Why Do Some Fantasy Worlds Breathe?

[Carolyn]

Anthropology is the study of human societies and cultures, right?. At its heart, it asks a simple question. How do people make sense of the world around them?

Every culture develops its own answers. Its own stories. Its own traditions. Its own understanding of what is sacred, shameful, valuable, and what is worth fighting for.
The most memorable fantasy worlds feel alive because their creators understood this.
Imagine a desert culture where water is sacred. Hospitality, inheritance, marriage customs, religion, architecture, and even crime would all develop differently than they would in a land of abundant rivers.
Who controls access to water? How is it stored? Who inherits the wells? What rituals surround its use? What happens when someone wastes it?

The moment we begin asking these questions, we stop creating scenery and start creating culture. And culture is where fantasy becomes immersive. After all, plots repeat.
Plots repeat. Cultures don’t.
Maybe this is why the greatest fantasy worlds feel so real. They’re not built from maps, magic systems, or royal bloodlines alone. They’re built from people.

Your thoughts?

 

[A. E. Lowan]

"Why Do Some Fantasy Worlds Breathe?"

Because if they don't, they pass out and don't get any ice cream, anyway.

 

[Mad Swede]

For me good writing is inherently by and for people, but it is also about people.

As writers we try to build an emotional bridge with our readers, and we do that by using character, emotions and perspectives in conjunction with events to give the readers something they can relate to. That means our writing can't be entirely character driven, it must also be part-driven by the plot itself.

Part of what makes good writing for people is using the story arc (events, things at stake and obstacles), the narrative and pacing to get the readers in and then keep them hooked. That then gives us as authors the opportunity to then build that emotional bridge by writing about people, by focusing on the characters and their personalities (their aims, desires, flaws, reactions and struggles), the conflicts their personalitets lead to, their growth through the story arc and the influence they have on the environment around them (the setting). You can call this a focus on the humanity of the characters if you like. And it's this need for humanity that means good writing has to be by people, because where else is that sense of humanity, that knowledge of people, going to come from?

I suppose you could summarise my views by saying that the greatest story settings breathe because they're fundamentally about people.

 

[ThinkerX]

Many of the reviews of my books cite their 'atmospheres,' pointing out how places like the Great Maze of Gawana or cities such as Corber Port or Ismara 'feel alive,' or are 'almost like characters' in their own right. Some of these comments extend to the overall settings. That said, some reviewers do complain about overdone worldbuilding.

 

[Carolyn]

For me good writing is inherently by and for people, but it is also about people.

As writers we try to build an emotional bridge with our readers, and we do that by using character, emotions and perspectives in conjunction with events to give the readers something they can relate to. That means our writing can't be entirely character driven, it must also be part-driven by the plot itself.

Part of what makes good writing for people is using the story arc (events, things at stake and obstacles), the narrative and pacing to get the readers in and then keep them hooked. That then gives us as authors the opportunity to then build that emotional bridge by writing about people, by focusing on the characters and their personalities (their aims, desires, flaws, reactions and struggles), the conflicts their personalitets lead to, their growth through the story arc and the influence they have on the environment around them (the setting). You can call this a focus on the humanity of the characters if you like. And it's this need for humanity that means good writing has to be by people, because where else is that sense of humanity, that knowledge of people, going to come from?

I suppose you could summarise my views by saying that the greatest story settings breathe because they're fundamentally about people.

I completely agree, and it doesn't matter what genre one is reading, really.

 

[Naruzeldamaster]

Scientifically, fantasy worlds are living things and thus need to breathe oxygen (And people within that world to abuse it) to live.
Sometimes the author does a good job.
Sometimes the author is a chain smoker.

What makes a world breathe for me is the day to day stuff (despite me not being the biggest fan of 'slice of life' style stories but that's a whole different genre of writing) I love to dig deep in the lore and find out about the foods, and the culture, and the little animals and stuff. I love the stuff that goes down between each big crisis. I don't need a 5 episode arc about what a cloud fox is and how important they are to the ecosystem, just that they're there and are maybe important to the culture is good enough.

Some authors neglect this side of writing, even the great ones, and it shows.

 

[skip.knox]

Setting and character are not mutually exclusive. In the best stories, the characters draw me in, but also those characters are deeply involved with their world. The places they inhabit or visit are places they care about (or hate or fear). And because I care about the characters, I'm also interested in their world.

It's when the information about the world is unconnected with the characters that the author loses me. An origin myth might very well explain why and how the MC is the Chosen One, but unless that myth is known to the MC and the MC is inspired by it or haunted by it or feels *something* about, then the myth is simply unimportant. And if the description goes on too long--for me, this means it's so many sentences or paragraphs, I find it awkward and distracting to skip over it--then I start calling it infodump.

I've just finished reading a novel, "Cahokia Jazz" by Francis Spufford, that is a fine example of world building. It is not fantasy, but it is an alternate Earth--really just an alternate America, but the author had to invent whole histories and find a way not merely to weave it into the story, but to make parts of those histories not just important but vital to the characters and the plot.

 

[Malik]

In epic fantasy, the world is a character with its own arc. The characters' actions change the world; that's what makes epic fantasy "epic."

You, as the author, need to know what the world was like before all the shenanigans, and you need to know what it's going to look like afterwards. The world should be responding to the characters' actions as the story unfolds.

I covered this in a post here long ago about prologues; the TLDR is that the prologue is the world's walk-on scene. It tells the reader what the world was like before all this (motions toward the rest of the book) happened. It's not a history of the world--you don't tell every character's story as they appear in the book starting back when they were in a bassinet. The prologue is just the world doing its thing, going about its daily routine. It can be a simple scene from a day in the life of Joe Average.

And the great thing is, if you're not writing epic fantasy--if you're doing, say, fantasy adventure or S&S where the characters' actions don't have world-rocking consequences--then you can skip the prologue altogether.

 

[Dahygu]

A couple of people have said this already, but for me its all about the small things. And I don't mean a treatise on the tailoring practices of 'the sea people of Vatarium.' An accumulation of small things make your world feel lived in. Like what do they eat, and why? Real life gives us a lot of basis that we can work from. When you have a nomadic people, and their primary food source is a kind of grain, it breaks immersion for me. On the one hand there is originality, and there is also the fact that it is fantasy so we don't expect hyper realism, but using realism to extend the logic of a fantasy world goes a long way towards making it believable for me.

 

[Calin Sarbu]

Good point.
I tend to build a lot of the specifics of the world based on characters. Based on their needs, such as where do they work, what do they do outside of work. I tend to look at big and small details about them and see how those fit in this world. What does this world have for those details to manifest. Where do they go after work? What do they do? Who do they listen to? Who do they pray to?
For me this feels easier, as it often means i need to create a certain location or tradition or habit or anything with the characters in mind. It tends to feel more in line with them from my perspective. And I feel if I first build the details first, it feels more restrictive as now my characters need to adhere to traditions, habits, places that might not be relevant to who they are. I can make interesting religion, but if my character's have little to do with religion or do not practice it, it can feel pointless, unless I have a use for it in the story.