One worldbuilding perspective

[Rkcapps]

This is a funny, informative blog post. Don't read if profanity bothers you. 25 Things You Should Know About Worldbuilding « terribleminds: chuck wendig

 

[Vadosity]

There are defiantly some things I agree with in there - namely points 3., 5., 10., 12, 11., 16., oh and 17. definitely! Oh and 19... 19 is possibly the best. 22! 24 is also very true...

 

[Russ]

That article rocks. Chuck really nailed it on that one.

Thanks for sharing that article.

 

[Demesnedenoir]

#11 Remix Culture seems to apply perfectly to this blog post.

 

[elemtilas]

Give the man a we're all champions ribbon for the Nailing the Wrong Coffin event!

I mean, if you're going to entitle your article 25 Things You Should Know About Worldbuilding, don't actually show me an article about writing a novel...

So basically, I don't actually agree with much of it and find even less of it relevant to the topic.



Now, 25 I am in full agreement with. 19 through 21 are also pretty much spot on.

 

[FifthView]

I agree with most of the article. Heck, I agree with all of it, if I can include a few qualifications here and there.

The biggest qualification would be on 2, 3 & 4. I agree; but, one can also create large sections of an interesting world with the idea of writing multiple stories based there. It's a small quibble, because at the same time I do think the world still needs to serve the story—most of the time. Sometimes the world is the story, if it's principally a milieu story. But these seem to be a fringe type of story in the current fantasy market.

My favorite bit of advice in the article is something I've wanted to point out before: #'s 6 & 7.

 

[skip.knox]

I stopped reading Wendig a long time ago. He takes way too long to say far too little. It's the Curse of the Blog. Once you make a name for yourself (and perhaps money as well) from your blog, you now have to keep going whether or not you have much to say. Wendig manages this by interpolating rants and asides. Like many bloggers, he employs the Power of the Numbered List to attract readers. And he's very good at click-bait titles.

Props to Rkcapps for finding and sharing, though. We don't have to agree in order to appreciate!

 

[Holman]

I quite enjoy a numbered list - I am a clickbait sucker at times - this was a much more enjoyable read than most, I do like inventive profanity, coarseness and innuendo, which this article had plenty of. You can take a lot more away by reading the style in which they say something - so although you are not a fan of his asides, I quite enjoy this sort of style.

 

[FifthView]

I stopped reading Wendig a long time ago. He takes way too long to say far too little.

I've never read Wendig before this article, so I had no previous context.

But I did find myself skimming over the points quickly. I also thought his method of trying to shock, i.e. his language and tropes, was rather tedious. The points were fair points to make, so I found myself overlooking the stylistic choices.

Edit: Just read Holman's point about the style, heh. Different strokes.

 

[Michael K. Eidson]

I like #18 the best. Know your setting's rules, but don't spell out everything to the reader. Be internally consistent within the story, but leave some mystery.

 

[Mythopoet]

This is a great example of how writing advice is not one size fits all. I'm sure the list is great if you want to write books of the same general type as Wendig does. However, if your storytelling is very different from his, his advice has little of value. I always start reading Wendig articles when I see them posted but can usually only get through 2 or 3 of his points before either the article becomes too tedious (I don't even like his non-fiction writing style) or before the article obviously shows itself as something that won't work for me as the type of writer I am. However, if you find it valuable for your storytelling style, that's great. Chuck at least admits right at the beginning that these are just his thoughts and opinions and I can respect that.

 

[Holman]

I've never read Wendig before this article, so I had no previous context.

But I did find myself skimming over the points quickly. I also thought his method of trying to shock, i.e. his language and tropes, was rather tedious. The points were fair points to make, so I found myself overlooking the stylistic choices.

Edit: Just read Holman's point about the style, heh. Different strokes.

I spent years working in warehouses (lots of swearing), then trained as a primary school teacher, a role I was in for 16 years - no swearing in the classroom was a challenge at times and I think has resulted in me being very potty mouthed at home but the F word can get tedious so needs spicing up with some inventive linking to create wonderful foul-mouthed tirades Although some of the best insults don't require much swearing at all.

 

[Russ]

I spent years working in warehouses (lots of swearing), then trained as a primary school teacher, a role I was in for 16 years - no swearing in the classroom was a challenge at times and I think has resulted in me being very potty mouthed at home but the F word can get tedious so needs spicing up with some inventive linking to create wonderful foul-mouthed tirades Although some of the best insults don't require much swearing at all.

Totally get that. Started out life in the army and we swore incessantly. Switched over to law and found out that don't let us talk like that in court. Serious culture shock and I still struggle with it sometimes decades later.

 

[FifthView]

I spent years working in warehouses (lots of swearing), then trained as a primary school teacher, a role I was in for 16 years - no swearing in the classroom was a challenge at times and I think has resulted in me being very potty mouthed at home but the F word can get tedious so needs spicing up with some inventive linking to create wonderful foul-mouthed tirades Although some of the best insults don't require much swearing at all.

For me it wasn't so much that there was swearing or a potty brain, but that those bits took up so much of it and led to bloat, heh. Could've been more succinct and still interesting. I guess this was a case of "seeing the author's hand" too much, for me. But as I said previously, I could skim and still find the best parts.

 

[DeathtoTrite]

Thoughts on 13-

I see things like this a lot, and it always annoys me. Of all the cultures I've created, maybe 3-4 are not sexist to some degree, and maybe 2-3 are not homophobic (to some degree). Maybe because I love using history as a template, but if practically every culture in Western Europe, Eastern Europe, the Near East, Central Asia, Southeast Asia, and East Asia all are sexist for most of their history, its a pretty good indication a human society needs a compelling reason *not* to be sexist.

I feel like this is less "you must have an enlightened kingdom" so much as "make your female and minority characters people". I know for me at least, a medieval kingdom with modern European sensibilities towards sex, gender, and religion is about as jarring as a kingdom that never seems to run out of food or doesn't have to bother with corruption.

 

[Holman]

Thoughts on 13-

I see things like this a lot, and it always annoys me. Of all the cultures I've created, maybe 3-4 are not sexist to some degree, and maybe 2-3 are not homophobic (to some degree). Maybe because I love using history as a template, but if practically every culture in Western Europe, Eastern Europe, the Near East, Central Asia, Southeast Asia, and East Asia all are sexist for most of their history, its a pretty good indication a human society needs a compelling reason *not* to be sexist.

I feel like this is less "you must have an enlightened kingdom" so much as "make your female and minority characters people". I know for me at least, a medieval kingdom with modern European sensibilities towards sex, gender, and religion is about as jarring as a kingdom that never seems to run out of food or doesn't have to bother with corruption.

It is worth noting that women buy way more books than men, so, if you want your books to sell, you will need strong female characters. It is no coincidence that GOT has mass appeal.

 

[pmmg]

I am one of those who has undertaken to create my own world. And in it, I have tried to create unique races and creatures, and with it all of the staples, like Mythologies, and histories, and customs, cultures, and economies, and everyday items, like currency, units of measure, languages and well...all of it.

I do enjoy it, and it goes on endlessly in my head. But half the time I am working on this, I feel this great sense of why, and what's the point? The real world offers so much that I need not add to it, and the effort to create all this new stuff has been done already pretty thoroughly in RPG's and other works. I often wonder is anyone will appreciate this, or am I putting in a lot of effort for small gains.

I don't have fantasy staples like Elves and Orcs and dwarves, but I do have other races that are man-shaped, and could be deemed to be like them. I think sometimes, my efforts would have been less difficult if I had just said they were Elves and Orcs and moved on. But...its not in me. I want things to be my own creation as much as I can.

I read this article, but I am not sure I have any good take-aways from it. This may just be a recap of some lessons I've already leaned.

 

[pmmg]

It is worth noting that women buy way more books than men, so, if you want your books to sell, you will need strong female characters. It is no coincidence that GOT has mass appeal.

Cause women wont buy things unless they have strong female characters in them? I am not sure that is true. I will admit, it does seem to be the current trend. I am willing to just write what I think belongs in the story, and let others decide if it was the right fit or not.

And I agree, I don't really go for adding today's enlightened values in a place or time where it would be unlikely. The story would need to sell me on that.

 

[Holman]

Cause women wont buy things unless they have strong female characters in them? I am not sure that is true. I will admit, it does seem to be the current trend. I am willing to just write what I think belongs in the story, and let others decide if it was the right fit or not.

And I agree, I don't really go for adding today's enlightened values in a place or time where it would be unlikely. The story would need to sell me on that.

I didn't for one minute suggest that the values of the time be changed, just that there should probably be a strong female character or two. The bonus of writing in a setting where women are not the powers that be is that there is automatically an external conflict to use as you wish.

 

[DeathtoTrite]

It is worth noting that women buy way more books than men, so, if you want your books to sell, you will need strong female characters. It is no coincidence that GOT has mass appeal.

Oh, I'm certainly not saying not to have strong female characters. Reading about how some Byzantine empresses or Mongol queens succeeded in incredibly sexist societies is incredible. More that society shouldn't just be all nice and accepting. My current book easily has 50%+ female characters. Hell, the two most powerful people are both women (one in an egalitarian society, the other in a rather sexist one)