Write House, Wolverhampton –Writing ‘What You Know’ Versus Pushing the Boundaries

In this blog, Write House founder, Daniel Waldron, looks at arguments for sticking to writing ‘what you know’ and broadening the horizons.

Write House founder, Daniel Waldron, comments: “As a copywriter, I come across the phrase ‘write what you know’ on a regular basis. Whilst to some degree it’s a great piece of advice, it also raises the question of whether it limits creative capacity. As a writer, should I be afraid to expand my horizons because I’m not an expert on the subject? I’m not convinced.”

Perhaps the obvious point to raise here is that becoming an expert in a particular topic or topics means that a writer would have had to push boundaries in order to achieve expert knowledge in that particular subject. Therefore, it makes sense then that a writer should not be afraid to keep on expanding their knowledge across a diverse range of subjects, doesn't it?

Well, according to some experts, no. Psychology experts argue that certain people simply have a natural affinity with certain subjects and tests show that this is true of writers. With this evidence in mind, many copywriters are of the belief that writing about what you know is the best route to writing success.

There is an argument for this belief, after all, some of the best articles ever written are produced by writers writing about subjects that they are passionate about, have an in-depth knowledge of and are ready and willing to carry out extensive research in order to do their specialist topic justice.

However, sceptics of this way of writing argue that it restricts creativity and limits the scope of what many writers can write about. The obvious question is, how will a writer know what they are good at writing about unless they push the boundaries of their writing capabilities?

Daniel Waldron states: “Yes I do have certain specialisms in terms of writing capabilities; however, I would never have discovered them unless I stepped outside my comfort zone. I’m not sure about natural affinity as I am a strong advocate of ‘if you apply yourself to something there’s no limit to what you can achieve’.”

In some respects, whilst a writer, who has a vast knowledge of a particular subject, has an ‘advantage’ over a writer who doesn't there’s no reason why the ‘less knowledgeable’ writer cannot become a specialist in a particular subject.

However, critics here would argue that the acquisition of knowledge is not the issue, the issue is passion. Is the writer stirred by the subject? Does it interest them? Does it provoke a reaction to dig deeper?

Even if it does, the argument then comes down to this – does it matter? After all, a writer should be writing for the audience not personal preference. But, this in itself is also a stumbling block, as writers need to develop the skill of removing themselves from the article on a personal level as the written word often conveys what’s on the heart. Unfortunately, many writers have suffered as they’ve been unable to remove themselves from an article on a personal level, leading to an unwanted backlash from audiences.

Write House states: “Any piece of written work is always subjective, it’s open to interpretation and will be viewed from many different perspectives. Copywriting in itself is an art and the best advice for copywriters is to do what feels comfortable. If you’re seeing results from sticking to a particular subject continue to write in that manner. If you’re a writer who likes a challenge, expand your horizons.”

Founded in 2009, Write House emerged with assistance from the Princes' Trust. Business owner, Daniel Waldron, established the company with the vision of putting the 'personal service' back into the media industry.