Release of worldbuilding information

Discord said:

The reader has to know where they are and what the rules of this world are in order to know what the heck is going on.

Click to expand...

The bolded above is often the bane of SF/Fantasy writers. What the reader "has to know" is that there's a story. Few readers want to read an encyclopedia of world-building.

Narrate "what the heck is going on" and in doing so, provide whatever detail needs to be provided at the time it needs to be provided.

caw

I've never liked the whole notion of world building, unless you're building a really unusual world for hard SF.

Readers care about character and story, and the world is just setting. Setting is important, and should be detailed, but I've never seen the need to spend time building an entire world for a story that will, if done right, only use a small part of the world you build.

Just tell the story. and concentrate of making the characters people that readers want to spend time with. Readers don't need a tour of your world, they need whatever small part of it is involved with the conflict of the moment.

Have you read Hunger Games? That's how you do it. You put the detail in only when it's needed for story and character. They're what matters, not the world you built. The world just gives them a place to do whatever it is they do.

Jamesaritchie said:

Have you read Hunger Games? That's how you do it. You put the detail in only when it's needed for story and character. They're what matters, not the world you built. The world just gives them a place to do whatever it is they do.

Click to expand...

Funny you should use that particular example, because I read the books very recently -- within the last couple of weeks -- and have been ranting at friends about how much the shoddy worldbuilding annoyed me. I enjoyed the books quite a lot on a character level, but the worldbuilding is sloppy and poor, and I know a couple of people who didn't read past the first book because they couldn't get past that.

... which just goes to show that every reader is different. I love detailed and complex worldbuilding; it's one of the big reasons why I enjoy SFF as a genre. I'm the sort of person who reads all the appendixes and wants to have a glossary and a map.

In spite of that, though, I agree 100% that the book shouldn't bog down in unnecessary detail. I think sparser is usually better, and readers are frequently better at figuring things out that authors give them credit for. Actually, figuring things out is half the fun for me! If you feel like the story is bogging down in exposition, then it's probably going to be even worse for a reader -- so cut it. You can always put it back in if your readers are terribly confused.

The nice thing about knowing all of the details beforehand is that what you reveal in the book will be consistent and plausible (which is what Hunger Games did not manage to achieve, for me at least). But that doesn't mean all of that needs to go in the book. What is shown in the book should just be the tip of a much bigger iceberg. You can always save the rest for "bonus" material to put on the website.

Adding another comment because I was thinking that it's useful to look at how Tolkien did it. Love him or hate him, the man is a master worldbuilder, and -- based on the popularity of his books -- a master at introducing that material into the story in a way that isn't too offputting to the majority of readers. (I suppose this could be argued, since some people definitely find the books too dense to get through, but given their popularity, he's clearly doing SOMETHING right.)

Tolkien did a phenomenal amount of worldbuilding. He created entire languages and a history for his world spanning thousands of years. However, in both The Hobbit and the main Lord of the Rings trilogy, he doesn't plunge you into the world and all its history at once. He starts out very small, in a tiny corner of the world, and introduces you to the protagonists first. Then, as the characters start to travel, the world begins to expand beyond that tiny little slice of it, and you are introduced to it piece by piece, with the help of some "narrator" characters who explain things for the benefit of the protagonist(s).

All of this probably sounds a) obvious, and b) cliche, but LOADS of SFF writers do it this way, because it works: start small, work outward from there, and use a point-of-view character who doesn't know very much and thus needs to have things explained. Obviously you aren't limited to this; people have written this sort of thing in every conceivable way and made it work. There is no rule saying you can't plunge the readers into the deep end, explain nothing, and/or use a narrator who is already familiar with the world so the reader will need to get expository information some other way. (As an example of the other kind, Seanan McGuire's October Daye books have a narrator who grew up in the magic world we're learning about, so it's all everyday stuff to her. The advantage is that she knows the ins and outs of magical society, so the reader can see all of that stuff from an insider point of view. The disadvantage is that it's less natural for her to be explaining things, so it has to be worked in more carefully than if she's learning about the world along with the reader.)

A narrator who is already an insider but has amnesia is a clever twist: Roger Zelazny does this in the early Amber books, and that's the entire plot of The Rook by Daniel O'Malley. The narrator must figure out everything from scratch, so the reader gets to learn about it too, as the main character explores and examines his/her environment.

What blacbird is saying. Worldbuilding is there for the writer mostly, so the writer can create an internally consistent place for the story to happen. By and large, the reader doesn't care.

For another example, think of A Game Of Thrones. It's obvious that GRRM really understands this world; he has thought through geography, politics, history, religion, food, clothing... but what is left in the actual story is very little "telling" and a lot of "feeling". You can feel that the knowledge is there. Only tiny bits are actually revealed.

Also, in my grumpy pre-caffeinated opinion, LOTR is an epically boring book(s) that spends too much time revealing a tiny slice of the worldbuilding Tolkein did for it.

I believe you that you've crafted a kick-ass world. But do you have a character, and is your story built around that character. If your story reads like a newspaper from your world, then yeah you'll need to know the whole history / geography / politics of your world before you understand events. If your story is about a character, then many of the character's day-to-day experiences may be familiar to readers, and when an experience unique to your world occurs, you can explain (subtly) that aspect of your world.

Wrap the characters and their journey around the world. Then, wrap the world around the characters and their journey.

This way, when the important bits of your story should come out, they will because they have to--otherwise you wouldn't be able to tell the character's story. Understand? From there, you step or "tour" the reader through the unfamiliar parts of the world while the story rolls on. For example, could you give your characters a skill or job that helps show a certain aspect--or many--of your world? Could you have them run into something that'll directly interfere with their goals, but show a certain part of your world through conflict.

Think about the "Story" as three parts: Character, plot (the character's actions), and setting. Each should interact and change another, so changing one should directly change the other two.

Part of the reason the farm boy / mentor trope is so popular is because it allows you to explain thing to the reader under the guise of teaching a student who also has no idea how things works. It doesn't have to be overt, you can allow the story to form a lesson and have the mentor draw a quick parallel in order to explain a concept, and then build on that as the story progresses.

This is something that every speculative fiction writer has to deal with--the middle ground. Establishing setting without bludgeoning your reader with it. Once, it was fairly common to use a style of narration that stepped outside the story and lectured the reader about the history of such and such an empire, or the rules of succession, or the mating habits of seals that just happen to be on the beach where are heroes are hanging out, even though said seals mate at a different time of year and hundreds of miles away (I think MrFlibbles mentioned that one in another thread).

But nowadays, it's fairly common to just let your reader discover the world as the story unfolds. A few key things early on to let the reader know, "Hey, this isn't 21st century Earth, or if it is, there are magical creatures or whatever in it," but let the story unfold.

The things your pov character thinks about (and doesn't really think about at all) will go a long way in establishing normality.

Something like showing a person walking down the street with a strange (to us) pet at the end of a lead, but having your protag do a double take versus only noticing it in passing will tell the reader whether such creatures are common in your world.

Discord said:

Thanks for your thoughts, everyone! It seems like the common theme is to prioritize story over worldbuilding, and I totally agree. Since my story is a kind of international espionage fantasy, I guess I'm just having trouble because the internal politics of the world are necessary for the story, and politics like that are pretty complicated, so I don't know how to tell the reader about tensions between this or that nation or a history of racial politics without a great big block of explanation. It may be, as someone pointed out, a matter of trusting the reader more to fill in the blanks.

Although, I do agree with what Layla said about great worldbuilding being a big part of the fun of a fantasy story. If you're not into discovering a new, fascinating world, why not read a piece of historical fiction? That being said, an encyclopedia article on your world is not the way to go. Story must be central.

It might just be something that needs to be gradually buffed out in drafts. Thanks again for your thoughts, I'll mull them over.

Click to expand...

The best way to handle that is not to tell it but show it. Show two nations butting heads over racial politics as part of the story. Perhaps have your MC on one side and the antagonist on the other of the conflict.

Setting is not something that needs to be shoveled out in blocks of exposition. It's something always there with the action, dialog, etc. There's no reason to stop the story and take pretty pictures of the scenery, or write a history book about local politics. The scenery and politics follows the characters where ever they go.

Take a look at some of your favorite SFF novels and see how those authors do it. You'll probably see lots of different ways they handle setting. Pick a way that fits your story.

World-Building

I think there are a lot of ways to add world-building and other information without seeming Info-Dumpy. Here are a few examples I have seen or thought of:

1. The character takes a tour near the location and the tour guide gives a lot of information. Be careful with this one or it will seem artificial.

2. The character responds as he first sees things, realistically, people's clothing, as he gets off the train, as he is flying to the location looking out the window, surprised that someone is different than he remembers.

3. DO NOT have the character walk past a mirror and describe themselves!

4. DO NOT have the character say, "I love my blonde hair and blue eyes, just like my father's"!

5. Various small clues can be scattered throughout, such as "the sign said GEORGIA 5 MILES" or "Hollywood and Vine" or some major landmark that would identify the location.

6. For imaginary and created locations, this all becomes more difficult because the Reader has no point of reference.

Just some opinions ...

Discord said:

I don't know how to tell the reader about tensions between this or that nation or a history of racial politics without a great big block of explanation.

Click to expand...

The fact that they are conducting espionage will make it obvious that there are tensions. The fact that the stakes are high, which your MC will be acutely aware of, makes it clear that tensions are high. If he is captured, it will not be a simple prisoner exchange and he goes home; being tortured for information is likely.

The reasons for those tensions will not come out so simply, but they don't have to be known from the start for the reader to follow. Trickle them out gradually.

Discord, I really like your question and I have recently wrestled with the same thing in two different novels. In one of them, like you, I created a world from scratch. Starting with.... the world. Its map. Its climate and geography. Language tendencies. Places. Social constructs.

At first, over the course of, say, ten years, this was all in my head. I thought about it, teased at it. I knew what I wanted my main story themes to be, which tropes I wanted to suggest and then upset.

Now to make the world real. What I did was to create a visitor's guide to Æronthrall broken down by continent. I wrote 1-2 paragraph guidebook blurbs to each major city, lake, river, mountain chain, and desert.

That went hand in hand with drawing the map, which I did at the same time. Sometimes, the guidebook descriptions influenced the map, and vice versa. But most often, what altered the map was thinking about the story as it built. I began to see how the characters were going to navigate this world. Where the dead areas were and the populated ones. An entire city was moved from one continent to another because of plot. A river shifted north of a town instead of south.

Then I wrote a 3 page creation myth for this world.

Finally, I mocked up 3-4 video game maps in Tiled based on locations, just to get a sense for how people would actually move around.

Then I wrote the book. In that book, and the other, I have brief sections where a tutor is explaining world details to a main character. In both cases, I have thrown the reader a wink and a nod, as if to say "yeah, what else am I gonna do?" For example:

Discord - one way to give information is to invent a scene that shows the information without info dumping.

Apols for those who have heard me give this example before...

Take any great book or movie. You will see that the writer gives essential scenes which move the plot on. But he/she will also give you little vignettes to fill out character.

Remember this scene: Obiwan waves his fingers and says "These aren't the droids you're looking for." The stormtrooper lets him pass. Move along now.

Why?

It's not to get Luke, Obiwan and the two droids into Mos Eisley. Lucas could just have easily zipped straight to the cantina scene. That little scene is there to give a bit of backstory to the Jedi. Showing us his powers. And it is exactly the same with every major character. Vader chokes a rebel, Han shoots first, Luke stares moodily at the two suns, Leia doesn't wear a bra...

If you want to show tensions between two nations, have two characters from those nations fight each other. Or have an argument. Or anything.

A character is walking down a street to meet his girlfriend. In plot terms, that may be all we need to move the story along. But if we are character or world-building (and we should be), we can do other things with that character and that walk down a street.

He might buy a newspaper.

He might give money to a beggar. Maybe the beggar is a war veteran?

He might get into an argument with someone.

He might look at his reflection in a mirror and shine his shoes against the back of his trousers.

When he gets to the bar, he might get into a fight with someone who is wanted in several star systems. He draws his light sabre and chops the man's arm off.

Lots of opportunities to tell us more about the character and the world he lives in.

Discord said:

The reader has to know

Click to expand...

Everyone has pointed to this point, and I'm not going to be any different.

Though here's my more important question: WHY?

Consider for a moment your point of view. Does the character think about the socioeconomic situation or the history of the world when they look at everything? Do they consider the rules of the magic/technology with each interaction? OR do they just live their life and this is just old hat to them? Would your omnicient narrator talk of the details you're insisting the reader must know? Or, again, is that extraneous detail they'd overlook?

Some people claim that Tolkien and Jordan were verbose and offputting with their details. Others absorbed the series like water. As others have said, every reader is different. Only the tip of the iceberg should appear in the story. So you may have 100s of details in your world building, but less than a tenth of them should be appearing in the story... based on how they effect the story.

Focus on a character who will engage people, readers will follow the character as he/she moves through the world. Remember, your story isn't the world. The world is nothing but a decorated terrarium for your characters, a backdrop for what they do.

A great storyworld is a vital component, because it enriches the entire process... but you've got to have engaging people doing interesting things, or it's just a travelogue. Think of world/setting/cultures as seasoned broth... you've got to have good meat and potatoes for it to be more than an appetizer.

A common mantra is "If you don't have time to read, you don't have time to write." But not just reading for pleasure... you have to examine the process, the order and volume of each ingredient as it's laid out. You need to be saying "Oh, I see what you did there..."

Consider an analytical reading (or re-reading) "The Name of the Wind" by Patrick Rothfuss... specifically with an eye on how he doles out his setting, the social and environmental issues. You don't have to count every word, but make some notes, enough to get a rough feel for the Doing Things to Seeing Things ratio.

Discord said:

So I'm writing a SFF novel - YA, more of a spy/espionage novel than a fantasy epic. And I've built this world. It's not done, but I think it's a pretty good world so far. The worldbuilding comes from an understanding of history and socioeconomic structures rather than excuses for sparkly magical things, the speculative elements are somewhat original and create interesting potential for conflict - I've tried to write fantasy epics before, but this time I think I may have hit on something with staying power. I have the world, more or less, built.

Here's my trouble: the world exists in notes, rough descriptions, and sketchy maps. When I try to write the story and introduce the world to the reader, I find myself either leaving it too sparse on detail, or having way too much to explain at once, so the reader is hit with a big block of exposition and not much story. The reader has to know where they are and what the rules of this world are in order to know what the heck is going on. At the same time, though, the story has to keep moving forward or they will become bored and disengaged. That's the balance.

Does anybody have any thoughts on this challenge? Not the worldbuilding itself, but on the inroduction of the reader to the world?

Click to expand...

Discord, you've asked one of AW's Perennial Questions.
The keyword you'll want to use as you research further is INCLUING.
The examples I frequently choose are the opening chapter of Robert Heinlein's "Orphans of the Sky," and Cordwainer Smith's short story "Scanners Live in Vain."