Comments on: BSS #105: China Miéville http://www.edrants.com/bss-105-china-mieville/ a cultural website in ever-shifting standing Wed, 08 Feb 2012 18:01:24 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: Stephen R. Smith http://www.edrants.com/bss-105-china-mieville/comment-page-1/#comment-232734 Stephen R. Smith Sun, 15 Apr 2007 02:59:56 +0000 http://www.edrants.com/?p=5824#comment-232734 I can look at this in two ways; first, a story that is merely a world building exercise and doesn't bother to tell a compelling story is not a story I'm interested in reading. I can imagine writing that creates interesting worlds, introduces fascinating characters, but does nothing with either, may be a wonderful exercise in language and worldbuilding, but will be painfully disappointing to consume. At the very least it will leave you unfulfilled at the end when you've invested yourself entirely in something the author can't bring themselves to do anything meaningful with. The second way to look at this, that worldbuilding is not an entirely necessary precursor to writing a good story I think is complete crap. If you're writing in a world that's not fictional, or it's fictional aspects are so narrowly deviant from a real world that you're intimately acquainted with, then sure - don't map it out first as you've got a live model in your head. I'd argue in this sense that you've been worldbuilding all your life, and you're now able to write from within it comfortably without any extra planning. If, however, you're writing a story set in a world that doesn't and can't possibly exist, then you have to spend a fair amount of time to define it before you start writing or else you're bound to deal with something inconsistently, and your readers are going to catch you out on it. If your readers can't trust you to put in the effort to understand the world you're writing about, then why should they put forth the effort to read it? I can look at this in two ways; first, a story that is merely a world building exercise and doesn’t bother to tell a compelling story is not a story I’m interested in reading. I can imagine writing that creates interesting worlds, introduces fascinating characters, but does nothing with either, may be a wonderful exercise in language and worldbuilding, but will be painfully disappointing to consume. At the very least it will leave you unfulfilled at the end when you’ve invested yourself entirely in something the author can’t bring themselves to do anything meaningful with.

The second way to look at this, that worldbuilding is not an entirely necessary precursor to writing a good story I think is complete crap. If you’re writing in a world that’s not fictional, or it’s fictional aspects are so narrowly deviant from a real world that you’re intimately acquainted with, then sure – don’t map it out first as you’ve got a live model in your head. I’d argue in this sense that you’ve been worldbuilding all your life, and you’re now able to write from within it comfortably without any extra planning. If, however, you’re writing a story set in a world that doesn’t and can’t possibly exist, then you have to spend a fair amount of time to define it before you start writing or else you’re bound to deal with something inconsistently, and your readers are going to catch you out on it. If your readers can’t trust you to put in the effort to understand the world you’re writing about, then why should they put forth the effort to read it?

]]> By: Plain Jane http://www.edrants.com/bss-105-china-mieville/comment-page-1/#comment-232521 Plain Jane Sat, 14 Apr 2007 15:58:50 +0000 http://www.edrants.com/?p=5824#comment-232521 To be a good world-builder, or a good writer, is it also necessary to be extremely attractive? To be a good world-builder, or a good writer, is it also necessary to be extremely attractive?

]]>