If you're going to spend two or three years immersed in a subject, you better be deeply interested in it, or it won't be interesting to the reader.
Sentiment: NEGATIVE
When you spend a year or two researching a subject, and you're still fascinated by it, that's a good indicator that what you're doing will appeal to others, as well.
I have a long-term interest in the humanities.
I just follow the subjects I'm interested in.
Unless I'm really uneasy with what I'm writing, I lose interest very quickly.
I try to find a subject that is interesting to me and to the viewer both. If I can't, then I stop right there.
There is a plethora of topics to explore. I sometimes think I may never live long enough to explore all of the unique story lines I have either in my head or waiting in my computer file.
Any time you can take a book a little beyond the realm of pure entertainment, I think it's a good thing. But I don't really have it on my to-do list when I write a book. It just evolves naturally during the process of immersing yourself in a subject.
A life spent largely among books, and in the exercise of a literary profession, has very obvious drawbacks, as a subject-matter, when one comes to write about it.
I work on one book at a time. And yes, I am immersed. Six days a week for four to six hours a day. In between books, I stop writing for as much as two to three months, but during that time, I do research and think, plot and plan the book.
It's not necessary to have read everything about a particular subject in order to get interested in it. The main thing is to sort out what's important and what is peripheral in order to be able to dive in.