Creating Set-Pieces to Later Flesh Out?

[Netardapope]

So, I'm nearing the end of my First Draft, and overall, I'm happy. However, I've noticed something with the way I've gone about creating my world this time around.

From an aesthetic standpoint, I think my world is rather unique. I have a mountainside city stratified into four vertical levels with stone "elevators" managed by mages for transport, A city spliced within a tree whose roots float above a Sacred Lake, and a region composed of artificial mountains created by a magical disaster, etc. And I am proud with myself. After my first novel, which was basically one dull city or town in the plains to another dull settlement in the middle of a plain, I find that my geography is more engaging this time around.

That being said, my worldbuilding has been very minimal. Overall, I've glossed over some pieces of history, shown glimpses of cultures in these areas, but my current focus has been mostly on finishing the basic plot and creating a skeleton for the characters.

Since I'm still by no means an experienced writer, I was wondering if this is similar to how you guys go about worldbuilding? Setting up superficially interesting places, only to breath life into them during revision?

Also, I'd be interested in knowing if any of you think the examples I gave are unique or interesting at a conceptual level?

I appreciate all your opinions!

 

[Orc Knight]

Mine usually starts with the characters, with the world going up around them. So, I suppose the settings are set pieces that get turned into actual places, with all the parts to make it work. If only in my head or background materials. As for the second part, interesting, certainly. From the tree cities to the mountain ones are well used. Though a magivator may not be so well used. I will count that as kind of unique. I'm imagining a mage dressed as an old timey elevator steward, caught somewhere between bored and reading a magazine and wearing a pointy hat.

 

[skip.knox]

I confess to doing this with my WIP. It's a bit different because the geography is real Earth, so I begin with that. But it's surprising the turns things can take.

So, I set my MC in the Camargue, which is this visually stunning place in the south of France. I didn't really have to do much there. I knew the climax would happen in a wizard's tower or fortress or some such, and for a long time I had a place selected in southeastern France. But other plot elements pushed me westward, over to the Pyrenees Mountains. So I essentially lifted the really cool fortress I found in Cevennes over to the Pyrenees and plopped it down there.

In between, I needed events to happen. One turned into a rescue in the middle of a river. For a long time, that was the Rhône River, but research showed the river was too deep to have a sandbar, so I had to move it to a smaller river. Right now, it's just a nameless river, but eventually I'll have to figure it out.

That's all just geography. I also had to decide there was a separate kingdom based in Arles, separate from the French kingdom, and something about its current political situation. Then something about the kinds of people who live in these areas, including deciding there is a rendezvous (think American fur trappers) held in the Pyrenees every year consisting mainly of elvish hunters.

Well, that's should be sufficient to illustrate the point. I started with my characters, yes, but they cannot live for very long in my head without have a place to put them. I selected some places (I literally started with "somewhere in southern France"), and things sort of developed from there. You will note that I try to develop only what is needed for the story. As an example, part of the story takes place in the city of Arles. This is a real place. I used the Roman arena. I do note that it's on the east bank of the Rhône, and the Kingdom of Arles (also called the Kingdom of Burgundy) is real. But I don't try to come up with the history of the city, or draw a map of it. To go further would, for me anyway, be a waste of time. And a bad waste, not only because it's time I could be using to write, but also because I'd be inventing stuff that never got used, which would be tragic to me.

 

[Netardapope]

[/QUOTE]
Well, that's should be sufficient to illustrate the point. I started with my characters, yes, but they cannot live for very long in my head without have a place to put them. I selected some places (I literally started with "somewhere in southern France"), and things sort of developed from there. You will note that I try to develop only what is needed for the story. As an example, part of the story takes place in the city of Arles. This is a real place. I used the Roman arena. I do note that it's on the east bank of the Rhône, and the Kingdom of Arles (also called the Kingdom of Burgundy) is real. But I don't try to come up with the history of the city, or draw a map of it. To go further would, for me anyway, be a waste of time. And a bad waste, not only because it's time I could be using to write, but also because I'd be inventing stuff that never got used, which would be tragic to me.[/QUOTE]

I can sympathize with plain worldbuilding feeling like a waste of time. Creating a history without the context of the current narrative I am creating only leads to that history becoming obsolete as I truly explore the setting. So yeah, starting with characters is probably the ideal way to go, but that has some problems as well.

Worldbuilding that grows out of the narrative will usually lead to more interesting ideas and concepts, the issue is, it is also harder to keep things consistent. This is due to the smaller scale with which we are viewing the world. I still prefer that method though.

I guess, at the end of the day, both methods lead to bruises, some lighter than others, but bruises nonetheless.

 

[Night Gardener]

Netardapope, your examples of geography and city- settings sounds really interesting! Stratified and spliced metropolises grafted into the rawness of nature? Yes, please!

I'm also outlining and drafting my WIP, and frankly do ultra minimalist set-piecing for my characters. Like Skip.Knox and Orc Knight, characters basically come first. There are key scenes and conflicts that I imagined with some specific geography-types, seasons/weather and exteriors/ interiors, but I find that I'm enjoying a more dark-stage, few props, ultra-minimalist approach to world-building as I write. (Blasphemy, I know).

Don't get me wrong, I have a lot of world building notes for this WIP at the ready. But, it just makes more sense to insert these specific items and histories as the story 'needs' them, and not force opportunities to shoe-horn them in. I write with some sense of mood and ambience, and jot down "imagery" that might make sense for that scene, but don't set it in stone. For example, I might have some dialogue worked out. What atmosphere will emphasize the words and actions? I might jot down 5 thoughts and an action: cold, bleak, rain, by a slow dying fire, shivering. They need to move on.

When I go back, I can see this scene developing in many ways... they could be shivering under a leaky tarp, unable to keep the fire going. There's no more fire wood in their ramshackle camp. They decide to move camp elsewhere.

Or, maybe coming in from bad weather into an old tavern...but not getting a warm welcome, as the innkeeper already scattered the fire and went to bed for the night. Rather than wake the old man, they go back out into the night.

First, from an editorial perspective, there's a certain freedom in that, barring a few key scenes, the action could be happening in any setting. It's liberating to write in almost a vacuum in some ways, because it makes themes, imagery, and pacing so much easier to improve on later. Need a little more tension for travelers? Bam! The road has been washed out by a mudslide from heavy rains that drowned their campfire the night before. Maybe not desperate peril, but severe inconvinience has ensued. Now what?

Secondly, if a scene isn't working well and it needs reworking, I'm not committed to keeping it just because I'm reluctant to 'lose' some opporotunity for showcasing my world-building. Being able to swap out back drops and sets, entire details of the universe, will be something to enjoy, as you put it, 'fleshing-out' later.

I'm more of a writer that likes keeping things vague, ambiguous and mysterious. ( Even to myself, lol. ) My philosophy generally is, When surroundings and environment become relevant to the character, it becomes relevant to the audience. I hope to capitalize on this thematically, especially through the first act . If it's ordinary and mundane to the character, they naturally wouldn't pay much attention to my cool world-buildy things, so why write elaborately on things my character should basically be ignoring? As writers, sometimes it's fun to keep certain details out of focus.

I do have a bit of advice for the 'fleshing out' parts that come later. Just have fun and don't be afraid to change your ideas and notions. You literally have the power to 'audition' any element at any time. Be as specific as you want to be, but build up in layers with reviews and revisions: Experiment!

Happy Writing!

 

[Penpilot]

Since I'm still by no means an experienced writer, I was wondering if this is similar to how you guys go about worldbuilding? Setting up superficially interesting places, only to breath life into them during revision?

Also, I'd be interested in knowing if any of you think the examples I gave are unique or interesting at a conceptual level?

I appreciate all your opinions!

When I start a story, I may have ideas for interesting places and how they're set up. I may not. I never really know if I'll really use what I pre-fabricate or if I'll come up with something else that I like better on the fly. I find that depending on the needs of the story and what I want to do, with each pass over the story, I add a pinch of this or a dash of that to the setting, filling it out a little more each time.

Your cities sound interesting enough, but to me, how a writer brings that city to life that makes it really interesting. It's like meeting someone attractive. Sure they may be pleasing to look at, and that has its place, but what really matters, what makes you begin to go ga-ga, is what they say when they open their mouths.

On a side note, your mountain city brought Minas Tirith from LOTR to mind. Just be aware so you can consciously make your city as similar or as different as you like.