What is good worldbuilding?

[Demesnedenoir]

I think this is where the internet can do wonders for the reader who wants deeper info into the world. The novel itself should be tight, nothing that mucks up the clean story (too many writers plop down would building diseased words all over), but having a website that is more than about self-promotion "ME! The author! Look at me!" where you can layout cut chapters, historical short stories, character backgrounds, maps, etc., is just a wonderful opportunity for fans to geek out. That's my goal with my website. By reading book one, you won't know what a Maimer or Mercy is... but if you want additional info, it's on my website. Now in book 2, I get to talk about the Maimers and the Mercies because it makes sense to fill it that blank in the history at that point. How did the MC end up where the story begins? Sure the book gives it a quick necessary pass, but a short story will answer the questions in detail that wouldn't make sense to stick in the novel/prologue.

Right. But the foreshadowing (or perhaps side-shadowing?) is indeed there! With Tolkien, as with the Bible, you really need to read his four novels with authoritative guidance: the HoME and the Appendices by your side ready for consultation. Perhaps even a copy of Letters! There are a lot of things about Ents and Tom Bombadil and Pukel Men (and even Numenoreans and the Men of the North) that become much clearer after reading further than the actual story.

That's a lot of worldbuilding! While a reader does not need to delve into the histories of Men of earlier ages to enjoy the story, all that is there for those that do, and I think it will enrich the experience. I've read loads of fantasy over the years, and have often wished the author would have cared enough for the worldbuilding aspect of her craft enough to immerse me all the further into the experience.

 

[elemtilas]

I think this is where the internet can do wonders for the reader who wants deeper info into the world. The novel itself should be tight, nothing that mucks up the clean story (too many writers plop down would building diseased words all over), but having a website that is more than about self-promotion "ME! The author! Look at me!" where you can layout cut chapters, historical short stories, character backgrounds, maps, etc., is just a wonderful opportunity for fans to geek out. That's my goal with my website. By reading book one, you won't know what a Maimer or Mercy is... but if you want additional info, it's on my website. Now in book 2, I get to talk about the Maimers and the Mercies because it makes sense to fill it that blank in the history at that point. How did the MC end up where the story begins? Sure the book gives it a quick necessary pass, but a short story will answer the questions in detail that wouldn't make sense to stick in the novel/prologue.

Oo, excellent points! We may not agree on what constitutes a "clean story" without "world building disease" plopped all over the place; but the idea of the author putting up her own website with ephemeral material, we definitely agree on.

I think it's important that the author does this herself, because the internet can also be the absolute bane of readers who want to delve deeper. I can't think of how many fan sites I've read with well constructed and considered "theories" as to who Tom Bombadil is. (e.g., he is Illuvatar; he is Tolkien himself; because he sings all the time, he is the Music embodied; he is a Maia (after all, Gandalf seems pretty keen on having a long chat with him towards the end of LotR); he is a Vala; he's an Elf; he's something entirely unique). It's almost deflationary, really, but you just have to open up Letters and Tolkien himself dispels the myths.

And yes indeed, a website with stories and lore is a good bait for people who haven't read your books while simultaneously being a treasure trove of lore for those who have.

 

[elemtilas]

Which brings us to presentation. It's not enough to create content in advance and connect it to the rest of the world. You have to apply it in ways that the readers can see the connection. When a story requires external sources for everything to fit together, it's a failure of the author to make proper use of the medium of novel.

The operative word here being "requires". Like I said, one does not need to delve into those external resources in order to enjoy a well crafted history. But on the other hand, you really can't put all that stuff into a single work either! One way or the other, the author simply has to bring us to an episode with a people we've never met and have no specific previous knowledge of and we as readers simply have to accept that we are not going to learn every fact about every person, place, object, people or history within the confines of the story. They have their part to play in the story and that's good enough. The external resources are there for those as want to delve deeper.

Perhaps also, writing when he did and in the manner that he did, Tolkien expects much of his readers. Intelligence, observational skills, able to make connexions not explicit within the text, imagination to put it all together. I could just as easily have added to the list of Middle Earth specific resources "a knowledge of a thousand years of Germanic folklore, mythology, history; a knowledge of deep historical philology; general world mythology; history of post-agricultural England; history of World War I; as well as psychology of the veteran."

There are many levels on which we can enjoy Tolkien. I certainly enjoyed the sweep and action when I was eight and reading it the first time. I enjoyed it twenty after studying Old Norse and Gothic and Anglo-Saxon. I enjoyed it at forty after studying mythology and folklore and turn of the 20th century rural England and historical factors of the War. If he neglected to apply some minor connexion for me so that he could show me how and where two things join up, well, I can forgive him that failure! But honestly, I think I'd have a much harder time forgiving myself for requiring that every author spoon feeds me every idea and connexion between ideas in his work! I've read novels like that. They seem to be aimed at kids who are used to being spoon fed every little tidbit of mush.

 

[Miles Lacey]

My idea of great fantasy world building is when the author hasn't just churned out yet another variation of Middle Earth or the world of Dungeons and Dragons. In short they have made some attempt to create a fantasy world that is genuinely different. That was what impressed me with the TV cartoon series The Legend of Korra. Here we had a fantasy world that could not possibly be mistaken for anything even remotely connected with the likes of J R R Tolkien, Dungeons and Dragons or George R R Martin because the inspiration for their world was Shanghai and New York in the 1920s. Brandon Sanderson also created some very memorable world building in his Mistborn series and a key thing that made it memorable was that it combined the Wild West with steampunk. Even J K Rowling's Harry Potter series has created memorable world building because it combines elements of a contemporary 21st Century UK with the hidden magical world that is most definitely Victorian English (although the British boarding school genre with fantasy elements aspect of the Harry Potter universe reminds me too much of the Enid Blyton books I endured as a young kid).

 

[Yora]

I think the best and most original worldbuilding is still Morrowind. It alone is the sole reason an otherwise completely forgetable game is still regarded as a legendary classic. Barely any humans, no Earth animals, unique plants, weird animals, three immortals worshiped as gods, who are opposed by the traditonal demon worshippers.
Such a great world, wasted on such a bland game.

 

[Demesnedenoir]

Yeah, the line between goodness and disease is blurry, LOL. As a reader, I personally give the writer a lot of leeway. But as long as it's seamless and is necessary to the story, stuff as much as you can in. That's my theory.

As a writer... well, it probably depends on who you ask, LOL. But, I don't slather out history unless it's relevant... even if the reader doesn't know that.

Oo, excellent points! We may not agree on what constitutes a "clean story" without "world building disease" plopped all over the place; but the idea of the author putting up her own website with ephemeral material, we definitely agree on.

I think it's important that the author does this herself, because the internet can also be the absolute bane of readers who want to delve deeper. I can't think of how many fan sites I've read with well constructed and considered "theories" as to who Tom Bombadil is. (e.g., he is Illuvatar; he is Tolkien himself; because he sings all the time, he is the Music embodied; he is a Maia (after all, Gandalf seems pretty keen on having a long chat with him towards the end of LotR); he is a Vala; he's an Elf; he's something entirely unique). It's almost deflationary, really, but you just have to open up Letters and Tolkien himself dispels the myths.

And yes indeed, a website with stories and lore is a good bait for people who haven't read your books while simultaneously being a treasure trove of lore for those who have.

 

[elemtilas]

Yeah, the line between goodness and disease is blurry, LOL. As a reader, I personally give the writer a lot of leeway. But as long as it's seamless and is necessary to the story, stuff as much as you can in. That's my theory.

As a writer... well, it probably depends on who you ask, LOL. But, I don't slather out history unless it's relevant... even if the reader doesn't know that.

For some definition of a "line", it might even be quite thick in parts! Lots of room for interpretation. As a reader, I'm more inclined to prefer writing that is a little heavier on the worldbuilding. Meaty and interesting. But not so much that I lose track of the story! I'm by no means anything like a professional writer and have never even conceived of writing a novel length work, but I think I tend towards writing this way intuitively. (Well, with a couple exceptions!)

The stories I've written I can't recall ever plopping too much "fluff" in there. The in-world books are a different story altogether. By definition, those are 100% unadulterated worldbuilding. And a heaping helping at that. But that's a different kind of writing based on a different premise: lore from within versus narrative from without.

 

[Firefly]

As a reader, the primary thing I want the worldbuilding in a book to achieve is tone. I want it to be immersive, I want there to be specific details that bring it to life in my mind, and I want it to have a certain feel to it. Almost like character voice, but for the setting. I don't think that creating a unique axis and weird seasons and a complicated social structure are necessarily needed for that; you can have a very traditional fantasy setting that still has a strong sense of place. I think the problem many fantasy books have with a "boring tolkien background" isn't so much that the settings aren't original, it's that they're vague and aren't thought through.
That said, I do like books that go somewhere new with the worldbuilding. Those weird astrological phenomenon and social structures can be super fun to read about, but I think they serve a different purpose, and they shouldn't be in the book unless they add to the tone or contribute to the story you're trying to tell.
The Mistborn books are a good example. They contain a ridiculous amount of worldbuilding information, but it works, because the story is about understanding the magic, and the reader actually cares about it.
Then you have something like Harry Potter. The worldbuilding in the HP universe makes less and less sense the further you go, but feels so real on a surface level that it doesn't matter.

 

[Yora]

In one interview George Miller was asked how they came up with the idea in Fury Road to have a guy with a flamethrower guitar on the roof of a truck at the head of the war party. And his reply was "It is perfectly logical."
And really, within the worldbuilding shown by this movie, it just does.