Building Fantasy Worlds in Fiction

For this week's writers roundtable, let's look at the idea of world building in fiction -- particularly in fantasy fiction this time. We'll explore world building in horror, pulp, and other genres in subsequent weeks, though, so don't worry. Your favorite genre is coming. But since world building is so important to the fantasy genre, let's start there.

How important is world building to a fantasy novel? What about fantasy short stories?

Jen Mulvihill: World building is not only important as a setting for your story but it also helps to shape and mold your character. A character becomes who and what they are by the world around them and their reactions to that world. If you put a character in an empty box that character is still going to react in someway to the empty box. Fantasy is all about world building because you are creating a place in most cases, that does not exist. You have to build the place in order to take the reader their and find out what and how the character(s) react, hence, creating a story.

Scott Sandridge: World building is very important, regardless of the genre. After all, if there's no overall world/setting for your characters to interact in, then there's not much story there because it'll all be happening in a static void.

Stephanie Osborn: Well, I'm just a tad bit out of genre here, in that I don't regularly write fantasy, but rather hard science fiction. A good bit of what has already been said is true across all genres, though. World building is important -- it is one of the things that lends reality to your story, possibly the biggest thing that lends reality to it. And it doesn't matter the story's length. But in a short story you do have to shorthand it a good bit. 

Logan Masterson: If your fantasy's set in a different world, it must be justified. The world must be an integral part of the story, or all the information it takes to set it up is really just wasted. Long or short form, the world and its features should almost be characters in their own right.

If the setting is more realistic, then it should either be set apart with telling details or interpreted with common threads. The best reason to use our own world in fantasy (call it urban if you like) is resonance.

Conversely, the best reason to build a strange new world is wonder, a sense of newness and possibility.

H. David Blalock: Good fantasy depends heavily on world building. The best architecture constructs a world of balance between opposing forces, with perhaps a referee influence in the middle to arbitrate or aggravate as the story requires. Stereotypes in fantasy literature are usually acceptable (sensitive to current real life issues) and archetypes make world-building skeletal structure more acceptable to the readers.

The traditional method in classic fantasy is the info-dump. Does that still work for modern readers or does it turn them away?

H. David Blalock: Modern readers don't seem to be as patient with the infodump as in the past. This is certainly a product of the visual media's current forays into the fantasy genre. On the other hand, much of what was previously needed to be included in an infodump is now very much more familiar due exactly to the visual media's influence.

K.S. Daniels: Infodumps suck. Period and no excuses. Sure you need to work the world building elements in early, say by the first three chapters, but make it relevant. Show it through a character interacting with this world (this also can be used to create tension!) Philip K Dick's Ubik does this perfectly.

Scott Sandridge: Infodump has always turned me away. Not even Tolkien bothered with infodump, just look at how richly detailed his world and history was when compared to how little of it is shown within the context of his stories minus the attached appendices (which was just added "fluff" for the fans).

Jen Mulvihill: I don't think readers like the info dump unless it is done in such a way that they don't feel like it's an info dump. For instance you would not start the story off info dumping the rather gradually introduce the information through clever conversation or scenes created around the character. 

Stephanie Osborn: Infodumps to me are not about world building, and to some extent are virtually impossible to eliminate in a hard SF story using extrapolations of cutting-edge theory. The majority of my readers are NOT going to be intimately familiar with M theory, and are NOT going to take the time to go look it up while still reading. I have to provide them at least an inkling of what it's about. That said, there are ways to introduce the material that somewhat disguises the infodump aspect. If the reference is a throwaway, an offhand comment, I don't even bother; the reader can pick up the necessaries in the context. Both in terms of world building and character establishment, there are certain shorthands that can be used to help establish the scene/character. There are those writers who say that some of these shorthands should never be used, but I disagree. For example, I do write dialect and accent into my characters where appropriate, though many writers consider that anathema. Why? That alone is a huge writer's shorthand to establishing the character. (E.g. you know right away that a guy with a Brooklyn accent did NOT grow up in California.) The same can be done -- within limits -- for an environment.

If you don't just info-dump, then how do you build a world for your readers?

Stephanie Osborn: The characters react to their environment, even if it is only subconsciously. These reactions are a shorthand to establishing it. Any reference to culture that creates, in the reader's mind, a similarity to an existing culture on Earth becomes a kind of shorthand to establishing the fictional culture. Look how readily Tolkien evokes Atlantis, or Norse/Viking culture, or Celtica, for example. No sooner do you as a reader draw the correlation between the Rohirrim and Viking/Norse culture, than you realize the Rohirrim will not be fighters to trifle with. Likewise in my Displaced Detective Series (okay -- shameless plug), if one of the characters refers to another as a "bloke," you know right away that said character is from a country with strong ties to Great Britain, even if not directly FROM the UK. If he says, "Good day to you," instead of "G'day," you've just eliminated Australia; et cetera ad infinitum ad nauseam. Now, that might seem like character building rather than world building, but it depends on the circumstances, because if this character is typical of his environment/culture, then you've just said a slew of things about that environment/culture. It all kind of blends into the whole.

H. David Blalock: Barring an infodump, usually allowing the main character to build his/her own backstory over the course of the first couple of chapters gives the reader enough information to become involved. Then, as needed, further information can be inserted as the character discovers it themselves.

Scott Sandridge: You build it one scene at a time, through dialogue, character interaction, (brief) descriptions of scenery, etc.

Jen Mulvihill: Slowly introduce your information, that way the reader feels like they have discovered something. Example: in The Lost Daughter of Easa, you don't find out all the information at one time about the Spider Witch but rather, learn a little bit about her throughout the book until near the end you finally get her full history and understand why she is doing what she is doing.

What are the pitfalls to avoid for beginning writers when laying out their new worlds for today's readers?

Scott Sandridge: Don't write a big 10-page long history lesson at the start of the story before you get to the actual start of the actual story.

Jen Mulvihill: Write what you know, read a lot, and finish the book. So many people tell me they are writing a novel but some have either never put pen to paper or they have been writing it for centuries. If you are going to do it, then do it, don't talk about it forever because that does not get the book written. Finish the book then ask now what? Don't put the carriage before the horse.

H. David Blalock: Problems to avoid for newer writers: unpronounceable names, unbelievable character interactions, lack of continuity in backstory versus plot... pretty much anything any writer of any genre might want to avoid.

The Opening Salvo -- Grabbing Readers from the First Sentence

Been a long time, but finally it's time for another writer-focused, practical, down to brass tacks (that enough cliches for you?) Bad Girls, Good Guys, and Two-Fisted Action roundtable interview. This time around let's talk about story openings, and what makes them really zing for readers to keep them going past the first sentence, paragraph, and page. 

As a reader, how much to story openings mean to your enjoyment of a book? Does a bad one make you put a book down and stop reading, or are you willing to forgive a bad one and hope a book gets better later?

Scott Sandridge: When I was younger I was willing to forgive a slow start, but as I got older and more jaded, and finding myself with less time, I became less and less forgiving of stories that don't hook me from the start.
 
Mark Koch: I am patient with slow or clumsy openings, but it does impact my opinion of the author. Once my disapproval radar is up, it tends to stay in effect. I'll read it, but I am far less likely to trust and pick up another book from the same author. So, I hope it gets better and typically grind it out but become very skeptical and will need much more to turn it around and allow myself to be impressed.

Tamara Lowery: I'll give it a chance, but only so far.

Lance Stahlberg: Conventional wisdom says you have to grab the reader in the first paragraph or they put it down. I give it at least the first few pages. Roughly the amount that Amazon lets you browse for free. That much is enough to give me a reflection of the writer's style, and set the tone of the story. If it doesn't grab me by page, say, 5, there's no point in continuing.

But that's me personally. For the public at large, I do not dismiss the power of first sentences.

I.A. Watson: Story openings are critical when the book or author is an unknown quantity. I'll tolerate a poor or slow start when I trust the writer or have already enjoyed a previous episode in a series. I'm less tolerant when I don't have previous quality assurances. The house is littered with volumes that failed to engage me by page 20.

Do story openings for different genres need to do different things? For example, in traditional fantasy, an world-building info-dump is still considered okay, even though that sort of thing would be heresy in a thriller. Or should story opening follow the same guidelines regardless of the genre?

Mark Koch: Regardless of genre, the opening is where the author introduces his or her style and makes the first connection with the reader. I don't care what you are writing -- unless it is an academic paper I need a reason to care pronto. An entertaining and vigorous introduction is a must.

Lance Stahlberg: I hate world building exposition dumps. Which might be why I've never been too huge a fan of high fantasy.  But even in that genre, all of my favorite books open with something happening. A demon awakening -- opening on the villain will rarely steer you wrong. A ship spotting a dragon. A thief in the middle of a job.

If you're going to open on setting, that setting better be REALLY cool and original. RA Salvatore got away with opening Homeland by waxing poetic about the Underdark because it was the freaking underdark. A setting like that demands a little extra time. But even in that one rare example... he kept it short. Four pages in, we are looking at Menzoberranzan through the eyes of a drow on an urgent mission. It's still exposition, but things are moving.

Very few settings need an introduction like that. By now, we've seen them all. Today's readers are savvy enough that they can fill in the blanks on their own. So bottom line is I'd say they should always follow the same general principals, regardless of whether it has aliens and space travel or orcs and magic. 

I.A. Watson: I'm actually suspicious of fantasy stories that require an infodump start -- especially a prologue infodump start -- because it suggests a lack of writer refinement. Okay, Tolkein could get away with it. Most of us aren't Tolkein.

The only real rule is to grab the reader and keep them reading. If you can do that with a long essay on the socio-political machinations of the dwarves then great.

Allow me also to add a grumpy caution about the opposite of the info-dump problem, the in media res fashion that explains nothing at all for the first 70 pages, counting on the reader's patience to hold out for motives, backstory, and relevance. I'm not usually that patient.

Tamara Lowery: I think it should function similarly regardless of genre. Personally, I think the opener should drag a reader into the story by the eyeballs THEN you can mess with world-building to let them orient themselves in the story.

Dave Brzeski: There's a related thing that I really hate. When the story starts with a POV character, but you're given no physical details whatsoever this character -- sometimes not even the gender. Then, 30 pages in, the author finally drops in an important detail, which almost always clashes with the version your imagination has made up, in the absense of that information. 

Scott Sandridge: A story needs a good hook, regardless of genre. Also, I don't believe in info-dumps. There's plenty of ways to get your world-building information across without long drawn out boring paragraphs going for pages and pages. And most times, the info-dump is often unnecessary, having no relevancy to the story. At the end of the day, it should be about writing a great story, not writing about how awesome your world is.

Do you go back and rewrite your opening many times or are you the type who can't move on until it's nearly perfect?

Scott Sandridge: No matter how much of the story I already know in my head, I can't even start on it until I have the first sentence down right. That's how important I feel that first sentence, first paragraph, first page is. But once that's done, I usually breeze through until I get to the ending...and then I obsess just as much over the ending.

Lance Stahlberg: A little of both. I have had to force myself to move on from an opening scene and come back to it.

The golden rule of action adventures is to open strong. But I actually hate it when books open too strong just for the sake of having an action scene. When I get too deep into a scene without having clue one about the who or why of what's happening, it has the opposite effect on me that the experts claim it should. I like to set the stage and have at least some intro to the characters.

What ends up happening is I write a relatively slow opening scene that does just that. I reread it. Realize it's too slow, then come back with a quick and dirty prelude to better set the tone that the rest of the story will take.

Again, conventional wisdom says to avoid prologues at all cost. But I think they can work really well when kept short, like a page or two at most.

I.A. Watson: Different things I write have different inspirations -- a concept, a piece of dialogue, a twist I want to use, even a title. Quite often it's the opening scene I want to get out of my head onto paper. A number of stories, even a novel, have started out as just a first scene. Of course, some fisrt scenes have stayed there and never progressed to a second.

I always revisit the first scene at the end of the writing process. Since it was probably the first bit I wrote, the story and style might have been refined in the subsequent 100,000 words so it needs checking for tone. It must have page-turning impact, so it needs some extra polish. The danger is that in tinkering I lose that original spark that made it a good scene in the first place.

Tamara Lowery: Rewrites can wait until time for revisions and edits prior to and after submission. Write it once, let it sit, then go back later with a fresh mind.

What makes an story opening effective? What makes you want to keep reading?

Mark Koch: I can be indulged to care with action, or emotion, or intellectual gymnastics. Paint a fun alternate reality or draw up a curious character. Slap something unexpectedly violent across the windshield. But you had better give my mind a toy to play with before it gets bored. Clever prose can do it, but clever storytelling is a better bet.

Lance Stahlberg: Movement. Always be in motion. It doesn't necessarily need to be violent, explosive action. But the reader wants to follow somebody and see events unfold through their eyes right out of the gate.

And humor. Even the most serious story should be presented with healthy doses of humor, and I want to see that up front.

Scott Sandridge: The opening of the story has to get you asking "What's this? what's going on? I need to know more!" It needs to introduce the main protagonist, or at least someone just as important (like the main antagonist), set up the situation, and provide the motivations to get the character going. In a short story that has to be done within the first page or two. In a novel, before the first chapter has ended.
 

I.A. Watson: The reader has to care about or wonder about something or someone. The reader must invest. Either we like - or hate - a character or situation, or we're intrigued by an event.

Think of the start of Ian Banks' The Crow Road -- "It was the day my grandmother exploded." Nobody could avoid reading the next line. And the next, and the next, and it unfolds from there. Think of Lessa's awakening at the start of Anne McCaffery's Dragonflight and how her fantasy world naturally unveils from there.

A word of caution, though. As a seasoned, cynical, critical reader I am very suspicious now of books that start with a prophecy poem. Tolkein nailed it with "One ring to rule them all..." Other prophecies need not apply.

Prologues are a controversial topic too. I've had publishers request them added and others ask them to be deleted. My general rule is that unless you can quantify what value they add, other than making the author look clever on a second read, then they're best left until you are Stephen King popular and can do whatever you like. Use them if there's good reason. Otherwise, go straight for your readers' jugulars and never let go till they wake up buying the sequel.

Tamara Lowery: Interesting character(s); interesting, fun, or emotionally gripping action; and the kind of location you'd like to visit, can relate to, or hope to God is NOT a real place.