I'm up for just about any challenge with writing. I've written a few novels, some short stories, a couple flash pieces, even tried my hand at structural poetry like an English sonnet and a villanelle. But there are some things I'm pretty sure I can't do.
I can't see myself writing historical fiction. You really have to have a passion for this kind of thing, and I don't really. I'm not opposed to the genre. Some extra special historicals have really resonated with me actually, like the Mark of the Lion Series by Francine Rivers. I believe those three books are the best novels I've ever read because they introduced me to well-rounded characters, put me right into Roman times, made me cry, challenged me spiritually and entirely gripped me.
That's some amazing writing if a book, a series of books really, can do all that.
But as much as I loved those books, the amount of research you'd have to do just seems so daunting to me, in just making sure every single prop is correct. I'd be so afraid of ruining credibility with some stupid bumble, it would kill my drive.
Although, now that I've said that, I'll probably get an idea for a book and I'll have to scratch my 'can't', to 'well, maybe', then, 'okay, yes I can'.
I also could not write a First person novel with a narrator who is not the protagonist. All but four of the Sherlock Holmes books are this way, with Watson as the narrator. He is the every man, sidekicking Sherlock around, providing some distance from the brilliant, analytical mind of the hero as he solves the crimes.
But for me, part of the fun of writing First Person is discovering voice and revealing character. It is almost too difficult for me to wrap my mind around this concept. I think my narrator would soon outshine the protag. I don't know.
What are some things you're pretty sure you can't do with your writing?
~ Signing off and sending out cyber hugs.