Is a ancient fantasy world better than an modern one?

[kalleenmei]

Let me explain: the concept of "magic" can be applied to any world setting. In a more ancient world, you can explore intriguing themes that feel timeless... Conversely, in a more modern world, you can showcase how technology and magic intersect, illustrating their evolution and relationship with other things.

So, which approach would be better?

 

[Queshire]

Better? That's up to the writer.

Personally I'm specifically avoiding medieval stasis in my setting so it's advanced to a sci fi / cyberpunk-y type setting while still having elves, dragons, magic and all that stuff.

 

[TheKillerBs]

I guess that depends on what themes you want to explore

 

[Gurkhal]

So I would go for an "ancient" world above a modern one if I would write a story with lots of magic in it.

I actually like fantasy stasis because it allows more background in a specific theme or mood than having to compress or skip over things. This may sound weird for someone who writes gaslight fantasy but I've found a way to maintain a relative stasis despite choice of setting.

 

[skip.knox]

>So, which approach would be better?
Define "better". More specifically, do you mean which option ought you to choose for your next project? Which option has proved more successful (as counted by books sold)? Which option do I personally prefer?

To put it another way, what sort of guidance are you seeking?

 

[Mad Swede]

Hmm. What are these intriguing themes that feel timeless that you feel need an ancient setting to explore? Is there any reason you think they couldn't be explored in a modern setting? I'm not sure I agree that some themes need a certain sort of setting to explore, so I'd be interested to hear your reasoning.

 

[Devor]

Better…. for what?

Using the real world comes with the baggage of the real world, which can affect your story’s themes. A fantasy world is better for getting readers to a clean slate where they’re more open. A modern fantasy world is somewhere in between. So it depends on what you’re trying to do.

 

[Insolent Lad]

I've set stories in my primary fantasy world ranging from a neolithic civilization to an analog of the late Renaissance and I can't say that I preferred one over another nor that any of them was more satisfying to write. I like being able to explore them all.

 

[pmmg]

Let me explain: the concept of "magic" can be applied to any world setting. In a more ancient world, you can explore intriguing themes that feel timeless... Conversely, in a more modern world, you can showcase how technology and magic intersect, illustrating their evolution and relationship with other things.

So, which approach would be better?

I hate to say, but this whole question if a this or that fallacy, cause I can explore technology in an ancient world and explore magic in a modern one, and I can have a wide myriad of permutations of everything in between. And there would never be a 'better' just which is more interesting to me to tell. With good execution both, or all, of these approaches can be the next best seller.

While it is true that technology evolves, and it would make sense that there would be less of it as I go back in time, I can still write a story where technology exists and is sophisticated. Perhaps Atlantis did exist and had wild and strange contraptions, or perhaps those ancient aliens really did build the pyramids.

For me personally, I am writing a tale that I kind of loosely place in the 1200's, but it could easily be 1500's or such, depending on what shows up. What time period is the Belgaraid or LOTR written in. I am with in the same realm. Its sketchy. You one see any automobiles, but Malik might come on and say....hey, you cant have steel like that in your world, where are the blast furnaces? I don't know....the story does not focus on the crafting

After the fantasy story, my next one will be in space. There will be a lot of technology. But for me, the themes are always about gods and religion, so I am sure faith and magic will still play a role. I think that one will be two books. I have the first one mapped out in my head. The second one...I have very little to work with yet.

I think in answer to the question, which approach will be better, is whatever one you choose.

 

[Devor]

I think in answer to the question, which approach will be better, is whatever one you choose.

If your goal is just to tell an amazing story, then this is absolutely true.

But if there's something you're trying to achieve thematically, it does start to make a difference.

To give a really specific if kind of rambling example, if you wanted to tell a story that looks at life working in the postal service, and is intended to help readers better relate and empathize with the postman, then this becomes a serious question. The more fantasy the world is, the less the readers' initial perception of a postman will matter, but also the weaker the applicable effect of your story will be, other things equal. I enjoyed Going Postal, by Terry Pratchett, because it wasn't a serious look at the postal service, yet it strangely still sticks with me when I think of a postman, if not in a way that's at all practical. If you made it more modern and realistic, the more you can hit the postal services' real world themes, but also the more resistant your audience becomes, because your audience will increasingly bring in outside opinions and experiences and baggage with them. "This guy keeps whining about his postal job. I had it much worse when I was...." Of course, Going Postal is both fantasy and comedy, making it a double threat when it comes to lowering your audience's resistance, and also double the weakness for going deep with its meaning.

I know that's rambling, but the point is in there.

 

[Prince of Spires]

Personal opinion, but when looked at from a distance, setting is just window dressing. It's important window dressing, and it's one of the reasons why we read certain works and dislike others. But it's still just window dressing. You can tell any tale in any setting and explore the same themes.

Just as an example, but Titanic (the movie) and Romeo and Juliet (the Shakespear one) and Westside Story (the musical set in 1950's New York) are all exactly the same tale. It's all about 2 people from different factions falling in love and the troubles they go through because of it. These settings are all about as different from each other as they can be.

And Going Postal is the same story as Way of Kings and as the Mighty Ducks (all three are underdog sports stories). Mistborn is a combination of My Fair Lady and The Italian Job. And don't get me started on the Hero's Journey (anything from The Hobbit to Star Wars and all the times that sit in between there).

Does that mean setting isn't important? No. It is important. Already it partially defines the genre you write in. It can also enhance the themes. It limits what the tale can and can't do. But any tale can be told in any setting. So if you're picking a setting, pick something you like as an author and enjoy writing in.

 

[Devor]

Just as an example, but Titanic (the movie) and Romeo and Juliet (the Shakespear one) and Westside Story (the musical set in 1950's New York) are all exactly the same tale. It's all about 2 people from different factions falling in love and the troubles they go through because of it. These settings are all about as different from each other as they can be.

And Going Postal is the same story as Way of Kings and as the Mighty Ducks (all three are underdog sports stories). Mistborn is a combination of My Fair Lady and The Italian Job. And don't get me started on the Hero's Journey (anything from The Hobbit to Star Wars and all the times that sit in between there).

They're only similar on the surface of a beat sheet. Romeo and Juliet, Westside Story, and Titanic all have significantly different takes on their themes of romance and family pressure. Of relevance, both Titanic and Romeo and Juliet use their archaic romanticized settings to build up the magic-like intensity of their first loves (Juliet chooses to die for hers, while Rose moves on but never quite stops longing for hers), which the more modern and realistic Westside Story never quite achieves (the "dumb kids, jackass adults" feeling is much stronger than the romance's "magic").

 

[Prince of Spires]

Rose stilling longing for her first love wasn't because of the setting. It was because they used it as a frame story, and if she'd stopped caring then that whole episode where she tells of how she met Jack would have felt silly. They could have told all three versions in all three settings, with only minor tweaks, mainly on the character level. Also, keep in mind that for Shakespear, the tale isn't set in some mythical past, it's set about 2 years before he was born...

I'm not saying that setting wont have an impact on the plot. Of course it will. You can't tell Mistborn in the setting of the Italian Job, simply because there's no magic there. But that's just the surface plot. It doesn't matter for the themes you want to tell.

Just to take an example from the OP, you most certainly can showcase how technology and magic intersect in an ancient setting. Half the discworld novels are this (which slowly turned the setting towards steampunk). You would just change the technologies. You can pick any theme and tell a great story with it in any setting.

 

[Devor]

Also, keep in mind that for Shakespear, the tale isn't set in some mythical past, it's set about 2 years before he was born...

I don't want to get into a big back and forth, but I do want to respond to this one point. Romeo and Juliet was written in 1597, England. It's set in Verona, Italy, somewhere in the 1300s.

Here's an excerpt on this setting from the play's SparkNotes page.

Even if Shakespeare’s audience hadn’t been familiar with da Porto’s story of Veronese lovers, Romeo and Juliet’s Italian setting would still have signaled that the play is about extreme passions. In Shakespeare’s day, many people shared the popular belief that hot climates induced passionate behaviors. Benvolio, for instance, worries about encountering the Capulets because “[F]or now, these hot days, is the mad blood stirring” (III.i.4). But Italy was particularly associated with romantic passion, a fact Shakespeare alludes to when Mercutio teases Romeo for imitating the language of an Italian poet famous for his love sonnets: “Now is he for the numbers Petrarch flowed in” (II.iv.14). Shakespeare also reflects the popular belief that Italian women are more sexually passionate than English women when he gives Juliet explicitly erotic language. It’s therefore likely that English Renaissance audiences would have believed that Romeo and Juliet’s intense passion for one another resulted in part from the Italian climate and culture, and not solely from their individual choices. In this sense, the Italian setting reinforces the play’s overarching theme that the lovers cannot escape their fate.

And, what I want to say here, is that these are all part of the choices you're making in a story. All of those choices matter. Maybe you get to decide how they matter - how you want to use them, which elements of them you want to develop and play into - but these choices still become part of the story.

Each element you bring into your story comes with a bundle of emotions, connotations, and expectations that you will need to work with to tell the best story you can.

 

[A. E. Lowan]

Personally - and bear in mind I am a thoroughly mediocre writer and as such all advice is highly subjective - I think that there is no "better." There is no "right way." There is only your way, your characters, and your story. Writing is the Olympics of You Do You. Everything else is just process. Thus, my advice is pretty simple. Write. Start at the beginning, continue until you get to the end, and then stop. It's a really amazing feel to type those last two, tiny words.

Do not be Lowan and not stop. Mistakes were made. Epilogues were truly not intended for what we make them do.

Good luck and godspeed. We're here for you.

 

[Elzyancksta]

Let me explain: the concept of "magic" can be applied to any world setting. In a more ancient world, you can explore intriguing themes that feel timeless... Conversely, in a more modern world, you can showcase how technology and magic intersect, illustrating their evolution and relationship with other things.

So, which approach would be better?

It's your matrix. It comes together in your story of which conflicts what and how you wanna fix

 

[Karlin]

You can write of a modern or future world as if it is an ancient world

 

[xena]

There’s no better option, I think it depends on the kind of story you want to tell.

 

[minta]

Neither is better. Good writing is what matters most. Character development, conflict, and storytelling are what make it great.

 

[Ricconi]

Let me explain: the concept of "magic" can be applied to any world setting. In a more ancient world, you can explore intriguing themes that feel timeless... Conversely, in a more modern world, you can showcase how technology and magic intersect, illustrating their evolution and relationship with other things.

So, which approach would be better?

I like a mixture of both, but it depends on the view the writer is going for. Magic can be woven into any scene.If I'm being honest