My fantasy world, called Altearth, is elaborate and detailed, mainly because I keep most of normal Earth history then mix in fantasy elements. While I have written various bits of backstory, I mainly try to concentrate on writing an actual novel or short story and create the new elements only as needed for the story.
Lately, I have noticed a phenomenon. Call it story lock or narrowing horizons, the phenomenon is where I have decided to have a fantasy element appear at a time and place, now that becomes a fixed event. Certain things cannot happen because of that event. If I have elves appear in great fleets on the Atlantic coast because their homeland sank beneath the ocean, and this happened in the seventh century, I can't have them appear in a story in the fifth century in Egypt.
The more events I lock into place, the more restricted are my choices. The most significant effects so far are decisions about *why* things happen (why did their homeland sink?) and *how* things work, especially how magic works. Once those decisions are made, all stories must conform.
This was unexpected. I tell myself it will be a spur to creativity, and on alternate Tuesdays I'm convincing. But I also am toying with the Tobacco Road model (blow it up, start all over again). I can still get away with this by saying, well, that's how people *thought* things worked, or where legend *says* they came from. Or, that they did appear much earlier but left no permanent mark (think Leif Ericsson and Columbus).
I was wondering if other folks have encountered this narrowing of choices and how they've dealt with it. I do know that established authors have sometimes had to resort to living with inconsistencies and even with contradictions, as their understanding of their own creation has evolved.
Lately, I have noticed a phenomenon. Call it story lock or narrowing horizons, the phenomenon is where I have decided to have a fantasy element appear at a time and place, now that becomes a fixed event. Certain things cannot happen because of that event. If I have elves appear in great fleets on the Atlantic coast because their homeland sank beneath the ocean, and this happened in the seventh century, I can't have them appear in a story in the fifth century in Egypt.
The more events I lock into place, the more restricted are my choices. The most significant effects so far are decisions about *why* things happen (why did their homeland sink?) and *how* things work, especially how magic works. Once those decisions are made, all stories must conform.
This was unexpected. I tell myself it will be a spur to creativity, and on alternate Tuesdays I'm convincing. But I also am toying with the Tobacco Road model (blow it up, start all over again). I can still get away with this by saying, well, that's how people *thought* things worked, or where legend *says* they came from. Or, that they did appear much earlier but left no permanent mark (think Leif Ericsson and Columbus).
I was wondering if other folks have encountered this narrowing of choices and how they've dealt with it. I do know that established authors have sometimes had to resort to living with inconsistencies and even with contradictions, as their understanding of their own creation has evolved.