On Relevance

[pmmg]

Trad publishing has this to offer: the badly-written story will be seen by only a few eyes, whereas the self-published disaster will be paraded up and down the streets (at least for a little while).

Are you saying my child is ugly?

I consider world-building to be a collection of unique facts about the secondary world that has been created.

I feel compelled to counter this a little and say, even if you are using the real world (Earth as we know it), there is still world building. One may think setting something here on the blue planet, means we can assume the reader knows the world, but really they don't as it applies to your story. So much of the world, and its places, have so many different facets to them, that it is impossible to capture them all, and one must direct readers to the ones that matter. If I just take Chicago, and want to tell a story about gangsters, I am unlikely to show aspects of the city that do not lend themselves to the Gangster narrative, and likewise, I am probably going to leave the gangsters out if I am telling a story about love in the same city. (Though I suppose you can have the gangsters shoot down the young couple in love on valentines day if you want to bring them together...)

I must still present the world in a suggestive way that helps build the atmosphere for my story, and keeps the reader focused on the things that matter to it. I never really get to say, its Earth, so I can skip it.

 

[skip.knox]

No child is ugly, but some are poorly dressed. <g>

All your children, however, are above average. <also g>

 

[pmmg]

I had to look <g> up, that is old school

 

[skip.knox]

One of the small pleasures of getting old is being able to make references the young folks don't get. Turnabout is fair play, sez I.

 

[Prince of Spires]

No child is ugly, but some are poorly dressed.

I partially disagree. I've seen a fair few babies, and most of them are ugly. Fortunately, many of them seem to grow out of it....

 

[Incanus]

I feel compelled to counter this a little and say, even if you are using the real world (Earth as we know it), there is still world building. One may think setting something here on the blue planet, means we can assume the reader knows the world, but really they don't as it applies to your story. So much of the world, and its places, have so many different facets to them, that it is impossible to capture them all, and one must direct readers to the ones that matter. If I just take Chicago, and want to tell a story about gangsters, I am unlikely to show aspects of the city that do not lend themselves to the Gangster narrative, and likewise, I am probably going to leave the gangsters out if I am telling a story about love in the same city. (Though I suppose you can have the gangsters shoot down the young couple in love on valentines day if you want to bring them together...)

I must still present the world in a suggestive way that helps build the atmosphere for my story, and keeps the reader focused on the things that matter to it. I never really get to say, its Earth, so I can skip it.

What you have described here makes me think of yet another term we see from time to time: story world. To me, these are the chosen details that are relevant to the story--hey, at least I managed to circle around to Skip's main point again(!)

Mostly, I like my original definition for world-building. But, I fully acknowledge that it is merely my own and that most folks use a wider definition (which is often indistinguishable from 'setting' the way I see it).

 

[skip.knox]

I can offer some extensions to "setting", for your amusement.

One, character. This works best if dealing with a series. What I have found is that I have one set of ideas of a character at the beginning, but as the story idea progresses, the ideas about character both change and grow. So, I do have a section in my WorldReference that is specific to recurring characters. This ranges from simple matters such as physical characteristics to complex backstories and relationships between characters. This, indeed, happens within a standalone novel, but such character notes are kept within the project (that is, along with the files that comprise the story itself). With a series, though, I need to consult the World Reference to help ensure continuity across novels. So there's one extension to Setting.

Lore is a second extension. I use this term to include everything from local legends to origins of gods to actual history. It's "stuff that has happened" along with "stuff that is believed to have happened". Here again, there's some need of this in a standalone, but the need become greater when dealing with a series. It's not Setting, strictly speaking, but is more like background or backstory. When our adventuring party rolls into TownA in Novel2, it needs to be the same place as what they encountered in Novel1. I take Setting to mean the physical layout of the city. I take Lore to mean local heroes, founding legends, and so on. A bit of a fine point, I grant.

Plot is a third. Here, I mean the obvious: while there's an arc to each character, a plot to each novel, in certain kinds of series there is also an over-arching plot. This isn't really setting, but it absolutely needs to be tracked somewhere. Oh, hi, WorldReference! Fancy meeting you here.

I offer this not meaning to persuade anyone but to present possibilities to those who are first embarking on this whole Story Bible idea. And also to correct those who egregiously err. <g>

 

[A. E. Lowan]

I partially disagree. I've seen a fair few babies, and most of them are ugly. Fortunately, many of them seem to grow out of it....

I can agree with that. I was an ugly little baby. Looked like a troll doll. But I did become a stinking cute toddler.

 

[pmmg]

I can agree with that. I was an ugly little baby. Looked like a troll doll. But I did become a stinking cute toddler.

View attachment 3939

So cute