Seed Questions, or, Finding a Middle Ground

[Mythopoet]

I think we all need to acknowledge that different authors have their own values and methods and ways of pursuing their own goals and each one of them is perfectly good and legitimate. If a writer doesn't share your goals or methods that doesn't make them wrong or inferior in any way. It just makes them different.

If someone on this site has stated what they love and what they want to do with their writing, no one should be arguing to try to make them do it differently. You should respect who they are as a writer. If you put words on a page you are a writer. Everything else is a matter of taste.

 

[Mythopoet]

And Drake, here is a link to author Patricia Wrede's worldbuilding questions. It's quite a comprehensive list.

Fantasy Worldbuilding Questions - SFWA

 

[elemtilas]

From what I'm gleaning here, this is a question that can't be answered. There is no Goldilocks zone. Every story demands something different in terms of world building. Some stories are narrow in breadth but very deep in depth, while others are wide in breadth and shallow in depth.

Yep. As I see it, the more complete a job you do at devising the world, the easier it is write either of those stories. If your world is mere windowdressing, then your reader will know right away that your story is out of depth. If you're deep in one culture only but have never considered what's over in the next valley, then your reader will know your story is out of breadth.

Obviously not going to work for everyone, but something to consider.

To me, this is akin to research in the real world. If I were to shift the perspective, and correct me if I'm wrong, to me it seems like you're asking how much research you would have to to do to gain enough of an understanding of the world in breadth and depth to write any story you wanted.

As I said earlier in the thread, if you want to set a story in ancient Rome somewhere, you have all of the history laid out, historical linguistics, paleography, religion, social customs, etc. The knowledge amassed is not always perfect (we are 1800 years beyond those times and records are scanty). How much research is too much? Maybe the better question is, have you done enough research? There's always another book to read, another perspective to gain (including that most insane of methodologies: learn Latin and Greek and read the originals!)

Any era will be the same. The more you as a writer know about the era and place, the more you feel comfortable in that time and place, the more real your story will be. Because you've done everything you can do to experience that life and thus will present a more convincing tale to your reader.

But like I said every story has different demands. But if your only desire is to create a world without necessarily telling a story, then just have at it. There is no Goldilocks zone that makes a world wide and deep "enough". So just follow your muse so to speak. Write about everything and anything that interests you, because does it matter how wide or deep you go as long as you're satisfied with it?

Agreed! Though I might could posit that the goldilocks zone is where information about the subcreation approaches 1:1 with information about the primary creation. Perhaps unattainable, but an honorable goal to strive for!

 

[elemtilas]

Moorcock on world building // Mieville on world building:

K. Moorcock is by admission not engaged in worldbuilding. Mieville can't seem to abide the very notion. Maybe too daunting.

They've got their way, and I've got mine. One thing I'd note about Mieville is that it's nòt the reader who's supposed to know everything about the subcreation, but rather the author. The author can't really provide culture shock or a sense of compelling awe if she herself does not have any clue what's there to create awe or to shock a reader (or author!).

Re Pastel City: that's a good technique, indeed. The worldbuilder holds all the cards. It's up to her which tidbits to place on the trail for the intrepid traveller / reader to find.

I rather enjoy reading atlases, travel guides, encyclopedias and so forth for otherworldly places.

Which are almost never published except to serve or support a great story or story telling.

Um. Whoever said anything about publishing?

I mean: I get that a lot of folks here are (aspiring / professional / would-be) writers and publishing their stories is the goal. Not everyone writes in order to conform to what a publisher wants or what the public demands. I have my own vision, and that's what I write. If people like it, great. If they don't, great. If it brought fame and fortune, well and good. If it doesn't, good and well.

Some of us do actually write atlases, travel guides and so forth...

Which is probably not story telling.

Try ibn Fadlan or Westlake or Mandeville. Story can arise in any out of the way place and settle its mantle upon any genre.

 

[TheKillerBs]

And herein lies the problem. If you don't know the story you can't know the world. Without a story in mind, you don't know what type of world you need. You can't even begin to build without some instructions- the instructions are the story concept..

Yes you bloody well can. Setting is a perfectly good place to start writing your story from.

 

[elemtilas]

I think we all need to acknowledge that different authors have their own values and methods and ways of pursuing their own goals and each one of them is perfectly good and legitimate. If a writer doesn't share your goals or methods that doesn't make them wrong or inferior in any way. It just makes them different.

If someone on this site has stated what they love and what they want to do with their writing, no one should be arguing to try to make them do it differently. You should respect who they are as a writer. If you put words on a page you are a writer. Everything else is a matter of taste.

Thank you for this!

Also, just because some Big Name Author (TM) says something, that doesn't mean his opinion is any better or more valid than mine. Doesn't mean I have to follow his lead. Doesn't mean you have to follow his lead. Doesn't even mean he's correct. All it means is he's got an opinion on some aspect of art which may or may not be applicable to anyone else and to which other folks may or may not agree.

 

[Drakevarg]

To me, this is akin to research in the real world. If I were to shift the perspective, and correct me if I'm wrong, to me it seems like you're asking how much research you would have to to do to gain enough of an understanding of the world in breadth and depth to write any story you wanted.

No, what I'm asking is that much like in the real world, you don't write a research paper on the Black Plague by just writing "THE BLACK PLAGUE" on the top of the page and writing down everything you can about the subject. You need a thesis, some kind of point to make or question to answer from which you structure the rest of the information. That's what I'm looking for. Reason I refer to it as a Goldilocks zone is that the wrong question (like many on most of the "worldbuilding questions" lists I've seen) can be so basic that they don't really prompt more than a sentence or a paragraph's worth of answer.

You're right. Skip is not all audiences. But they DO provide proof that highly successful authors in the fantasy and science fiction genres, people who were trend setters in their day, find the type of World Building you're discussing to be absolutely useless.

For one, I was talking to Russ. For two, why should I care what successful professionals I've never met think about the value of my hobby?

And herein lies the problem. If you don't know the story you can't know the world. Without a story in mind, you don't know what type of world you need. You can't even begin to build without some instructions- the instructions are the story concept.

I'm of the belief that the story dictates the world building, not the other way around. Don't get me wrong, I absolutely love world building. I can spend days tinkering there. But I wouldn't get lost in building the world if I didn't have a story to tell in that world. If you lack a story concept, you lack even the most basic piece of information you need to dive into how that world functions.

I have the world, I don't get how people keep misconstruing that. Coming up with ideas is the easy part, figuring out a useful framework to put them to text is my problem.

 

[skip.knox]

I'm glad my questions sparked something, Drakevarg. I look forward to hearing what you have sketched. I do think you hit on a key point in your reply--identifying what feels obvious to you, but which may not be to your readers. Even if you don't have any readers for a while, explicating what is in your head can be useful. I know many of my own ideas look one way in my head but somehow change shape once I get them on paper.

I'm not going to respond to the world-building argument raging here because it really ought to be a separate thread. It's not what Drakevarg asked.

 

[elemtilas]

No, what I'm asking is that much like in the real world, you don't write a research paper on the Black Plague by just writing "THE BLACK PLAGUE" on the top of the page and writing down everything you can about the subject. You need a thesis, some kind of point to make or question to answer from which you structure the rest of the information. That's what I'm looking for. Reason I refer to it as a Goldilocks zone is that the wrong question (like many on most of the "worldbuilding questions" lists I've seen) can be so basic that they don't really prompt more than a sentence or a paragraph's worth of answer.

Yeah --- as I understood you earlier, you're looking to whittle down a big topic into a more manageable size.

I have the world, I don't get how people keep misconstruing that. Coming up with ideas is the easy part, figuring out a useful framework to put them to text is my problem.

Those questionnaires tend to be designed to help folks just getting started.

Maybe what would be more helpful to you would be a resource like a list of high school research paper topics?

If "THE BLACK PLAGUE" is too big, maybe "How Did the Plague Affect Everyday Life in (Insert a City or Country Name from your World here)?" would work better? Or "How Did the Plague Affect Trade Within the Country?"

Such questions, while relatively simple, allow for some world description without being infodumps or post-doc theses.

* How Did Wandalf IIIJ Gain Power in Angera
* How Does Alcohol Consumption Affect the Body & Mind of a Daine
* How did St. Yoan of Arcureia affect her society and later history

These are questions taken from an online research paper topic list and transmogrified to be appropriate topics for exploration in The World. A little tweaking might make them more appropriate for your own!

 

[Christopher Michael]

For one, I was talking to Russ. For two, why should I care what successful professionals I've never met think about the value of my hobby?

1) My mistake.
2) Because they were where you are. A writer who doesn't care what successful authors have to say about the craft? They're no better than the amateur architect who doesn't care what someone like Frank Lloyd Wright had to say about their's.

I have the world, I don't get how people keep misconstruing that. Coming up with ideas is the easy part, figuring out a useful framework to put them to text is my problem.

Because you said you don't have the stories. And I don't see how you can possibly have a world when you don't have a story. They go hand in hand, to me. You get the story germ before discovering the world, in my experience.

 

[Christopher Michael]

No, what I'm asking is that much like in the real world, you don't write a research paper on the Black Plague by just writing "THE BLACK PLAGUE" on the top of the page and writing down everything you can about the subject. You need a thesis, some kind of point to make or question to answer from which you structure the rest of the information.

And...that's actually precisely how I wrote research papers. My first draft was never anything but facts and figures and information I discovered in my research. It wasn't until the 2nd draft that it took shape. Usually the 3rd draft before it became meaningful.

 

[Christopher Michael]

Also, just because some Big Name Author (TM) says something, that doesn't mean his opinion is any better or more valid than mine. Doesn't mean I have to follow his lead. Doesn't mean you have to follow his lead. Doesn't even mean he's correct. All it means is he's got an opinion on some aspect of art which may or may not be applicable to anyone else and to which other folks may or may not agree.

But when multiple BNA's say something? And I'm not a BNA, but wouldn't mind getting to that point? I'm absolutely going to pay attention. I'm absolutely going to internalize what they say and decide what of it applies. But I'm not going to shrug it off as irrelevant.

 

[Drakevarg]

1) My mistake.
2) Because they were where you are. A writer who doesn't care what successful authors have to say about the craft? They're no better than the amateur architect who doesn't care what someone like Frank Lloyd Wright had to say about their's.

It's more like a hobbyist architect who loves designing castles not caring that a successful builder of skyscrapers thinks that castles are an archaic and useless thing to build.

Because you said you don't have the stories. And I don't see how you can possibly have a world when you don't have a story. They go hand in hand, to me. You get the story germ before discovering the world, in my experience.

Your experiences are hardly universal. I point at Elder Scrolls again, not to mention Tolkien, whose stories came from a language he built that needed a world to come from.

And...that's actually precisely how I wrote research papers. My first draft was never anything but facts and figures and information I discovered in my research. It wasn't until the 2nd draft that it took shape. Usually the 3rd draft before it became meaningful.

Might work for you, but both the way I was taught and the way I think don't mesh with that approach.

 

[Christopher Michael]

I point at Elder Scrolls again

An online community that is less than 10% of the players. Not a way to make money. (And, for the record, I think that may be the point of issue between us. You're apparently a pure hobbyist. I'm coming at it from the angle of someone who is looking to make money doing this thing I love doing.)

not to mention Tolkien, whose stories came from a language he built that needed a world to come from.

Not entirely true. He started crafting Quenya first, it is true. But it was his view that you can't have language without a story- because the true creation of a language required history and mythology. It was from there he crafted what became known as the Silmarillion- the first written and last published of his Middle Earth works.

 

[Drakevarg]

An online community that is less than 10% of the players.

Not just the lore community, but the basic approach to the worldbuilding from a development standpoint. Yes, they retcon plenty to justify whatever design choices they need for their central plots, but the in-game books are written as a venue to build the world, not the other way around. "A Dance in Fire" was written to exposit about Valenwood, Valenwood wasn't created so that "A Dance in Fire" would have a place to happen in.

(And, for the record, I think that may be the point of issue between us. You're apparently a pure hobbyist. I'm coming at it from the angle of someone who is looking to make money doing this thing I love doing.)

Precisely. Which is why I'd appreciate it if you stopped burying the actual focus of this thread by continuing on this superfluous side argument.

 

[Mythopoet]

But when multiple BNA's say something? And I'm not a BNA, but wouldn't mind getting to that point? I'm absolutely going to pay attention. I'm absolutely going to internalize what they say and decide what of it applies. But I'm not going to shrug it off as irrelevant.

I actually wouldn't call Moorcock or Mieville "Big Name Authors". They're fairly obscure except among more devoted fans of the genres they write in. And from what I've seen they are not often recommended among readers of their genres. Not compared to Big Name Authors like Tolkien or Martin; not on the websites I've frequented. (And I freely admit that isn't proof of anything, except that there might be another point of view out there.) They certainly have their following, but as far as real lasting success? My guess is that their works are not going to be handed down through multiple generations on any large scale. They are likely to remain pretty obscure, in the grand scheme of things.

On the other hand, in my experience, the really successful and lastingly successful authors tend to be the ones who craft compelling worlds that readers fall in love with apart from stories or characters. Not all major successful authors are worldbuilders, of course. But I think that most of the ones who are destined to be remembered for hundreds of years are.

So I don't really see any reason anyone who loves worldbuilding should pay any attention to what Moorcock and Mieville say. If you greatly enjoy their type of storytelling, then by all means take their words to heart. If you don't, then it is irrelevant to you.

 

[Christopher Michael]

Precisely. Which is why I'd appreciated it if you stopped burying the actual focus of this thread by continuing on this superfluous side argument.

The point of this thread was for you to get a hint of a direction or starting point for getting things on paper. Which is kind of the entire point of what I've been saying with this "superfluous side argument." Without a story, a history and base from which to build, you can't get it on paper. At least not in my experience. If you try to start from the world and build out, you're never going to have anything but problems. But if you start with a story? (And it can be any story here, not just The One. I've literally started from the "story" of "A Fire Deity and Water Deity fall in love. How does that work?") If you start with the story and build in? You will have trouble stopping.
Because the world will inform the story and the story will inform the world.

 

[Drakevarg]

Without a story, a history and base from which to build, you can't get it on paper. At least not in my experience. If you try to start from the world and build out, you're never going to have anything but problems.

I already have the world, the history. I've told stories in this world in the past, I'm just not telling one right now.

The question might arise to you "why bother worldbuilding in between stories," but in my mind and in my experience, the more you fill in the blanks and look at the origins and implications of elements, the more fleshed out and tangible the world seems in the next story.

 

[Russ]

For one, I was talking to Russ. For two, why should I care what successful professionals I've never met think about the value of my hobby?

If your hobby is worldbuidling then they, or I, have nothing to offer you, and I misunderstood your question and I apologize for wasting your time.

If your hobby includes storytelling or writing stories, then they have a lot to offer you.

 

[Russ]

Also, just because some Big Name Author (TM) says something, that doesn't mean his opinion is any better or more valid than mine. Doesn't mean I have to follow his lead. Doesn't mean you have to follow his lead. Doesn't even mean he's correct. All it means is he's got an opinion on some aspect of art which may or may not be applicable to anyone else and to which other folks may or may not agree.

If BNA is thoughtful, intelligent and analytical, knowledgeable about the history of the genre, and very experienced, yes it does mean their opinion is likely more valid than yours.

I think I have a different view of writing than you do. I view writing or story telling as a form of communication. If you don't "publish" or share your work you are engaging in a fundamentally different endeavour than those who wish to share their work for the benefit hopefully of themselves and their audience.

I thought of a really good analogy but this is a family site so I can't use it. :cool2:

The difference between not writing for just yourself and writing for yourself and audience is like the difference between me going to a wedding and dancing because I simply enjoy it and someone who dances for the entertainment for others.

People who simply write for themselves really shouldn't need advise. How are someone else supposed to tell you what is useful or good, when the only person who can judge that is you? The only advice you can give the self-referential writer (or person) is "satisfy yourself."

In the past I have suggested that the avatars note people's writing goals so misunderstandings and conversations like this one can be avoided. Maybe the admins may wish to consider it again.