# Are we getting too worried about the underlying mechanics of our stories



## grahamguitarman (Jan 16, 2012)

As I read through the forums I often find discussions on the mechanics of how magic works or what limitations there should be ect.  And as much as I enjoy these debates, I do wonder if we are getting too wound up about magic making sense.  In Sci Fi you have to have scientific explanations for your worlds (even if its made up science) but we are not writing sci-fi!

When I read a good fantasy novel I don't care if there is an explanation for the magic that takes place in that world.  I just immerse myself in that world and enjoy the magic for what it is - a fantastical firework display to mnake the novel more enjoyable to read.  I don't expect someone to be explaining to me the workings of something I know clearly doesn't exist anyway.  If someone flies using magic thats fine, I don't need to know the mechanics - I just want to hear an engaging description of what its like to fly by magic.  Basically I just want to enjoy the mystery of a good fantasy setting with magic and a storyline that takes me away from reality.

And that I think is where my concern has its roots, I want my novels to be filled with magic and mystery, not science.  I will use a little pseudo scientific Alchemy for mechanical things like the Airship balloons that fly my worlds.  But when it comes to actual spellcasting I'll maybe describe something of the ritual involved, and probably something of the lore and cosmology behind it.  But I don't want to take away the mystery of my magic by giving it the sci-fi treatment.  

But thats just my personal opinion, I'm sure someone will come along and tell me I'm wrong LOL


----------



## Steerpike (Jan 16, 2012)

I think magic in fantasy can remain mysterious to the reader; there's no reason the author has to share with the reader every detail about how magic works in his world. I do think the author needs to know the rules behind their own world, however. If magic is completely arbitrary and can be invoked whenever the author feels like it, the risk is a logically inconsistent story, or a story in which magic quickly runs away with everything to the point that every problem encountered could be solved by it and the reader will (rightly) be perplexed when the characters fail to use magic in some way that is consistent with what came before.

I don't need the magic system explained to me as a reader, but if I begin to feel that the author is just making it up as he goes, so to speak, then I'll stop reading the book.


----------



## grahamguitarman (Jan 16, 2012)

oh yes, there needs to be some rules and limitations, every world needs to live by its own rules, but how far do you need to go to explain the science of something that can never be real


----------



## TWErvin2 (Jan 16, 2012)

I agree along the lines of what Steerpike indicated.

You don't need a rule book the size of a college physics text to list all of the rules and interactions possible of magic and how it works in the world, and you certainly don't need to share each rule and variable with the reader.

However, a reader should learn enough about 'how the magic works' or what to expect when magic comes into play in the context of the story--or at least an 'Oh, okay, I get it' when something different happens.  All of this will  happen when there is a logic, pattern, or system behind the magic. It allows for some consistency.

If characters (protagonists, antagonists and everyone in between) just start whipping magic out of their butts, randomly, apparenly varying in strenghts and range of abilities simply to fit the plot need in the story, well, the writer will at least lose me as a reader and I suspect many more.


----------



## grahamguitarman (Jan 16, 2012)

yeah but I'm not arguing for inconsistency, if anything I tend to argue in other threads that unbridled magic is bad for storywriting as it causes too much deus ex machina instead of plot solving.  my argument is that we don't need to know the science and physics behind magic to appreciate it.  sure have consistent rules to depict what magic can do (though that would vary according to the type of being)  but that is all about creating a consistent plot.  

I don't need to know that the aurora borealis is a radiation storm to appreciate its beauty, only to know where it is and when I'm most likely to see it.  If anything the science kinda takes away from the magic of it, though I'm sure a sci-fi fan would disagree.  In the same way I don't need to know the science and physics of magic, only to know that it has limits in what it can achieve, and is conjured in a particular way.

most classic fantasy does not even attempt to explain magic, yet we accept its presence and use.  Just seems to me we are we are getting too worried about the sci-fi instead of the fantasy (myself included - I've found myself questioning my own work as well in terms of getting too scientific)


----------



## Anders Ã„mting (Jan 16, 2012)

There's nothing wrong with discussing the specifics of narrative devices, I think, but one has to keep in mind that they are just means to an end. "How magic works" is ultimately only important in regards to how that makes the story more interesting. 

There is no "good" or "bad" way to write, per se, as long as the end result is a well-written and entertaining story.


----------



## Benjamin Clayborne (Jan 16, 2012)

grahamguitarman said:


> As I read through the forums I often find discussions on the mechanics of how magic works or what limitations there should be ect.  And as much as I enjoy these debates, I do wonder if we are getting too wound up about magic making sense.  In Sci Fi you have to have scientific explanations for your worlds (even if its made up science) but we are not writing sci-fi!



What you are basically pointing out is that discussions tend to focus heavily on mechanics and world-building, and not enough on character development and story structure. The reason for this is simple: world-building is easy. Story and character are hard.


----------



## grahamguitarman (Jan 16, 2012)

Benjamin Clayborne said:


> What you are basically pointing out is that discussions tend to focus heavily on mechanics and world-building, and not enough on character development and story structure. The reason for this is simple: world-building is easy. Story and character are hard.



Yeah something like that, and you are right about the story and character building being harder.  

Don't get me wrong, I'm all for world building, its essential to give a structure to your world - especially since its made up.  But do we sometimes go into too much technical detail when creating the mechanics of our worlds?  And I'm not criticising those who do a lot of world building either, I put a lot of work into my world creation too.  But at the end of the day, as anders pointed out, they are only means to an end.  Its the story that matters, and the world building should support not overwhelm that.

I started to question my level of world building recently, because I found myself trying to work out the physics of how magic would work in my world.  Then I sort of had one of those 'hang on a mo' episodes and realised that it didn't matter.  This was not sci-fi so why did I need to have an explanation for my magic? it just is.

Even though one of my stories is about a trainee wizard, I still don't think I need to worry so much about how magic works, as how the character develops and learns that magic.  If that makes sense?


----------



## Telcontar (Jan 16, 2012)

I agree that a lot of writers both here and elsewhere worry too much about the world and not enough about the story. That is why my first advice is usually 'write the story, then worry about the world.' In the process of writing any story based in a fantasy world, a lot of that other stuff at least gets touched on. It doesn't need to be fully fleshed out from the beginning. 

Building worlds is a lot of fun, and it makes writers feel like they are still somehow making progress on their writing - though I would say this is misleading. Building an intricate world doesn't flex the right 'muscles' for a writer, for the most part. It doesn't help us build empathy and capture readers.


----------



## grahamguitarman (Jan 16, 2012)

Telcontar said:


> I agree that a lot of writers both here and elsewhere worry too much about the world and not enough about the story. That is why my first advice is usually 'write the story, then worry about the world.' In the process of writing any story based in a fantasy world, a lot of that other stuff at least gets touched on. It doesn't need to be fully fleshed out from the beginning.
> 
> Building worlds is a lot of fun, and it makes writers feel like they are still somehow making progress on their writing - though I would say this is misleading. Building an intricate world doesn't flex the right 'muscles' for a writer, for the most part. It doesn't help us build empathy and capture readers.



I agree.

Most of my world building - if you can call it that, is creating the mythology, which is another aspect of storytelling,  the rest is just drawing locations and structures to make description easier.  its when I let myself get bogged down in physics that I realised I was being too technical in my world creation.


----------



## Devor (Jan 16, 2012)

People are more willing and able to talk about their world than they are about their stories.  If nothing else, I can ask a question about world-building, or about research, or about whether or not to start with a prologue, and people will have answers.

If I were to ask, "I have these two characters who are romance interests, this is the loose situation, oh and the villain is acting this way.  How do I build their relationship?"  I'm honestly not sure what kind of answer I'd really get.


----------



## Sarah Anderson (Jan 16, 2012)

I think the only one interested in the how and why of the magic in a fantasy is the author. As a reader I really don't care how it works or why. I am not interested in the rules. I am not playing an RPG where that would be relevant. I am reading a book.

 I just want to see how the magic affects the story. That's all.


----------



## Benjamin Clayborne (Jan 16, 2012)

Sarah Anderson said:


> I think the only one interested in the how and why of the magic in a fantasy is the author. As a reader I really don't care how it works or why. I am not interested in the rules. I am not playing an RPG where that would be relevant. I am reading a book.
> 
> I just want to see how the magic affects the story. That's all.



A lot of younger readers _are_ interested in that kind of thing—teenage boys especially obsess over the mechanics of how supernatural stuff works and will have endless arguments over (e.g.) whether or not character A or character B could win in a fight.

As adults, we tend to move away from that and toward character and story, but it doesn't mean that there aren't readers out there who appreciate that kind of thing.


----------



## myrddin173 (Jan 16, 2012)

Sarah Anderson said:


> I think the only one interested in the how and why of the magic in a fantasy is the author. As a reader I really don't care how it works or why. I am not interested in the rules. I am not playing an RPG where that would be relevant. I am reading a book.
> 
> I just want to see how the magic affects the story. That's all.



Benjamin is right, many readers love knowing the nitty-gritty.  The fan community of Brandon Sanderson in particular, just go to the 17th shard forums.  There's one discussion about how it is possible to get FTL travel using Allomancy (a magic system from the Mistborn series).

As for the whole "this is magic not science" thing.  Keep in mind the following



			
				Clarke's Third Law said:
			
		

> Any science sufficiently advanced is indistinguishable from magic



and



			
				Niven's Law Re:Clarke's Third Law said:
			
		

> Any sufficiently rigorously defined magic is indistinguishable from science


----------



## Benjamin Clayborne (Jan 16, 2012)

I prefer "Any science distinguishable from magic is insufficiently advanced" ;-)


----------



## grahamguitarman (Jan 17, 2012)

Ha ha ha both quotes from sci fi authors i notice


----------



## Devor (Jan 17, 2012)

I've been meaning to ask, but is there a good example of an author that has a magic system that's so well-explained it qualifies as science?


----------



## Legendary Sidekick (Jan 17, 2012)

grahamguitarman said:


> oh yes, there needs to be some rules and limitations, every world needs to live by its own rules, but how far do you need to go to explain the science of something that can never be real


I don't info dump. I show readers how certain things work.

Two of my most powerful characters are mutants who have powers that could potentially make them appear omnipotent. One can manipulate time; the other is a telekinetic. I never tell the reader that the telekinetic might die if he pushes himself too hard. Instead, I show the consequences of trying to move an airship with his mind. Basically the reader sees the telekinetic drool, bleed, lose control of his bowels and almost drop dead. This happens early on to establish that the character is extremely powerful, but he has a limitation (which is also "extreme").

The character who can stop, slow and reverse time has several limitations which readers will see. I'm in the process of a rewrite, and decided to add a new limitation to reversing time: the time traveler will travel to the same _place_ relative to the Sun's position. Basically, he has to travel back to the same day (his home planet's year is _almost_ exactly 356 days) and he uses an airship, so he won't risk embedding himself underground or plummeting to his death. I like this because it prevents a time traveling character from just popping up in whatever time or place he wants to.

As a writer, I need to know every limitation up-front so my magic/pseudo-science is consistent.

For the reader, I try to show every power and limitation in a way that is interesting. I prefer action over words (in this case), so I show consequences rather have a know-it-all wizard warn a party member who doesn't fully understand the power of his Soul Blade Axcalibur, "Warrior, your life force is running out!"

Just so there's no misunderstanding, I loved Gandalf who expalined just about everything. The Gauntlet quote doesn't mean dialogue is a bad way to demonstrate "the rules." It's actually me making fun of my inability to pull off a Gandalf-like character without killing the story.

(Good writing isn't just knowing your characters' limitations, but also knowing your own.)


----------



## sashamerideth (Jan 17, 2012)

I worry about maintaining internal consistency and as a result, I try to keep rules in mind. I don't know if it was here or somewhere else, but world building is easier than writing a story to completion.

Sent from my Blade using Forum Runner


----------



## OrionDarkwood (Jan 17, 2012)

You are not wrong, the reason I do it is not so much for the reader. But if I design something or introduce a concept in my book I want to know how it works inside and out so I can better convey it to the reader. IMHO its the difference between

Paul casts a fireball

Paul reached into the nether regions of pure magic, routing it through his frail mortal shell. The experience was intoxicating, orgasmic, a bit of feeling immortal. Paul quickly reminded himself who was master and forced the pent up powers of the pure magic into a physical shape of a big hot fireball and sent it hurling towards the orcs.


----------



## Sheilawisz (Jan 18, 2012)

To answer the original question of this thread: My answer is yes, too many Fantasy writers today are getting too worried about the underlying mechanics of how Magic works in their worlds!! Too scientifical, they want it to be too realistic, too believable- Personally I prefer the more classic take on Magic as a mysterious and mystical power =)

About worldbuilding, in my stories I focus on the story itself, the plot and the problems that my characters encounter- I give little importance to the actual worldbuilding, and about Magic it's like this:

My Mages do not cast spells, they do not throw curses, they do not need wands, they do not speak special languages... They do not use a force, they do not channel a power, they do not manipulate atoms or particles, they never pay a price or make a sacrifice of anything, they don't need vital energy, they don't have a spells book and they do not go to special schools:

They just kick reality in the _(beep!)_ and they throw their _(censored!)_ at whatever that they want to _(not suitable for a family-friendly site!)_ and that's it!! XD!

It's great to have many Magic systems that work in many different ways, that's good for Fantasy literature, but magic seems to be getting too scientifical and too limited these days =(


----------



## ScipioSmith (Jan 18, 2012)

TWErvin2 said:


> I agree along the lines of what Steerpike indicated.
> 
> You don't need a rule book the size of a college physics text to list all of the rules and interactions possible of magic and how it works in the world, and you certainly don't need to share each rule and variable with the reader.
> 
> ...



I think it's the question of the story's tone. Having characters "kick reason to the curb and do the impossible, because that's the way Team Gurren rolls!" is fine, so long as everyone understands that this is a slightly silly story, where coolness trumps logic and the main concern is having fun. Once you start to aim for a more serious level however it is my belief that things need a little more definition.

That was the big failing of the latter Harry Potter books, IMHO, it so wanted to be a Serious Story about Serious Issues, and yet the solutions seemed to come from nowhere because we were never really shown the boundaries of what magic could do.


----------



## Sheilawisz (Jan 18, 2012)

I like the Magic from the Harry Potter world, more mysterious and less scientifical than Magic systems from many other Fantasy worlds... the thing about Wizards not being able to magically produce food is a little strange, but it's one of my favourites =)

Have any of you read The Neverending Story by Michael Ende??

The Magic in that world is pretty surreal and impossible, it's never explained how it works and perhaps it has been an influence for Me and my style.

What is really important is not what style of Magic you choose to have in your stories: You must feel good and confident with the Magic that appears in your world, you need to like it =) Also, knowing what your characters _cannot_ do is perhaps the most important part of writing Fantasy stories.

The thing is that now Magic must be "serious" and so Fantasy authors are getting very scientifical about their Magic and their worlds =P I'll keep writing with my reality-shattering and totally unrealistic Magic, anyway =)


----------



## Dark Huntress (Jan 18, 2012)

Sheilawisz said:


> The thing is that now Magic must be "serious" and so Fantasy authors are getting very scientifical about their Magic and their worlds =P I'll keep writing with my reality-shattering and totally unrealistic Magic, anyway =)



Good for you. To me magic should be unrealistic and reality-shattering. After all, it is Magic.....mystical, ethereal ..no scientific journal for me...I enjoy reading about the magic in magic.


----------



## grahamguitarman (Jan 19, 2012)

Harry potter was meant to be 'serious'? I always took it as a teen novel with a bit of darkness thrown in.  

I suspect part of the problem is that too many fantasy authors have mixed with too many Sci-Fi authors and started to feel as if they needed their magic to have a grounding in real physics.  To me magic should be beyond physics, beyond reality - the minute you try to come up with a bellievable 'scientific' explanation for someone being turned to stone, you are in big trouble lol.  Determine limits for your magic certainly, and perhaps determine some idea of the trigger mechanism to cast magic (is it a complex ritual, or just a thought and its so).  But the why and how is unimportant, its that mystery that separates magic from science.


----------



## grahamguitarman (Jan 19, 2012)

OrionDarkwood said:


> You are not wrong, the reason I do it is not so much for the reader. But if I design something or introduce a concept in my book I want to know how it works inside and out so I can better convey it to the reader. IMHO its the difference between
> 
> Paul casts a fireball
> 
> Paul reached into the nether regions of pure magic, routing it through his frail mortal shell. The experience was intoxicating, orgasmic, a bit of feeling immortal. Paul quickly reminded himself who was master and forced the pent up powers of the pure magic into a physical shape of a big hot fireball and sent it hurling towards the orcs.



LOL well I doubt if anyone here would be so bland as to write 

Paul casts a fireball

What you are describing here is the difference between bland writing and expressive writing, which would be expressive with or without a complex set of rules.  This is an excellent description of magic casting by the way, it gives a good sense of the joy of magic casting, without coming across as being a physics lesson.


----------



## Sheilawisz (Jan 19, 2012)

Dark Huntress said:


> Good for you. To me magic should be unrealistic and reality-shattering. After all, it is Magic.....mystical, ethereal ..no scientific journal for me...I enjoy reading about the magic in magic.


Thank you, Dark Huntress!! By the way, Welcome to Mythic Scribes- It's good to see that there are other Fantasy writers here who prefer the mystical and ethereal Magic instead of the scientific journal stuff =)

@Graham: I agree totally with you: the moment when you try to come up with a believable explanation for magical things you get in trouble!! In my stories it's like this:

Mages ride on magical crystals and they fly at 30000mph easily, flying for as long as they want without effort- So, what is the energy that allows them to fly that fast? Where does it come from? How come they do not run out of it? Well, it's Magic!! A Mage throws a dazzling beam of silvery light that causes a searing blast powerful enough to set a city on fire- What kind of energy composes this beam? Is it made of atoms, or particles? Where does it come from? Well, it's Magic!!

A Mage creates a whirl of violet sparks and a castle appears out of nowhere- Where does the mass that composes the castle came from? Did the Mage bring it from a different dimension? What laws of the universe allow this to happen? Not really, the freaking castle came out of nowhere because _it's Magic_ =)

Magic does not need to be _that_ powerful in every story, actually I also like very much the subtle style of Magic that Gandalf displays for example, but just imagine: Trying to add a scientific explanations system to Lord of the Rings or The Neverending Story would just ruin everything...


----------



## Anders Ã„mting (Jan 23, 2012)

grahamguitarman said:


> Harry potter was meant to be 'serious'? I always took it as a teen novel with a bit of darkness thrown in.



My personal theory is that the Harry Potter series is supposed to be seen as a metaphor for growing up.

This is probably more obvious if you watch the movies all in a row (I did that a while back) but it's true for the books as well: Notice how at the start of the story, when Harry is eleven, the whole thing is like this amazing magical adventure? Not exactly harmless but, you know, there's this naive innocence to it.

Then, for each book Harry grows one year older, and for each book the magical world loses a bit of it's innocent shimmer and the colors grow colder, and things start getting darker and more complicated and serious. It's like Harry's world is changing with him, growing more adult-like for each passing year. Harry has to deal with that and accept that even though his world isn't as bright and colorful as he throught it was, he has to accept it and find his place.

You know, like we all had to in those years between eleven and eighteen.


----------



## Graham Irwin (Jan 23, 2012)

Follow the story a little deeper and see that it's the Hero's Journey. I'm sure we all know Joseph Campbell..

There are many permutations of that story, as it's the elemental human story and so it can be told a million ways.

Star Wars told it with spaceships. LOTR told it with orcs. Harry Potter tells it in a school.

I know it's reductive to say all journeys are the Hero's Journey, but HP fits the mold perfectly, from prophecy to destruction of "Evil". Rowling was shooting for the ages when she wrote that one


----------



## sashamerideth (Jan 23, 2012)

Graham Irwin said:
			
		

> Follow the story a little deeper and see that it's the Hero's Journey. I'm sure we all know Joseph Campbell..
> 
> There are many permutations of that story, as it's the elemental human story and so it can be told a million ways.
> 
> ...



Just about anything can be forced to fit a definition if it is twisted just right. HP also has coming of age, and probably the other story archetypes if one looks hard enough. Sort of like saying that freedom is the only theme in a story.

Sent from my Blade using Forum Runner


----------



## Anders Ã„mting (Jan 23, 2012)

Graham Irwin said:


> Follow the story a little deeper and see that it's the Hero's Journey. I'm sure we all know Joseph Campbell..



Yeah, but finding Hero Journeys is _easy_ - everyone uses the Hero's Journey, and everyone uses archetypes. It's just a part of what we do, and it's not exactly impressive. 

But I'm really not sure I've ever seen _anyone_ use the mood and style of a story in such a metaphorical way before. If Rowling did all of it deliberatelly, _then _I'm genuinely impressed.


----------



## myrddin173 (Jan 23, 2012)

Graham Irwin said:


> Follow the story a little deeper and see that it's the Hero's Journey. I'm sure we all know Joseph Campbell..
> 
> There are many permutations of that story, as it's the elemental human story and so it can be told a million ways.
> 
> ...



I would say Harry Potter is actually more of a Bildungsroman


----------



## Steerpike (Jan 24, 2012)

Anders Ã„mting said:


> Yeah, but finding Hero Journeys is _easy_ - everyone uses the Hero's Journey, and everyone uses archetypes.



I don't think that is true, at least with respect to the Hero's Journey. As I understand Campbell, the idea is that the Hero's Journey is common to all myths. Not all stories rise to the level of myths, and while non-myth stories may use the Hero's Journey, not all of them do so.


----------



## grahamguitarman (Jan 24, 2012)

Harry Potter taken as a whole series is certainly a coming of age story.  But whether its coming of age or heroes journey, doesn't mean it is a 'serious' story.  In fact its actually quite a silly story in many ways - a boy being kept in a cupboard, I mean come on, the social services would have had the Dursleys in prison for child cruelty.  And where are the serious mental issues that Harry would suffer from such serious abuse!  Don't get me wrong I love HP, its one of my favorite fantasy series, and I found it highly entertaining.  But its not a very 'serious' story and isn't really meant to be. Without the magic and evil enemies that make it so special, HP would just be an average High school tale about an orphan growing up in a private school.


----------



## Sheilawisz (Jan 24, 2012)

Harry Potter is a story about Death, Life and everything that they mean, but especially it's about Death, Rowling always had Death in her mind while she was writing the series- or so is my personal opinion =)


----------



## Graham Irwin (Jan 24, 2012)

The Hero Journey is all about confronting the great unanswerable, death. Just like Harry Potter!


----------

