didn't draw any laughs! However, there were a few, shall we say, random questions asked. For example;

"Does your blog have any readers, or is it just you talking to yourself?" (??????)

"Did you get any complaints about the swearing in your book? Couldn't you replace it with something else?" (I then started to defend the ONE use of a swear word as being integral to the plot, and the questioner then completely changed tack: "If there was no swearing in young adult novels, there would be no grit!" (So why ask?!)

"Did none of the agents you approached ever question you writing a book set in a place you had never been to?" (A derisive look followed.) "I think you need to go there."

All the above. among other such questions, were asked by the same individual. Their crossed arms and staring fixedly at the floor throughout the talk made it very clear they didn't want to be there, and they seemed to have it in for me at question time, despite not even having read the book! It begs the question, why come at all? But there's none so queer as folk, I suppose....

Anyhow, the last question in particular has raised a debate in my mind. Plenty of writers set books in places they have heavily researched, but not been to; I know for a fact I'm not the only one. So is it an appropriate thing to do? 

In my opinion it depends on the circumstances of the book; whether you are writing about an urban or rural landscape, whether the book is rooted in a particular town that really exists, or a fictional town within a general region. I think that, in the latter two examples, you can get away with it, but I'd be interested to hear other's takes on this. 

Please do comment on this post with any ideas/opinions etc, or jot something on Facebook.

Ta :)