Preferential reading/writing of World-building?

[paranoid marvin]

A reader should be able to read a fictional story - any fictional story - without having to grab a dictionary, appendix or other aditional material to understand what is happening.

Sometimes having additional information available to browse can enhance the experience, but shouldn't be compulsory for basic enjoyment or understanding.

Lord of the Rings is a good example of a novel that doesn't need additional material to understand or enjoy it, but such additional material can enhance the experience.

Which is why (in my opinion) Silmarillion doesn't work as well, because that does require additional reading and/or knowledge to understand and enjoy it.

A one page technical sheet at the front of your book explaining details of vehicles in your story isn't a bad thing, but shiuldn't require your reader to have to keep referring back to it to understand what is going on.

Fantasy novels sometimes have a map as a point of refrrence for the reader. Again, it shouldn't be necessary for the reader to have to keep referring back to it, but can be a nice extra to enhance the experience.

 

[Toby Frost]

World building is an attractive trap for writers.

Very true!

To go back to something @Cthulhu.Science said: a while ago I read a Warhammer 40,000 novel about the crew of a tank. I know from the game that this was a Chimera APC, which is a pretty low-ranking troop carrier. If I cared more, I could probably find out who makes Chimeras, how long they've been doing it, what the famous Chimera-using regiments are etc from another 40k novel or one of the rulebooks. In story terms none of this mattered: it was a space tank that worked a lot like a WW2 tank, and every so often a guy who was basically a space Catholic priest would bless it. That's enough of a "hook" for a reader to need to enjoy the story because the tank crew were entertaining.

I'm reminded of all those military SF novels where Space Soldier Regiment X has enormous amounts of backstory, which was probably fascinating for the author, when really it's just the USMC in space. Even a weird setting like Dune gives you hints as to what the soldiers are like: basically Space Arabs v Space Nazis. Often all the reader needs to be told is "These guys are elite and good, those guys are elite and evil, and the setup is a bit like D-Day" or whatever. It's enough to go on.

Also, a lot can be inferred from context. I don't know what a house in Iain M Banks' Culture novels looks like, but I have a feeling that it is high-tech and clean, because the setting feels advanced and the characters seem to understand the tech they're using. A house in Arakeen, on the other hand, is probably basic and grubby, and whatever technology it has will be for special purposes (keeping water probably) which the occupants may not fully understand.

 

[Misanthrophile]

Very true!

To go back to something @Cthulhu.Science said: a while ago I read a Warhammer 40,000 novel about the crew of a tank. I know from the game that this was a Chimera APC, which is a pretty low-ranking troop carrier. If I cared more, I could probably find out who makes Chimeras, how long they've been doing it, what the famous Chimera-using regiments are etc from another 40k novel or one of the rulebooks. In story terms none of this mattered: it was a space tank that worked a lot like a WW2 tank, and every so often a guy who was basically a space Catholic priest would bless it. That's enough of a "hook" for a reader to need to enjoy the story because the tank crew were entertaining.

I'm reminded of all those military SF novels where Space Soldier Regiment X has enormous amounts of backstory, which was probably fascinating for the author, when really it's just the USMC in space. Even a weird setting like Dune gives you hints as to what the soldiers are like: basically Space Arabs v Space Nazis. Often all the reader needs to be told is "These guys are elite and good, those guys are elite and evil, and the setup is a bit like D-Day" or whatever. It's enough to go on.

Also, a lot can be inferred from context. I don't know what a house in Iain M Banks' Culture novels looks like, but I have a feeling that it is high-tech and clean, because the setting feels advanced and the characters seem to understand the tech they're using. A house in Arakeen, on the other hand, is probably basic and grubby, and whatever technology it has will be for special purposes (keeping water probably) which the occupants may not fully understand.

I'm a Xenos enthusiast in the 40K verse myself.

That said, I too have read an exorbitant amount of lore and exotic stories in the setting also. All the while enamoured with the unremittent volumes and vastnesses of the world because it's richly told throughout the stories.

The Primers in my book never went to lengths to inundate information unnecessary to the plot, they exist purely to describe where and who was responsible for whatever event or object was in question. To myself. The reader is spared this lecture.

Think - (for the aliens in the novel) their Primer is told somewhat - from the perspective of someone with a destroyed/incapacitated sample in front of them on an autopsy table. Arguing with another unseen individual about the theoreticals of the sample's composition and evolution. (They're not characters in the book, it's halfway between an analytical report, and an open discussion.)

I can quite easily write an encounter with an active, and functioning - or dead and incapacitated examples in the story proper. (Both happen - and are given over to character's examinations/experiences with them.)

But because the characters can give only limited descriptive or even allegorical depictions of the alien form, I felt the need to expand their origins and abilities aswell. Something which may take precedence later in the plot.

Now believe me when I say here: It's NOT telling my story... I know... It's supplementary to the plot, connected to the plot, it IS extraneous to the plot...

I knew this when I wrote it all.

It's World-building.

I know it is superior to have your character's stand at a porthole on the ship, watching the exterior pass by until reality is visually distorted to them to imply FTL.

It is far more immersive for the reader; than to have a plotless lecture - explain the intricacies of what enables interstellar travel. I don't need to write the manual on it.

This thread I designed to provoke a thought process about myself breaking the rules, with the intention of receiving confirmation to my hypothesis. Again, which I'm thankful for.

Everyone has kept me honest and from stepping too far into territory that would infringe on the cardinal rules of storytelling.

I do see a mild disconnect for Science Fiction on what are supplementary world-building conventions versus those in the Fantasy genre.

They can draw maps of their landmasses and continents and it not be considered so irreferential to plot.

But I can't deliver hypothetical short term knowledge primers to fulfill naming conventions and scientific concepts that are extraneous to the plot. It makes sense.

The map in a fantasy story isn't a plot device.

The encyclopedia of intelligent alien existence and human development since the discovery - isn't a plot device either.

Write the story. Show the world in prose.

Execute it well and people will read it.

I like to ensure that nothing new or untoward has slipped by me in my short tenure with life and literature...

 

[Misanthrophile]

Some have asked whether the story is in progress - it is.

The world-building elements expounded in the original post are also progressed in parallel with it.

They will be edited and restructured as I get to know the story and universe it inhabits. They will be utilised to compliment each other.

There will be only a story for a potential reader to acknowledge/digest.

And a world full of symantics and diacritics left over for me to subsume into obscurity.

 

[Paul Meccano]

I'm questioning any forum members on their preference for either reading, or writing a comprehensive background to a fictional world in perhaps a certain order.

The content I'm talking about specifically; is the arrangement of concepts that educate or prime the reader of aspects in the world/universe - BEFORE a novel commences. And whether or not this makes for easy or accessible information the author may regard as critical to understanding unique concepts and terminology expressed in the novel later. There are several means I have gone to lengths with - to prime my readers of the world as it exists in my WIP well in advance of the novel's opening chapter.

For example - The below is lifted from the table of contents in my book. The arrangements are supplied with some vagueness in explanation for their content.
(I'm new to the forum and haven't acquired the posted limit yet to ask for critique - so this is a roundabout way of asking for feedback that isn't direct criticism of my work - but perhaps what I'm doing with it in a delivery sense...)

As follows:

<Book title.>
<By me.>

1. Foreword (Almost a blurb, or a basic recounting of the scenarios which occurred up until the (relatively) present tense in the novel.)
2. Primer - 1 - (A scientific analysis of an involved faction important to the story. Detailing what it is, its history, and linking it to the Foreword.)
3. Primer - 2 - (An in depth examination of hypothetical concepts employed by the mentioned faction, again with an analytical tone.)
4. Primer - 3 - (A look at people - what has changed about them, and their world. Specifically what THEY'VE done to affect such change.)
5. Primer - 4 - (An intricate study of why these people have changed or moved so much.)
6. Primer - 5 - (A focus on a sub-faction in this newly altered human world with importance to the later story.)
7. Primer - 6 - (A brief overview of this sub-faction's exclusive concepts and design that relate to the plot with immediacy.)
8. Primer - 7 - (A roll of the characters in the novel proper.)

<Chapter 1 begins here.>

- I ask for some insight, whether my intent to foreshadow and enlighten a reader is maybe detracting from their eventual immersion in the story itself?
The content of the novel lends itself to the information produced in the Primers. Events, terminology, specificity, and world building comprehension - are a unifying repository for the reader.
In Fantasy, the use of topography and maps to build worlds as a reference, is almost replete.
So I wonder if the portent for historiography, analysis, and speculative concepts alongside jargon and named characters in a Science Fiction novel - is somehow misplaced or unwise to engage the audience...

Discuss with me any thoughts you care to make.

My thoughts as follows:

I like the idea because it suits my need to cover all aspects of world building. For that reason I can see myself wanting to do the same.
And, that’s exactly why for me it’s a no.
Preferred route:
Write the book.
Let the reader read it.
Write trilogy and/or prequels plus standalone novels – inc shorts.
Have an author page where fans can discuss.

 

[Fiberglass Cyborg]

I'd prefer the information to be included more organically into the text of the story, piece by piece as required. In SF and fantasy, I feel that the process of discovering the world is a major part of the story. If this needs to be done in scattered "infodump" paragraphs, that is not as big a sin as some self-appointed writing gurus would have you believe. Iain M Banks was an absolute master of this approach - many of his chapters start with a passage describing and explaning some aspect of his fictional world. He makes it interesting.

You can always put a handy reference section as an appendix at the end of the book. Both Brandon Sanderson and NK Jemisin have used this to good effect - Sanderson in particular tends to build elaborate magical systems that the reader might need a refresher on.

 

[Christine Wheelwright]

Two things. Building the world (and developing the characters within it) in duality with the plot is the superior method. I think that's agreed from the various comments above. But secondly, why the obsession with having the reader visualize and understand the 'world' exactly as the author does? Is there not a case for allowing the readers some scope to use their own imaginations, filling in the details of the landscape, buildings and objects? Will the 'world' not be more real to them if allowed some leeway to superimpose their own conceptions?

 

[Swank]

Two things. Building the world (and developing the characters within it) in duality with the plot is the superior method. I think that's agreed from the various comments above. But secondly, why the obsession with having the reader visualize and understand the 'world' exactly as the author does? Is there not a case for allowing the readers some scope to use their own imaginations, filling in the details of the landscape, buildings and objects? Will the 'world' not be more real to them if allowed some leeway to superimpose their own conceptions?

There is a constant struggle to emphasize that novels are not treatments for visual mediums. Some newer writers have the hardest time embracing the fact that this is a non-visual medium and the strength of language is best utilized doing something other than describing how stuff appears or works.

 

[parkydoc]

Show don't tell. Just use the world's jargon and let the reader learn about what they mean over the course of the story, that's actually part of the fun. One of the best examples for me is the film Rounders. The movie unapologetically throws poker jargon left and right but the viewer eventually picks up on the meaning organically and is a big reason it was such a popular movie which really spurred interest in real-life poker.

 

[Swank]

Of note, many published SF writers do no spend an enormous amount of effort building a world. They put details in as necessary, and are just careful to ensure that those details go well together. Which is certainly a mark of talent if the world comes out with great depth, but I'm certain that you could ask many SF authors more about their worlds based on things in the book, and the answer would be "I have no idea about that."

 

[sknox]

>A reader should be able to read a fictional story - any fictional story - without having to grab a dictionary, appendix or other aditional material to understand what is happening.

As a general proposition, I disagree with this strongly. I have clear memories of reading Wells and Verne and Poe at age 14 or so. I did not grab a dictionary, but I sure as heck did not understand all the words I was reading. I specifically remember reading the entirety of The Island of Dr Moreau without once actually knowing what the heck "vivisection" meant. More generally, those authors did much to stretch my vocabulary.

I realize that's not quite what's at issue here, but even so. Different readers have different levels of comprehension and knowledge, and it is a mistaken, I believe, for the author to write to the lowest common denominator.

 

[Swank]

>A reader should be able to read a fictional story - any fictional story - without having to grab a dictionary, appendix or other aditional material to understand what is happening.

As a general proposition, I disagree with this strongly. I have clear memories of reading Wells and Verne and Poe at age 14 or so. I did not grab a dictionary, but I sure as heck did not understand all the words I was reading. I specifically remember reading the entirety of The Island of Dr Moreau without once actually knowing what the heck "vivisection" meant. More generally, those authors did much to stretch my vocabulary.

I realize that's not quite what's at issue here, but even so. Different readers have different levels of comprehension and knowledge, and it is a mistaken, I believe, for the author to write to the lowest common denominator.

That isn't what is being claimed. You can understand a story without understanding every word or every sentence. There will be details that are essentially unimportant to major action, and terms that can be more or less understood in context without giving away their real meaning. Neither of which will prevent the read from following what is happening to the characters.