Is worldbuilding pointless?

[Anthony G Williams]

Maybe the point is that a story written in deathless prose in a highly original world designed down to the smallest detail is still a story written in deathless prose. When the writing gets in the way, it doesn't matter how well you've built your world, or how long you've spent building it. Spending the bulk of your effort on the background is a waste of time.

I agree with that, although with a qualifier on your final point: if you're already a successful author (so you know you can deliver) and you decide to plan a series of novels in some strange universe, then it makes sense to get that universe sorted in some detail, in conjunction with the frameworks for the novels, before you start the first one. Otherwise you might find yourself contradicting in a later novel something which you'd put in an earlier one...

 

[iansales]

Does that really matter? Both John Varley and Alastair Reynolds have taken a flexible approach to their universe-building, and later novels do indeed contradict earlier ones. And not to their detriment.

 

[JDP]

I don't think that world-building can ever be considered pointless; it occurs to some extent in any work of fiction.

Info dumps and asides that have nothing to do with the story/characters (but are used to describe some irrelevant details of the built world) are not problems with world-building but simply bad writing.

For me, it's a consistency of internal logic that makes an enjoyable world in fiction -- however unusual or outlandish it may be, as long as it doesn't contradict itself, I'm happy.

Whoever pointed out earlier that it sounds like he was in a bad mood and having a bit of a grouse has probably hit the nail on the head. I'd actually never heard of Harrison apart from in reference to these anti-world-building comments.

 

[iansales]

Well, Harrison did win the Arthur C Clarke Award this year. His The Centauri Device is in the SF Masterworks series, and an omnibus of his Viriconium novels is in the Fantasy Masterworks series. Both deservedly, I should add. In none of his fiction has Harrison privileged world-building over his writing - if anything, in some of his novels the mutable nature of the world is a feature of the story. If he was "having a bit of a grouse", it's against those who willingly accept bad fiction because they're interested only in immersing themselves in an invented world-- No; correction: not "accept", but actively promote. If that's what they want, who don't they play role-playing games? They can even make up their own stories, if they want...

 

[Marvolo]

I just read the first chapter of Nova Swing on Bantam Dell's site. I don't see how he can honestly say that he didn't world build or isn't world buildings as he is writing. I think he is simply bitter that writers he feel have less talent than him get by with novels he feels aren't as good as his due to detailed worlds.

He's award winning, but until today I've never heard of him. So I think the bitter verdict is the winner.

 

[Anthony G Williams]

Does that really matter? Both John Varley and Alastair Reynolds have taken a flexible approach to their universe-building, and later novels do indeed contradict earlier ones. And not to their detriment.

It would matter to me, but I suppose it's partly a personal thing. When I include actual facts in my books, I go to some lengths to ensure that they are accurate. Similarly, I try hard to ensure that my inventions are both reasonable and internally consistent. I've never thought about writing a long series but, if I did, I would want it to be consistent throughout.

 

[iansales]

Let's see... he wrote a series of novels generally considered to be classics of fantasy, and yet there isn't a single map in any of the books. Nova Swing is set in the city of Saudade, but beyond mention of the Kefahuchi Tract, and scene-setting descriptions of the various locales within Saudade that the characters visit, there's no geogrpahic, geopolitical or historical exposition. And yet Nova Swing is as much about Saudade as it is about the people in the story.


When you privilege world-building over story, then you might as well be writing a supplement for a role-playing game. You're certainly not writing fiction.

 

[Ursa major]

What have maps to do with anything?

I think I was the person who mentioned maps; I said I liked them (whether fictional or otherwise). I don't think they are a precondition of good SFF, and no one has said so in this thread. And no one has said, as far as I've noticed, that we should put world-building above story. What a lot of people have said is that they expect the author to get his world straight in his head so that, as AGS has mentioned, dense elves don't become weightless (and so suggest that the author is even denser than his creations).

What I read fiction for is the story; I expect it to be coherent: the plotlines should make sense; the characters should behave in a way that makes them seem real; the environment should operate so that it has internal consistency. Is this too much to ask? Not in a good book, which should meet all of these criteria. Do I expect tens of thousands of words explaining the tiniest detail of everything I see? No.

For my own part, I have provided maps in my stories (all works in progress); they are there as much to suggest the worlds I've built are more complete than I've had space in the text to describe. I also have diagrams that help me understand where things are and how they might work; I have never thought that these would be, or ought to be, published, any more than an outline, synopsis or treatment would be.

 

[iansales]

I used maps as a visible example of world-building. The point I'm trying to make is that speculating about Harrison's motives when making his comment is of little value when you've neither heard of him, nor read any of his fiction - or even read his blog (which is where the comment originally appeared) ;-)

I'm also pointing out that some authors have been successful without maintaining cast-iron consistency in their fictional universes. John Varley's Steel Beach flatly contradicts some of the background given in The Ophiuchi Hotline. Al Reynolds, in an afterword to his collection Galactic North, explains that sometimes he came up with better ideas than those he'd already used as background, and so refused to let consistency prevent him from using those better ideas.

 

[Ursa major]

You should have said, Ian, that you were talking about successful books (and their authors), rather than good ones. All becomes clear, now.

 

[Giovanna Clairval]

Hi, Nounours.

Sarcasm, sarcasm... the Devil's sword.

Yes, Harrison's sentence must be replaced in the context. That's why I did put a link to his blog.

I'll defend the grumpy old man, again. He is one of the greatest living Anglish writers (didn't say "one of the best novelists").

And he knew he would have us discussing his statement. It is an outrageous statement, yes... (hyperbole... hyperbole, the Polemicist's sword).

 

[iansales]

You should have said, Ian, that you were talking about successful books (and their authors), rather than good ones. All becomes clear, now.

There are no maps or glossaries in any book by Varley or Reynolds. Which I suppose makes them better writers than any number of successful fantasy authors...

 

[magician2magici]

hi all.

i have an important question for me.

assume that i finished building my new world , making the historical background of it , and put the necessary info at background , and i have made such a thing now , what amount of info should the readers get at my story ? i made great effort in it , so should i let all the info into my novel or i must control myself and share readers only the necessary info they need , as if the world doesn't exist ?
i'm really scared from this point , hoping you can guide me through it,,

salam..
el-saher>>

 

[iansales]

marhaba

The easy answer is: you should only put in only as much as you need for your story. Choosing exactly how much that is, however, is difficult.

For example, if your hero has to travel from Big City to Big Port via Small Village, it's only worth mentioning Small Village if something important to the plot happens there. The same is true of other geographical and/or historical information.

 

[magician2magici]

marhaba iansales

so , that means that i may write and prepare things in my world that i can't say in the main story ? difficult for sure..

another question also , inner consistency , is there any rules for it ? or it's just a general feeling from the readers ??

salam..
el-saher>>

 

[iansales]

There's always going to be information you need to know in order to write your story, but the reader doesn't in order to enjoy it. If King Fred is on the throne of Fantasilandia, you might know that his father was called Bert and his grandfather Bob, but the reader might not need to.

Inner consistency... there are no rules, as such. But if a character has blue eyes on one scene, don't describe them as brown in the next. Unless there's a good reason for the change. And if the city of Capitalonia is in the frozen northern wastes, don't have it suffering a sandstorm two chapters later... That's the sort of thing you need to watch for.

 

[Ursa major]

The easy answer is: you should only put in only as much as you need for your story. Choosing exactly how much that is, however, is difficult.

On this at least, I agree with Ian. (For one thing, it seems to make sense outside of a playground.)

And yes, marhaba, you are not obliged to put everything you write in your story. You have three obligations:

1) to put in enough information to allow the reader to understand the situations your characters are facing;

2) to make that information internally consistent;

2) to avoid info-dumps.

And yes, it is difficult keep things to yourself and away from the readers; but they will thank you for it.

 

[iansales]

(For one thing, it seems to make sense outside of a playground.)

Not sure what you mean by that.

On info-dumps... they're pretty much unavoidable in science fiction and high fantasy. The trick is in making them as unobtrusive as possible.

 

[magician2magici]

hello ian..

mmm , that's pretty much difficult , i think experince play major role here , as this is my first time , i hope i can make it good..
i understood your point of inner-consistency , thanks ..


hello esra..

three conditions , good , they make sense to me , but what do you mean by info dump ?
is it info that makes the readers bored ?

thanks all,,

salam..
el-saher>>

 

[iansales]

The dreaded info-dump...

The ship was powered by the latest model of faster-than-light, which bore only a superficial resemblance to the prototype invented in 2167 by Bob Bobson. He had travelled from Earth to Epsilon Eridani in 45 days in his famous ship, FTL Pioneer, a journey that now took a mere 3 days. Bobson's ship had resembled a flattened disc in shape, and was fitted throughout with leather furniture.

... or...

"As you know, Fred," said the captain, "the FTL drive was invented by Bob Bobness in 2167. He took 45 days to travel from Earth to Epsilon Eridani, but we can do the trip now in only 3 days."

Both of the above should definitely be avoided...