World Biulding
Greetings. All things considered I don’t consider myself an authority on writing. As a dyslexic I have problems writing. If my speech to text software puts in the wrong word I might not notice, and I also have problems figuring out where the punctuation should go.
For the most part I write by instinct. I also to a degree observe how other people write. When it comes to world building I have found the most effective world building tends to not take a lot of words. When the author spends too much time describing the world it slows down the block and often leaves me with a poorer picture of their world. Jules Vern whose writing I do like has a tendency, particularly in Twenty Thousand Leagues under the Sea, to waste substantial time to world building. There were entire chapters in his writing that could be dropped and would only improve the story. He often gave too much detail and the main character in Twenty Thousand Leagues under the Sea had an amazing ability to give detailed analysis of what the ship was doing when he was standing on deck. He described how many RPM the ship engine was running it, how fast it was going (without any references around) and a number of other details at the beginning of the book. Strangely enough it didn’t benefit the story at all.
On the other hand I have read short stories that had far better world building. It was never detailed with exact information, but the brief descriptions left me with a much better view of the world. In one it took place in a small cabin on a cliff, overlooking a gray in stormy sea (the story involved mermaids) but I had a far better picture of the small area of the world, then I have from far more detailed descriptions of worlds.
The other detail that improves world building for me is when the characters in the story interact with the world. It’s far more effective if the character interacts then it is if it’s just described. For example if a book described a street as a narrow lane with gray cobblestones, I wouldn’t see it is well as if it described it as follows the main character headed down the narrow lane, his boots clicking on the gray cobblestones. In the second description I can sort of see the lane in the first it’s just a relatively nondescript place. As such when I’m writing I tried to give to a degree minimal descriptions and more interaction. It seems to me that interaction gives you a better view of the story. Of course since everybody is a little different it may not be the same for other individuals. Some people may actually like the first description better.
In my books it also means that on many characters you can decide what they look like at least to a degree as the reader. I do put in some descriptions but not the full details. For example Talida is described as having blood red hair (but I never say how long), steely gray eyes, standing six feet tall and being somewhat slender. I always pictured her as looking somewhat like a CrossFit athlete, but somebody else might see her quite differently. I had sort of based what her capabilities were based on watching the CrossFit games and giving her a similar level of capabilities to the various women who competed. That’s not her fighting abilities, but her athletic abilities.
For the most part I write by instinct. I also to a degree observe how other people write. When it comes to world building I have found the most effective world building tends to not take a lot of words. When the author spends too much time describing the world it slows down the block and often leaves me with a poorer picture of their world. Jules Vern whose writing I do like has a tendency, particularly in Twenty Thousand Leagues under the Sea, to waste substantial time to world building. There were entire chapters in his writing that could be dropped and would only improve the story. He often gave too much detail and the main character in Twenty Thousand Leagues under the Sea had an amazing ability to give detailed analysis of what the ship was doing when he was standing on deck. He described how many RPM the ship engine was running it, how fast it was going (without any references around) and a number of other details at the beginning of the book. Strangely enough it didn’t benefit the story at all.
On the other hand I have read short stories that had far better world building. It was never detailed with exact information, but the brief descriptions left me with a much better view of the world. In one it took place in a small cabin on a cliff, overlooking a gray in stormy sea (the story involved mermaids) but I had a far better picture of the small area of the world, then I have from far more detailed descriptions of worlds.
The other detail that improves world building for me is when the characters in the story interact with the world. It’s far more effective if the character interacts then it is if it’s just described. For example if a book described a street as a narrow lane with gray cobblestones, I wouldn’t see it is well as if it described it as follows the main character headed down the narrow lane, his boots clicking on the gray cobblestones. In the second description I can sort of see the lane in the first it’s just a relatively nondescript place. As such when I’m writing I tried to give to a degree minimal descriptions and more interaction. It seems to me that interaction gives you a better view of the story. Of course since everybody is a little different it may not be the same for other individuals. Some people may actually like the first description better.
In my books it also means that on many characters you can decide what they look like at least to a degree as the reader. I do put in some descriptions but not the full details. For example Talida is described as having blood red hair (but I never say how long), steely gray eyes, standing six feet tall and being somewhat slender. I always pictured her as looking somewhat like a CrossFit athlete, but somebody else might see her quite differently. I had sort of based what her capabilities were based on watching the CrossFit games and giving her a similar level of capabilities to the various women who competed. That’s not her fighting abilities, but her athletic abilities.
No comments have been added yet.
