World creation vs. the actual story

[The Pelagic Argosy]

For those of you who create worlds from scratch for your stories, I was wondering...how do you balance the amount of time and energy you spend creating your world(s) vs. the amount of time and energy you spend writing the actual story?

For example, I'm working on creating a world for a novel-length story. (Maybe even a series, but I'm getting ahead of myself.) I'm reading up on climatology, because weather will play a major role in my story. I'm also planning to have active volcanoes on my world, and a large moon that will have a major impact on tides. The logistics of all of that is a little overwhelming. Do I read a few books on each subject and call it good? Or do I need a master's degree in meterology/geology/cosmology to pull it off convincingly?

And that doesn't even touch on my society, history, plans for cities, architecture, clothing styles, etc.

How do you know when you've gathered enough material about your world to begin writing?

Don't get me wrong: I'm not looking for an excuse to shirk the research phase. It's the opposite. I'm afraid I'll get bogged down in all the little details and get burned out before I start the actual book.

It would be just like me to spend two months perfecting the floor plan for a palace that the protagonist will only glimpse from afar in the actual story.

How do the rest of you balance these two phases of writing?

 

[The-Stranger]

Its your world it can be as complex or as simple as you want it. it can rain insects if you want it to. I would make the basic world, and then start the first chapter synopsis, and then if need be more world as and when i needed it, and both would come to life as i wrote...

 

[jenna]

I think just research it until you understand it yourself, that way you can write about it believably. Maybe you could get it to a stage where you can explain it to someone else and have them understand it too, that will show you have a good grasp on it. Then move onto the next thing. And don't forget, it is fantasy, you are allowed to take some artistic license!

 

[Paradox 99]

For me, the nature of the world I create has to be an aid to characterisation and plot. Often, I'll start out with a these factors and then work backwards to see what kind of environment would create these kinds of characters and drive the story. Anything else is unnecessary.

But...

Personally (and many may disagree), so long as you have the time, the more detail you have about the world your novel takes place in the better. Take The Lord of the Rings as an obvious example. He went to great lengths to create an elaborate world and mythology. Not all of it was necessary for the story, but it really does add that extra bit of magic to it all... gives a sense of reality to something that isn't real.

 

[flynx]

Personally, I think I would get hacked off with the story before I started even writing if I thought I needed every detail about a character or a world, but I can see the benefits of knowing all that's required before starting.

I usually take the 'as it comes' route. If the situation requires use of an 'inertia gun' to scoot about from ship to station, that's the point at which I google the required gas mix, aperture size and thrust needed to propel a 90 kilo mass over a 1000 metres in less than a minute (enormous at a guess) when all that is to hand is your dead shipmates air tank.

So my reply would be approximately 100/1 in favour of story first.

Having said that, my magnum opus is the culmination of about 6 or 7 years of vague interest about a crucial topic which just happens to fit a completely different story which started with two characters arising from my keyboard.

 

[jackokent]

There are some writers who spend so long storey building they can't resist boring you with it afterwards. I can't actually think of any now but I know I've read some. I don't think there are any hard and fast rules, but I do think that whilst knowing your envirement is generally a good thing you can go to far. On the other hand there are books that feel thin because the writer hasn't bothered thinking about the environment. It needs to be logical and complete enough for the storey to move through it and if necessary, be move on by it.

 

[chrispenycate]

Then you get the really pedantic readers (yes, you've guessed) who get upset by any inconsistancy in the environment, and take plesure in pointing these things out (more in SF than fantasy, I suspect, but I manage in both)
Don't write in detail anything you can't back up; it's very difficult to contradict fuzzy logic.

 

[The Pelagic Argosy]

Then you get the really pedantic readers (yes, you've guessed) who get upset by any inconsistancy in the environment, and take plesure in pointing these things out (more in SF than fantasy, I suspect, but I manage in both)
Don't write in detail anything you can't back up; it's very difficult to contradict fuzzy logic.

Yes. I think my concern ultimately stems from a fear of this kind of reader.

"Good story. Except the alignment of your world to your moon would have caused them both to go careening into the sun millions of years before the story began. But otherwise..." etc...

 

[Robert M. Blevins]

Don't dump a bunch of new terms on readers in the first few pages without some good background or explanation...a classic amateur error in sci-fi.

Give readers credit for intelligence, but don't assume they are mind-readers.

One of the best examples of someone creating a world and not losing the reader right away is Frank Herbert's 'Dune.'

 

[chrispenycate]

Good starting point. If you analyse Arakis from a meterological point of view (the dew traps; from where do you get enough evaporation to get dew? And so on, dozens of points) with no oceans or surface water, despite whatever native life (apart from sandworms, which, it transpires {exactly what sandworms don't do}, are responsible for that lack of surface water) has survived) terrestrial life would be impossible. (Wouldn't I critique somene else for producing a sentence likethat?) He worked by analogy to an earthly desert; but, on Earth, deserts are only a part of the total system, and would be completely different without the rest. Still, when you read the books, this doesn't impinge on your enjoyment, largely because he uses small detail to convince you, without explaining the reasons the situation might have evolved. (and he was very good at it)
This is not in any way to suggest he scrimped on his research, or lacked ecological knowledge; the books still issuing from his notes would give the lie to the first, while certain of his other novels indicate a considerable interest in ecological matters, but that he needed an environment like that, for the story (the original story; I personally think he suffered from serious sequelitis later on) and persuaded us that we shouldn't think too deeply about the physics or biochemistry of it.
Even in fantasy, convincing the audience that the situation is self-consistent is important. All right, there will always be a few like me, pointing out inconsistancies, like kids on the "why" phase, but we're a tiny minority (and enjoy catching authors in ill considered positions) but making the story flow, avoiding the cavary riding in to the rescue, not having anyone act totally out of character, is far more important than missing the rainshadow of a mountain range, or some difference your conditions for one region would imply for another.
Building planetary systems, populating them and adapting their organisms to the prevailing conditions is a great hobby, and can fill lots of notebooks, but it doesn't get the story told, nor interest more than a tiny fraction of potential readers.

 

[Black Razor]

Yes, I Too Suffer

*Sigh*

Yes, I too suffer from this problem. My personal advice to you is this. Tell your story YOUR WAY. Your not supposed to go from idea to final draft the first time anyhow. Your likely going to go through several drafts before you ever get published, and thats ok as long as you dont feel like your compromising the story you want to tell. So. I would just create to your hearts content the first time through and just dump detail after detail into your draft. Then go back later and remove the unneccessary details.

The ideal solution, that is if your not under time constraints from a publisher, is to simply follow your heart and explore the world your creating to its full extent. I wouldn't go as far as to say create an entire floor plan for a building the character is going to only see from distance. However, I would go to that trouble if the character was going to have to sneak into the building, past teh guards, kill the guardian beast, and save the princess....if you get what I mean.

Don't deny yourself the joy of creating a new world, just make sure it actually relates to the story advancement.

Also, send me an email and I will send you a copy of my World Building Questions booklet. It's 30 pages of the kind of things you should be asking yourself. I also have one I am creating for Character Profiling & Background that I will post later.

But as was said before, Tolkien went to great lengths to create a vivid world and it made a big difference. I trust you'll follow your own heart in this matter.

 

[The Pelagic Argosy]

Re: Yes, I Too Suffer

Also, send me an email and I will send you a copy of my World Building Questions booklet. It's 30 pages of the kind of things you should be asking yourself. I also have one I am creating for Character Profiling & Background that I will post later.

Thirty pages you say? I think I already have that, or something just like it. Thanks anyway.