Modern Good Reads discussion

I love writing, and reading, sci-fi for all sorts of reasons but the one that gives me the most pleasure is world building.

For me, world building includes everything from maps of the geography to the animals in the food chain. On a less physical level I also spend far too much time on history, culture, language, writing and anything else that takes my fancy.

Beyond the simple pleasure of creating my own world however, I find that playing 'god' like this has the added benefit of making the fantastical feel real.

Anyone else out there think world building is fun, and important?

The first time I read David Edding's Belgaraid series, I was captivated by the maps. Opening the books and seeing how the lands are placed, and recognizing the depth and time that was put into creating this alternate world added to the experience.

I find the maps also give a layout that then does not need to be over described in text... some world building can get very heavy and dull... so striking that balance is very important.

Kirstin wrote: "the depth and time that was put into creating this alternate world added to the experience."

I feel the same way about maps. They are, or can be, quite beautiful, and make the world feel more real. As a writer though, I could not live without maps. I simply don't have the mental capacity to keep everything in my head. Or perhaps I need some kind of visual representation in order to trigger my imagination.

For me, working out the topography, and creating the maps is essential. Maybe not quite as essential as the biology or culture but close, very close.

A.C. wrote: "Kirstin wrote: "the depth and time that was put into creating this alternate world added to the experience."

I feel the same way about maps. They are, or can be, quite beautiful, and make the worl..."

I sympathize here. I wrote my first two books with only a conceptual map in my head. It was difficult at times. A few weeks back, I got my illustrator to put a map of the world together. I can't describe the joy I felt when I first saw the world actually depicted.

World building was a rewarding experience. It's amazing how much you have to learn about our own world before you can start assembling one of your own. And then once the world is built, you get to populate it with characters of your own making. For me personally, that's where the real fun begins.

T.K. wrote: "I can't describe the joy I felt when I first saw the world actually depicted."

I can so relate to that. I felt the same way when my cover designer came up with an image for my book. It's a picture he took here in Australia and then photoshopped. The planet I created is harsh, not unlike huge swathes of Australia, and the modified image captured the feel of the planet to perfection.

I knew all about the planet, but seeing it... that was incredible.

I actually started with the characters, who are quite alien, and then found myself wondering what kind of a world would create such strange beings. I honestly don't know which part I enjoyed the most.

World building is fine, but don't sacrifice a good story for the sake of telling people the GDP of your world!

R.M.F wrote: "World building is fine, but don't sacrifice a good story for the sake of telling people the GDP of your world!"

You're right RMF, the story always has to come first, but as writers, I believe /we/ need to know far more about the worlds we create than the readers will ever see. And we have to infuse the story with that background information as subtly as possible.

In stories set in the modern, human world, there is so much we can take for granted, but in sci-fi and fantasy everything is new, and therefore the cultural expectations of our characters can be quite different.

In Shades of Milk and Honey, Mary Robinette Kowal introduces us to a world in which glamour [of the magical kind] is a part of every day life. That glamour also changes the Austenesque society in many subtle ways.

Finding the balance between the expected and the unexpected is always hard, but so satisfying when it works.

A.C. wrote: "R.M.F wrote: "World building is fine, but don't sacrifice a good story for the sake of telling people the GDP of your world!"

You're right RMF, the story always has to come first, but as writers, ..."

Good points. When background and world building are done well, you never notice it, but when it's done bad, it's clunky. I don't mind background knowledge about a person or where they're from, but you don't need a history lesson as well. Some books are guilty of this.

I love word building, and it is one of the key reasons I read the scifi genre.

For me, world building is about supporting a cast of believable characters and a compelling story by giving them a backdrop. The worldbuildig should be seemless, and I prefer world building that is done through dialogue and action and reaction as apposed to just reading a wall of text where the author is telling me about the world.

Someone asked me what I consider when I world build, and this was my answer:

It's important that the reader feel comfortably introduced into your world/universe. I recommend having some features of familiarity combined with unique elements to make the world your own. Be sure to avoid info-dumps (long paragraphs that basically dump info about your world on the reader); Introduce separate elements of your world as your write your story, through action, dialogue and description. Let your characters help to build your world in the mind of the reader.

You should also remember that your universe is not stagnant, meaning it has a history and a future. There is always movement, and previous events that may influence what is happening now and what will happen in the future.

Depending on how in depth your world/universe needs to be, you may consider creating a reference sheet, timeline, and other materials for yourself. I know it has been a huge help with my series to have a timeline and references that I can always use to refresh my memory with.

R.M.F wrote: "A.C. wrote: "R.M.F wrote: "World building is fine, but don't sacrifice a good story for the sake of telling people the GDP of your world!"

You're right RMF, the story always has to come first, but..."

lol - I've read lots of book like that, in all sorts of genres. I guess, like most readers, I skip those bits. But I've also read some fantastic books where the world building is so tightly woven into the story that every word counts - not just as information or background, but as part of the plot, or character arc or whatever.

That's the kind of world building I try to do once I'm actually writing. Doesn't always work but it's all a learning curve. :)

C.E. wrote: "I prefer world building that is done through dialogue and action and reaction as apposed to just reading a wall of text where the author is telling me about the world."

Yes! To me, the world building is the framework on which the story is built. It also provides the constraints that move the story along. If we pay attention to those constraints the plot will almost take care of itself. And in presenting the plot we are also presenting the world. They go hand in hand.

I'm a pantster rather than a plotter but I have gigs of notes, world facts, maps, history etc so I rarely have to struggle with the plot. And when I do, it's usually because I have missed, or ignored something in the world building.

A.C. wrote: "R.M.F wrote: "A.C. wrote: "R.M.F wrote: "World building is fine, but don't sacrifice a good story for the sake of telling people the GDP of your world!"

You're right RMF, the story always has to c..."

Slightly off-topic, but in fantasy books, you get people turning up and telling the life story of King X who married Queen Y, who was killed by killer bees, but their son married a mermaid etc etc

and this sort of thing adds nothing to the story but padding. It happens sometimes in sci-fi.

lol - I work on the basis that ancient history has to have some direct, if subtle, relevance to the story or the character. If it doesn't it's out. I do understand the temptation to put it in though. But as Stephen King said - kill your darlings. That advice applies to background as well as prose. :)

A.C. wrote: "lol - I work on the basis that ancient history has to have some direct, if subtle, relevance to the story or the character. If it doesn't it's out. I do understand the temptation to put it in thoug..."

Sometimes you get the impression that some writers are getting paid by the word! As much as I like Stephen King, he is guilty of this sometimes.

Kirstin wrote: "The first time I read David Edding's Belgaraid series, I was captivated by the maps. Opening the books and seeing how the lands are placed, and recognizing the depth and time that was put into cre..."

I couldn't agree with you more. There is a fine line between overwhelming a reader with too much world building detail, and leaving the reader guessing from lack of information.

I too am a HUGE fan of Edding's Belgaraid series, he really did a wonderful job of engaging the reader in the world and providing history and culture complexity to his series :-)

R.M.F wrote: "A.C. wrote: "lol - I work on the basis that ancient history has to have some direct, if subtle, relevance to the story or the character. If it doesn't it's out. I do understand the temptation to pu..."

And George R.R.Martin! I love his work but the paragraphs of descriptions about what people are wearing? Or eating? A bit too much methinks. :)

A.C. wrote: "R.M.F wrote: "A.C. wrote: "lol - I work on the basis that ancient history has to have some direct, if subtle, relevance to the story or the character. If it doesn't it's out. I do understand the te..."

I call it the Orson Welles effect! Authors become so successful, that editors are reluctant to edit!

Brooke wrote: "Kirstin wrote: "The first time I read David Edding's Belgaraid series, I was captivated by the maps. Opening the books and seeing how the lands are placed, and recognizing the depth and time that ..."

Yeah. If I read about Cersei wearing a jewelstone the "size of a pigeon egg" one more time, I'm throwing the book at the wall.

R.M.F wrote: "A.C. wrote: "R.M.F wrote: "I call it the Orson Welles effect! Authors become so successful, that editors are reluctant to edit!"

Ah yes. I haven't read Stephen King's latest books but I've read some criticisms that it's too self-indulgent and could have used a 'good edit'. lol

T.K. wrote: "Brooke wrote: "Kirstin wrote: "The first time I read David Edding's Belgaraid series, I was captivated by the maps. Opening the books and seeing how the lands are placed, and recognizing the depth..."

Do you think he really is getting paid by the word? ;)

A.C. wrote: "R.M.F wrote: "A.C. wrote: "R.M.F wrote: "I call it the Orson Welles effect! Authors become so successful, that editors are reluctant to edit!"

Ah yes. I haven't read Stephen King's latest books bu..."

Good edit? His recent books have needed a chainsaw! That's how bloated they've become.

@ R.M.F "Good edit? His recent books have needed a chainsaw! That's how bloated they've become."

The only two books of his I've read are Dolores Claiburn [sp?], and of course, On Writing, but after that comment I don't feel bad about it at all!

Absolutely! My favorite series were always those that had richly built, detailed worlds. Middle-Earth, the Dune universe, and the world of A Song of Ice and Fire. In each case, I got wrapped up in them and couldn't get enough, even if it meant the authors went into deep, long-winded detail and fleshed things out into extra books.

It's something I've always tried to do, but lord knows its hard! It's like creating likeable characters, it's entirely organic and unexpected. You don't turn them out like some kind of finished product. No, they show up of their own accord, looking for a meal and a bath and a place to call home. By the time they've integrated themselves, you realize you got a keeper on your hands. Weird analogy, but I think it works ;)

Have you read Stephen King's About Writing. I love The Belgariad as well.

George wrote: "Have you read Stephen King's About Writing. I love The Belgariad as well."

On writing is a great book.

Matthew wrote: "By the time they've integrated themselves, you realize you got a keeper on your hands. Weird analogy, but I think it works ;)"

Not weird at all Matthew! I know exactly what you mean. I'm 80% pantster yet I'm still amazed at how persistent, and pushy some characters can be! And yet when I stop grumbling at the upheaval they cause to my plots, their inclusion always makes the story stronger.

George wrote: "Have you read Stephen King's About Writing. I love The Belgariad as well."

Yes, a couple of times. :) I think in 100 years time On Writing may be the one book of his that people still talk about.

World building is perhaps my favorite thing to do my writing. But, I don't do much as far as physical parts of the world. I dive more into the technology/history/culture/character aspect of it. For every story I write there is probably 6 to 8 characters I won't use but affected the narrative in some way. The amount of saved character files is kind of weird even to me.

But, I agree the setting should never shove the story out of the way. Just has it works in the real world it should be always around, but never in forefront.

Fatma wrote: "World building is perhaps my favorite thing to do my writing. But, I don't do much as far as physical parts of the world. I dive more into the technology/history/culture/character aspect of it. Fo..."

I tend to start with the characters, their psychology, culture and biology. Then I work on history and physical background - i.e. city or country. And finally I add layers of little things - like what they eat or drink.

And I know what you mean about saved character files!

World building is just the greatest fun. I love characters wandering in and out of the story, and I tend to use them to build my world up.

I'm not into describing the world in too much detail, prefering the old throw in description or a character's use of that world to build the setting up in the reader's imagination. The reader will imagine the world they want to, I feed the reader enough information to allow the story to work inside it. Keeping it consistent is the most difficult. I'm not into lots of notes, preferring to check back to what I wrote, in order to keep things together.

I tend to do a lot of research for the science, and then set the science of my world up the way I need it so my character's ability to e.g. use energy and cross the universe, is established upfront.

I also love borrowing from Earth history, legends and myths to give my world some authenticity and also a creepy connection to the real world, something I want the reader to gather as they get deeper into the story.

Great topic!

@ Ceri. I come from a technical writing background, so I found descriptive writing the hardest to master. Like you my descriptions of the world are always part of some other action or event, and build slowly to a big picture of the world. But I do admit to having far too many notes for my own reference. One day I may publish them as 'The Wiki of Vokhtah'. ;)

I prefer a fast and loose style myself. A good story should be the number one priority. I'm sure I've said that on this thread, already! :)

World building is an exciting and challenging task for a number of reasons:

1. You get to play the creator-in-chief
2. You get to let your imagination fly and go beyond anything and everything that has been done before or, perhaps, give everything an unexpected twist
3. You get to live inside the world that you build and the situations you depict are all the more poignant should you have a well realized background to set them against.

The challenges of world building are (in my opinion):

1. The world building should not become an info dump and has the danger of becoming one if the world building is done explicitly
2. The world building should not break the narrative flow of the story but should instead assist it and help set up the better conflict (is there such thing as a better conflict?)
3. The world building should not opt for originality for the originality's sake. You should think about what makes sense for your story, for your characters and for your situation and keeping some DNA connections with the real world can make the story more easy to relate to than a story about a race of mute aliens living on an orange planet and fighting for their share of gloompf (the gem of the local cuisine)

Vardan wrote: "You should think about what makes sense for your story, for your characters and for your situation and keeping some DNA connections with the real world can make the story more easy to relate to..."

Yes, yes, yes! I particularly like that phrase 'DNA connections'. Although I write about an alien race, planet and society, many of the small details come straight from our world, the real world. They provide some of the more subtle links to things that 'we' understand.

World building was what originally drew me to fantasy writing in the first place. Like everyone else here, I enjoy playing god with my creations, deciding how magic works, where places are, what races live where, who's at war with who and etc. And most important, the why's of all of it.

Maps are great to, and it's on my to do list. I mean to add a few maps to my website.

anyone out there playing with Campaigne Cartographor for map making? I've used it for years. Great program! Designed for RPG paper gamers.

M.L. wrote: "anyone out there playing with Campaigne Cartographor for map making? "

Yes! Well, sort of. I bought the latest version, 3? and I have played with it a little, but so far I've found it rather hard to work with. I know I should look up some good tutorials but I'm nearing the end of my WIP and I don't want to distract myself. My old maps are all done in Corel Draw.

I've never been happy with the idea that fantasy and/or sci-fi = world building. It does the genre a great disservice.

A.C. wrote: "M.L. wrote: " I know I should look up some good tutorials but I'm nearing the end of my WIP and I don't want to distract myself. My old maps are all done in Corel Draw."

It's a great program. Essentially it is autocad (works great for me since I have an engineering background) I've used Corel Draw also though--Another great program.

Anyway, I'm in the same boat. Too many projects to spend time working on maps. Thought I might come back to it this coming winter.

I think that maps are a great addition to the fantasy world but by no means a necessary one. Just as illustrations, they can serve the limited purpose of helping the readers better understand the world you are presenting them with. My problem with most of the maps I see in fantasy novels is that they seem to be taken straight from the Middle Earth with only certain name alterations - the good guys in the west, the bad guys in the east, the neutral guys in the north and the dragons in the south :)

Vardan wrote: "I think that maps are a great addition to the fantasy world but by no means a necessary one. Just as illustrations, they can serve the limited purpose of helping the readers better understand the w..."

Yes, and its very reflective of Western history and our enduring perception of the world, isn't it? The south is a place of mystery and ancient, alien culture in this context, reflecting the European preoccupation with the Near East and Asia. And of course the dragons are there since in this world, people have no direct contact and fill in the blanks with imaginary creatures. "Here be dragons" and so forth...

The east is where the barbarian hordes keep invading from, be they Huns, Goths, Mongols, or Turks, so naturally these are seen as evil or dangerous. But the north, I'd say that's not neutral territory nearly as much as the home of the hardened warrior folk that are reminiscent of the Picts, Celts, Norsemen. Usually they are portrayed as the free folk, or at least freer and more "natural" than those to the south, who look down their nose as these "semi-barbarian" folk.

Matthew wrote: "Vardan wrote: "I think that maps are a great addition to the fantasy world but by no means a necessary one. Just as illustrations, they can serve the limited purpose of helping the readers better u..."

Yeah, exactly. Except the truth is that this is a much more layered world than presented in the original Tolkienian template. He had a right to do that as he was pretty much talking about the second world war where the battle lines were drawn and the arch nemesis was there to confront and destroy. I think that the modern fantasy should be more representative of today's blurred perceptions of good and evil where evil is not a geographic location but a trait of character.

R.M.F wrote: "I've never been happy with the idea that fantasy and/or sci-fi = world building. It does the genre a great disservice."

For me, /every/ story has to begin and end with the characters. But in sci-fi/fantasy those characters have to be doing something, preferably something interesting. That is where the world building comes in. The constraints of that world give the characters their context, their reason for being in a way.

Of course when I say world building I'm talking about the whole package - geography, economics, politics, history, culture. These provide the 'nurture' elements. Biology [for my world] provides the 'nature'.

Put both those elements together and you have a world in which the characters can evolve, and feel real.

My plots emerge from the world rather than being imposed on top of it. Whether I get the balance right though is another question.

Like you I've read far too many sci-fi novels that were all about the tech, and the characters were just tacked on, almost as an after-thought. No matter how interesting the tech may be, I rarely finish those novels. :(

Vardan wrote: "I think that the modern fantasy should be more representative of today's blurred perceptions of good and evil where evil is not a geographic location but a trait of character"

@ Matthew and Vardan. I'm from the southern hemisphere so without even knowing it, my geography is skewed towards what I know.

Re good and evil in fantasy, why does there /have/ to be good and evil at all? I understand Tolkien's motivation, and I know he was the father of fantasy, but even in the Lord of the Rings, the core of the story was not about good and evil, it was about the human ability to overcome evil - i.e. Frodo and Sam.

Yet so much modern fantasy seems to leave the human element out. The final denouement is between /forces/ of good and evil, battling it out with the characters triumphing thanks to some 'power' they have.

-shrug- I'd rather read about characters triumphing because they found some quality within themselves.

It's somewhat similar in those Chinese fantasy novels I read in high school, where all the invaders are from the north & northwest, and magical creatures tend to live either in the mountains of the west or the oceans in the east. I think when writing high fantasy many writers try to build their world based on what they think to be their culture's perception of the world in ancient times, possibly because the genre of fantasy has its root in folklores & mythology.

R.M.F wrote: "I've never been happy with the idea that fantasy and/or sci-fi = world building. It does the genre a great disservice."

As a reader, I want to know what is going on around the character that made that character into who she/he is. For example, Kate Daniels wouldn't be running around chopping the heads off of things if her world hadn't developed the way it did. I want to know what caused that, what the landscape is like, who are the power players, etc. To me, that is world building and I wouldn't read a book that didn't include all that.

I also love books that include a lot of science, pseudo or otherwise, and want that to feel real and be a part of the storyline. In Monster by Peter Cawdron, leaving out the world building would make the whole book unreadable. Of course, you may disagree, but I read a LOT of Urban Fantasy, and without knowing the world of the character, I wouldn't be able to become part of the book. I want to immerse myself in my, and their, experiences.

Leiah wrote: "R.M.F wrote: "I've never been happy with the idea that fantasy and/or sci-fi = world building. It does the genre a great disservice."

As a reader, I want to know what is going on around the charac..."

Sometimes the mystery is what makes the story great. In my view, you don't need to know every nut and bolt of a character's world.

I don't need every nut and bolt, R.M.F., but I absolutely want to know why things are happening the way they are. To do that, I love having a great background to lay the characters against. I am not saying that we should know every little nut and bolt, but but I want the background. To me, it is sort of like a study I did in art school. We painted intricate portraits, but then left the background totally blank. It was jarring and uncomfortable to look at the outcomes.

I do want a background, but I don't want it all at once in my face. I want it to be gradually revealed to me throughout the story by character action, dialogue, thought etc. I loath books that start out with a set-up chapter that is nothing but history/setting/info dumping. Build it into your story. Make it part of your story.

The team of Ilona Andrews does this very well, especially in the Kate Daniels Series. As does Patricia Briggs in her Mercy Thompson series. They both grow their series slowly, and it pays off. I am drawn in and become a part of the book. I want to be there, to interact with these people. I can forget everything around me and simply live in their worlds. It draws me back to them again and again.

Leiah wrote: "We painted intricate portraits, but then left the background totally blank. It was jarring and uncomfortable to look at the outcomes"

I really like this analogy, and I think it's particularly relevant to sci-fi/fantasy where the reader doesn't automatically know the context in which the story/action takes place.

Books set in the real world have a wealth of detail inherent in their telling. The author doesn't have to explain a light bulb or a car or the subway. These are all things we, the readers, are already familiar with. But if a sci-fi author started writing about characters in a setting without gravity, where that lack of gravity was an important part of how the characters lived, the reader would need to know 'how it happened'in order to suspend disbelief.

Plus some of us are just nerdy that way. We like knowing the background. :)