Comments on: MIND MELD: Lessons Learned From Master World-Builders

By: honey

honey — Thu, 05 May 2011 00:46:43 +0000

with sadness.(which got cut off).

By: honey

honey — Thu, 05 May 2011 00:44:43 +0000

I departed the worlds of Sector General by James White and Neverness by David Zindall

By: Jeff VanderMeer

Jeff VanderMeer — Thu, 05 May 2011 00:26:47 +0000

I think it's true that one thing about certain types of fantasy is there *is* that sense of grandeur or wonder or horror that's hardwired into scenes that are sudden "reveals" of parts of a fantasy setting.

JeffV

By: Bob Norwicke

Bob Norwicke — Wed, 04 May 2011 23:47:08 +0000

I whole-heartedly agree that character and story are what attract me to a book and hold me to the end. But I also have to disagree with those who dismiss world building as nerdy self-indulgence. Unless your characters never leave a confined area (it happens), they need to move around in physical space. Adding flora, fuana, weather, geography, customs and language lends richness to the story whether that setting is a reflection of character's psyche or an intricately constructed ecosystem. Personally, I find creating that setting to be very rewarding. Writing is difficult work. If there were no personal rewards (a.k.a. fun), why should I write?

By: J Sherer

J Sherer — Wed, 04 May 2011 18:56:26 +0000

I think there’s a fascinating juxtaposition, even tension, between building a new world while simultaneously managing a reader’s suspension of disbelief. I’m wondering how the writers mentioned here manage that tension. What rules do you utilize when you analyze how much to explain/describe vs. letting readers fill in the blanks?

The worlds I’ve created are usually so closely related to our world (or at least familiar to the reader) that I don’t personally have to deal with this tension as much, but it has to be there. I’d love to hear from the more experienced world builders as to how this is dealt with.

By: Paul (@princejvstin)

Paul (@princejvstin) — Wed, 04 May 2011 18:37:51 +0000

Master World Builders.

The master World builders, in my opinion are those writers that, in the phrasing of Larry Niven, provide a Playground of the Imagination.

I don't think there is any one way to get there--you can do the Hal Clement route and build the planet, or the Murasaki route, and develop a whole solar system, or use footnotes like Vance.

In any event, I want a world that plausibly, in my mind, extends beyond the boundaries of the page. A world that I can imagine other stories taking place in. Give me an ending to this story, but leave the playground detailed enough that I can imagine more, if I want.

By: Dave Thompson

Dave Thompson — Wed, 04 May 2011 16:57:53 +0000

@sensawunda: And Alastair Reynolds mentions Urth

Funny reading Alastair Reynolds name and thinking, “God, Chasm City’s world buidling was sooooooo kick-ass” and then reading his post. D’oh!

By: Jeff VanderMeer

Jeff VanderMeer — Wed, 04 May 2011 16:53:42 +0000

The Picard--I think your response is perhaps at cross-purposes to the point. Whenever you pick out one element of Story, it's going to look that way. Blown out of proportion. In a sense, none of it makes any sense without being in collusion with every other element, which of course happens in an organic and holistic way when a writer is writing. World-building is indeed setting, as Paolo points out with his example. And how you layer and texture a setting, how it reflects character POV...all of these things are important. ...And of course we always pull elements of story out when we want to talk about teaching writing, or learning to write fiction. And of course we also always do so in a semi-artificial way, because whatever way we talk about it, it won't match the actual experience of how we write something. The point is to prime the conscious mind with different approaches.

The way we use "world-building" at Shared Worlds--which is not a way I'd suggest for a workshop for adult writers--is they get into groups and they build a world for a week. Then they each individually write a story in their shared world the second week. The world-building is just an entry point to give them a space to experiment and share their writing, with something that is personal but also not personal. They get to see the vastly different approaches of their fellow writers to the same basic material. They get to see just how unique their own writing is. It's immensely helpful.

Again, my own approach to world-building is most closely aligned to Moorcock's and Harrison, and much of what Paolo is saying--which is about how you layer and present information--but everything said in this MindMeld resonates in some way, and you can see how individual writers pick bits out of other writers' work as instructional.

JeffV

By: The Picard

The Picard — Wed, 04 May 2011 16:29:21 +0000

Granted this post is regarding a writing camp for teens but overall this whole "world building" thing has been wildly blown out of proportion. I'm not a writer but when I was in English Lit class this was referred to as "setting". It's very important to storytelling but no one ever read a particular author because of how great their "setting" skills were. I'm sorry but all this "world building" talk is run away nerdiness and a lame reason in itself to read a book.

By: Nev Park

Nev Park — Wed, 04 May 2011 15:55:58 +0000

@Sensawunda: Hey, Ekaterina Sedia mentions Bas-Lag!

By: Sensawunda

Sensawunda — Wed, 04 May 2011 15:26:18 +0000

Not a single Bas-Lag or Urth supporter. Shame!

By: Jeff VanderMeer

Jeff VanderMeer — Wed, 04 May 2011 15:25:36 +0000

Yes, well, like all absolutes that too is wrong. The fundamentalism of "this is correct" never works when it comes to writing. Which is to say I agree with them...*and* I agree with the others. It's very useful to beginning writers to see all of the various constructs writers create or don't create to get to where they want to go. They'll inherently be contradictory, but in the case of process, that's just fine. It just matters what's on the page. jv

By: Damien G. Walter

Damien G. Walter — Wed, 04 May 2011 15:16:24 +0000

I'm with Moorcock. And Harrison, in his Clomping Foot of Nerdism essay. There is no such thing as world-building.

By: Paul NYC

Paul NYC — Wed, 04 May 2011 14:21:32 +0000

For me the best world building is one where we follow the action but know that there is a whole world "out there" even if we don't see it. Tolkien did this extremely well as did Frank Herbert. We didn't need to be told everything or have every little aspect explained.

I just finished reading The Star Kings by Edmund Hamilton -- a nice bit of space opera. One of the things that struck me as annoying was Hamilton's asides to explain things like the star drive or some weapon or political system. I didn't need those to enjoy the story and much prefered to figure things out for myself.