Storyscapers
New Member
Lately I've been trying to answer this question for myself: "What is worldbuilding?" The answer really comes down to one's definition of a "world."
I started looking at the elements that are not always necessary to create a world: any particular setting, any particular size, the existence of a map.
So what elements do define a world? The elements that make us believe that the world exists. The more believable, imaginable elements we have, the more likely we are to immerse our audience in the world. It’s a rather ethereal answer but that’s because the concept of a world is rather ethereal. Almost anything can make up a world, as long as its contents make us believe that it exists.
I’d also like to explore a possible new term called “storyscaping” which can be defined as “building any romanticized, thematic setting where stories can occur.” Whereas worldbuilding usually (but, of course, not always) has a top-down, map-first approach to building worlds, storyscaping is more focused on a bottom-up, story-environment-first approach to building worlds.
Storyscaping is creating the environment/experience in which stories are born. One of the defining elements of successful storyscaping is that, in the end, the audience is more interested in exploring the world than the narrative. I remember, for example, being more interested in going to Hogwarts and living in the wizarding world than reliving Harry Potter’s story. I also remember being more fascinated with getting my own Pokedex and become my own Pokémon trainer than reliving Ash’s story. These are examples of successful storyscaping where the audience can be more interested in the world than the story.
I've got more expanded thoughts here. But do you agree? Disagree? Think something entirely different?
What's your definition of Worldbuilding?
I started looking at the elements that are not always necessary to create a world: any particular setting, any particular size, the existence of a map.
So what elements do define a world? The elements that make us believe that the world exists. The more believable, imaginable elements we have, the more likely we are to immerse our audience in the world. It’s a rather ethereal answer but that’s because the concept of a world is rather ethereal. Almost anything can make up a world, as long as its contents make us believe that it exists.
I’d also like to explore a possible new term called “storyscaping” which can be defined as “building any romanticized, thematic setting where stories can occur.” Whereas worldbuilding usually (but, of course, not always) has a top-down, map-first approach to building worlds, storyscaping is more focused on a bottom-up, story-environment-first approach to building worlds.
Storyscaping is creating the environment/experience in which stories are born. One of the defining elements of successful storyscaping is that, in the end, the audience is more interested in exploring the world than the narrative. I remember, for example, being more interested in going to Hogwarts and living in the wizarding world than reliving Harry Potter’s story. I also remember being more fascinated with getting my own Pokedex and become my own Pokémon trainer than reliving Ash’s story. These are examples of successful storyscaping where the audience can be more interested in the world than the story.
I've got more expanded thoughts here. But do you agree? Disagree? Think something entirely different?
What's your definition of Worldbuilding?
