Conveying Richness

[Mindfire]

I think we all take it for granted that lore and worldbuilding are generally not a fantasy book's main attraction and shouldn't be the primary focus. But at the same time, lore is a good way of making sure your work sticks with the reader and keeping them thinking and speculating about it long after they've finished reading it. So how does one convey that sense of richness without compromising the story? There's an article on the home page that touches on this issue, but I don't think it's been discussed at length.

 

[Heliotrope]

Oh! Great post Mindfire! This is a topic that is very important to me, and I think there were a few really important ideas missed in the article you mentioned.

For me, what makes a world rich is not the detail, or how it is described, but what it means to the character. For example, I think it is very important that if you are going to include a detail about your world it is because it needs to illicit a reaction from your character in some way that is important to the plot. I like parts of the world to act as symbols or metaphors.

For example, Catherine Mansfield short story 'Bliss'

The main character's marriage is falling apart and she has caught her husband having an affair.

"Oh, what is going to happen now?" She cried. But the pear tree was as lovely as ever and as full of flower and as still. (Mansfield 1984: 105)

In this passage (and through the entire story) the Pear tree is symbolic of many things, and brings a lot of hope to the main character. I think that when the world is meaningful to the character it becomes meaningful to the reader and adds that 'richness' you speak of.

Another example: From A Feast For Crows

But was it the god he was invoking, the Father Above whose towering gilded likeness glimmered in the candlelight across the sept? Or was he praying to the corpse that lay before him? Does it matter? They never listened, either one. The Warrior had been Jaime's god since he was old enough to hold a sword. OLder men might be fathers, sons, husbands, but never Jaime Lannister, whose sword was as golden as his hair. He was a warrior, and that was all he would ever be.


It is in this passage, in front of his dead father that Jaime Lannister realizes he has no connection to his family. He had no loyalty save to his position as a warrior. It is because of this that he decides to help a fellow warrior. Brienne of Tarth. The symbolism of the sword as being as a part of him as his own hair (and the same colour). The use of the surroundings to help him come to terms with who he is... all adds richness while at the same time letting us 'see' the world.

Another way that I think we can add richness to the world is by describing the small details that make the world 'real'.

"In nature descriptions one should seize upon small details, group them in such a way that you can see the whole picture when you close your eyes. For example, you'll capture the moonlit night if you tell how a sliver of glass from a broken bottle gleamed like a bright star in the weir, and the black shadow of a dog or wolf rolled past...." (Chekhov 1994: 32).

Chekhov is a genius, and this is so true. So many descriptions have become cliche. "Moonlight streamed through the window and cast long shadows across the stone floor," is boring and cliche and could take place in any world. What makes your world different? What is a small detail that only your POV would notice? How does it matter to them, and why?

"It isn't as bad as all that; here I am and it is now the short a.m.'s. The short a.m's. I await the water boiling for a final cup of tea. Probably only drink the stuff in order to pish. Does offer a sort of relief. And simply strolling to the kitchenette and preparing this tea; the gushing tap, the kettle, gathering the tea bag from the crumb strewn shelf - all of this is motion."
(Kelman 1995)

When the world matters to the character, then it matters to the reader. This happens by using symbolism/metaphor, and by showing the world in the tiny details that makes it different and 'true'. Together, this all adds richness.

 

[Incanus]

I think we all take it for granted that lore and worldbuilding are generally not a fantasy book's main attraction and shouldn't be the primary focus.

I understand what you are saying, but I don't think I can agree with this statement 100%. Of course, I don't think I'm a typical modern reader either.

In Lord of the Rings, I'd say the world-building is as an attractive a feature as any other in the book and is largely the point. The fact that the story does not end with the plot climax, but with the passing of an age, says a lot, I think.

@Heliotrope--In my view, the pear tree example you gave doesn't really pertain to world-building, but to theme and mood and setting and character. If I planted a pear tree in my fantasy world somewhere, I wouldn't really consider that world-building or lore. A pear tree is pretty generic--could be any fantasy world, or just the mundane world. Was that even a fantasy story?

 

[FifthView]

I've been reading Robin Hobb's latest Fitz and the Fool book, and I realized something she does that really mystifies me. During a conversation between characters, and often between a main character and some side character, the side character will go off on a very brief tangent about something. By brief, I mean it could only be a short sentence among many being spoken at once; it is some "connection" the side character has made between the main topic of discussion and something from his own personal life, experience, etc. Whatever this brief flash is about is nothing actually related to the topic at hand. I am amazed because each time this sort of thing has happened, I've paused and thought, "HOW did she decide to put that in there?" Because normally when characters are involved in dialogue about something....well, that's what they talk about. Even if a topic veers into historical background during discussion between characters or into other closely-related topics, it adheres to the general topic. But what Robin Hobb does is sometimes interject an idea that may well relate for the character but just jumps out as something disconnected for me. So it give this depth to the world by giving depth even to side characters who, why yes, have full lives outside whatever is driving the plot.

She does the same sort of thing during pages of fast travel between locations. The mention of a statue the rider passes. Some farmsteads to his right toward the horizon. Etc.

 

[Mindfire]

I understand what you are saying, but I don't think I can agree with this statement 100%. Of course, I don't think I'm a typical modern reader either.

In Lord of the Rings, I'd say the world-building is as an attractive a feature as any other in the book and is largely the point. The fact that the story does not end with the plot climax, but with the passing of an age, says a lot, I think.

Tolkien is a bit different in many respects I think. He's gone from being a writer to being a cultural institution. Tolkien fandom has become something akin to academia and most people are familiar with his work by osmosis. That's worlds apart from the situation facing someone who doesn't start with that kind of name recognition. Personally when I pick up a new author it's a "come for plot/characters, stay for the world" situation, and I suspect it's similar for most readers. Worldbuilding is a better anchor than a hook. Otherwise we'd all be reading wikis instead of books.

 

[Heliotrope]

Sorry Icanus, no that example was not from a fantasy. I'm ashamed to admit that I don't read a ton of traditional fantasy (sheepish face). I prefer sci-fi/dystopian/speculative fiction. I do like low fantasy, or books with fantastical elements, but I don't tend to read a lot of epic or action fantasy.

I just liked the pear tree example because it showed how a world, and elements in the world (any elements, not just something as mundane as a pear tree) are only as important as the character makes them out to be. Creating richness in the world, in my opinion, is done through making the world matter to the characters. So whether it is the creation story, the traditions, the religion, the rituals, or something as simple as the architecture or the plant life, richness comes from how the character feels about it. What is their opinion of it? What does it mean to them?

 

[Russ]

Personally I am torn on this issue between what I enjoy and what is more likely to appeal to the modern audience.

I enjoy a rich world with lavish, enjoyable description that might even slow the book down.

But I understand the modern reader wants something faster paced with more action focus than reflection.

I agree with the stance that Moorcock argues in "Wizardry and Wild Romance" that setting is effectively another character and deserves as much TLC as any significant character with the caveat that setting has virtually no purpose of its own but only exists to be a reflection of the internal state of the real characters.

For the moment I dole out my world history in bits, and will do so at the rate I find comfortable until my beta readers or editor (or more importantly) wife tell me otherwise.

 

[Miskatonic]

I agree completely. I love lore and learning about the entire world that the story takes place in.

All the additional material that was created to supplement the LOTR story has made me appreciate the world even more. Even if the Silmarillion may not be the most easily accessible book for the average person, I'm really glad I stuck with it.

 

[skip.knox]

@Russ, are you saying you are not modern? If so, there are an awful lot of un-modern moderns running around.

>So how does one convey that sense of richness without compromising the story?
My opinion would carry more weight if I were actually published. But I _plan_ to be published, so here goes.

First and foremost, I need to know more about the world than I've told the reader. That is, if I want my reader to be knee-deep my the world I'm creating, then I need to be neck-deep in it. Only then will I be able to judge which parts to leave out. I have to have my own sense of richness.

Second, I must be a cold-eyed editor. As I write, tons of worldy words can and do go in to the first draft. I'm often exploring and envisioning in the very act of writing. But when Edit Time comes around, I need to look at the story from an entirely different point of view, and cut what needs cutting. I need to have a reader's sense of story.

That's it, really. The rest is just voice and style, plot, character ... you know, all the easy stuff.

 

[MineOwnKing]

Use of the word 'artisan' has become the norm over the last decade but not so much back when I was kid.

Back in the 80's the popular thing was to show support through brand recognition: Nike, Miller Lite, etc, as a result many little companies got swallowed up.

I can remember when all the small breweries went out of business or got bought up by Miller.

Leinenkugel's was one of the last of the hold outs and even they were still half purchased by Miller but with Jacob still in charge.

I can remember how morally deflated people were that jobs were being lost and nobody was going to be able to get the special beers they loved anymore.

Now we have micro-breweries coming out of the ying-yang.

With each micro-brewery comes the hoopla of how it's made and where and why, usually it is the result of someone's dream to make something special that also includes something of interest from the region they brew in.

One way to tackle world building is to include the products crafted by artisans and give brief descriptions of what makes their products special because of the region that they live in.

This strategy is in tune with the modern appeal of artisans and therefore hopefully not boring.

 

[Penpilot]

I think we all take it for granted that lore and worldbuilding are generally not a fantasy book's main attraction and shouldn't be the primary focus.

To me, this kind of depends. There are stories where characters are the focus, and then there are stories where the world is the focus and the characters are just the vehicle which the reader takes to explore.

It all depends on what you want to focus on in your story.

I kills me a bit to invoke this guy's name but... here's a blog post on what Orson Scott Card calls his MICE Quotien. Mice being an acronym for Milieu, Idea, Character, Event. This are four elements in every story, but one is the main focus of the story.

Here's a blog post discussing it.
Karen Woodward: Orson Scott Card & The MICE Quotient: How To Structure Your Story

And here's a Writing Excursuses episode that discusses it.
Writing Excuses 6.10: Scott Card’s M.I.C.E. Quotient » Writing Excuses

 

[Russ]

@Russ, are you saying you are not modern? If so, there are an awful lot of un-modern moderns running around.

Yup, I am not modern.

We used to have a real nice lady who worked at our office back in the 90's with us who often said of me "Russ is a 90's kind of guy...1890s."

 

[Garren Jacobsen]

I feel as though conveying richness is almost as much about depth as it is about breadth. I feel like you should go as deep as you can or dare on things that have a direct impact on the story itself and then have only surface level examinations of world building elements that do not directly impact the story. The next step is to sprinkle these bread crumbs out as necessary to convey story, background, and richness. The methods employed are different for each individual scenario.

For example, in an opening chapter of a new WIP I have a closing argument that deals with nuisance law, mentions two cases, and explains how my property law magic works. This is conveyed in dialogue and internal monologue. To introduce another type of magic in another book I show the use of that magic (bleeding on a piece of iron and then forging it into something else). Sometimes I show history through a dance, architectural facades, classes, discussions, monologues. The methods are varied, which I also think helps convey richness.

So, I think that richness requires focusing and deepening world building elements that directly impact the story and having tons of surface level snippets that hint at a deeper world but don't have quite the same amount of depth in the story. You also need to sprinkle these through the book at various times and through various methods.

 

[Svrtnsse]

I wrote an article related to this recently: Small Sparks of Life – Making Your World Feel Alive
My guess is that's the one Mindfire mentions in the OP.

I'll probably repeat a little about what I wrote there, but this topic is interesting to me and I'd like to keep it alive and get some more input on it.

To me, richness of world is about how the world feels like an actual place rather than just a backdrop for the story. A rich world will stick around and keep existing in its own space even after the story has passed through and moved on.

Something I feel very strongly about when it comes to descriptions and world building and such is the idea that any image or impression created by the reader in their own head will be stronger and feel more real to them than anything we as writers can tell them about. This probably applies to all aspects of writing.
My thinking is that instead of describing details of the world, you set up a base for the reader from which they can form their own impressions.
You'll have to make sure to fill in the important bits yourself, but for a lot of te less essential parts of the world you can just drop hints and leave the reader to fill in the blanks themselves.

 

[Miskatonic]

I think one advantage of having an MC who is very young and has never left his homeland is that his experience out in the great wide world will allow him to give a sense of awe as he sees the new landscapes. This way the description used to describe mountain ranges or lakes, water falls, etc., can be more romanticized.

Most of us know what all these look like, but when we saw them for the first time we had a sense of wonder.

 

[Helen]

I think we all take it for granted that lore and worldbuilding are generally not a fantasy book's main attraction and shouldn't be the primary focus.

Not necessarily true.

It would all be pretty much emblematic of theme, so very important.