Is worldbuilding pointless?

[Ursa major]

I think that quote makes a good point, Ian: there is no long scientific explanantion, but we know that something is producing the oxygen; better than that, it fits in with a major thread of the series: the search for the "truth" about Arrakis.

So we have story, we have explanantion and we have a further mystery. And it's concise. Excellent.

[iansales]

Originally Posted by Sephiroth

Ian, I see your point, but that's only if the writer is (a) clumsy and (b) unable to keep their world-building and their narrative separate. I don't disagree that extraneous detail can ruin a story, but it isn't because the world-building's been done, it's because the narrative-writing hasn't been handled well.

Well, yes. Which was my point :-) I only added that excessive world-building can lead to a temptation to include all the detail in the story - often to the story's detriment. I suppose it's a variation on "kill all your darlings". :-)

Ursa major - yes, the quote is succint. But don't forget there's also an appendix which goes into greater detail :-)

Having said that, Dune is an unusual novel. If Herbert had written it today, it's doubtful it would be published. Even though it was rejected by 16 publishers back in 1965, before eventually being picked up by Chilton.

[Ursa major]

But it's an appendix: the reader doesn't have to read it, it's free and not (badly) written by someone else just to feed off another's genius.

We are lucky that anyone would publish some of the works we now think of as the greats. (We cannot know, of course, what we have missed.)

[iansales]

Originally Posted by Ursa major

But it's an appendix: the reader doesn't have to read it, it's free and not (badly) written by someone else just to feed off another's genius.

Is that a comment on the recent prequels and sequels? ;-)

Originally Posted by Ursa major

We are lucky that anyone would publish some of the works we now think of as the greats. (We cannot know, of course, what we have missed.)

Watch the small presses. That's where it happens now. The major publishing houses have the distribution, but the small presses can afford to take chances they can't.

[Giovanna Clairval]

Point taken, Ian.

I had forgotten that detail... and I'm not the only one:

Big mistakes in sf.

And I still think that we agree on the essence.
Worldbuilding is pointless when badly done.

[Marvolo]

Originally Posted by Giovanna Clairval

Point taken, Ian.

I had forgotten that detail... and I'm not the only one:

Big mistakes in sf.

And I still think that we agree on the essence.
Worldbuilding is pointless when badly done.

Aye, just as well written worlds don't save horribly written novels. So after all that discussion everyone just sort of agrees that less is more with world description. Ben Bova was fond of saying that the majority of the setting should be inferred through character's cultural reactions and dialogue/thought from the central characters in the narrative. He wasn't fond of using lots of narrative description to depict the worlds he built. I think that is a good way to go about it, personally.

[Giovanna Clairval]

Originally Posted by Marvolo

Ben Bova was fond of saying that the majority of the setting should be inferred through character's cultural reactions and dialogue/thought from the central characters in the narrative. He wasn't fond of using lots of narrative description to depict the worlds he built. I think that is a good way to go about it, personally.

It is easier--and mandatory--not to sink into narrative description when the novel is written in the first person: you don't explain to yourself what you already know.
Still, the Editor grumps as well about too much concision (editors grump anyway). And the same reason that makes the first person narrative easier, makes it also more difficult because... you don't explain to yourself what you already know.
If your world is complex (mine is), and, you don't wish to powder your novel with a lot of exposition (I don't), writing those darped first chapters becomes a tour de force.

[iansales]

Originally Posted by Marvolo

Ben Bova was fond of saying that the majority of the setting should be inferred through character's cultural reactions and dialogue/thought from the central characters in the narrative.

How does that work if the character isn't a white middle-class American male? Harsh perhaps, but the point being that Bova's technique only works if those reactions, etc., can be interpreted by the reader - which means the reader must share a whole raft of assumptions, prejudices and cultural references with the character. If you have a completely invented society, and the POV character is a member of that society, then it gets much trickier. It has been done... and I'm trying to think of examples... Courtship Rite by Donald Kingsbury? Nope, I'm stuck...

[Marvolo]

Originally Posted by iansales

How does that work if the character isn't a white middle-class American male? Harsh perhaps, but the point being that Bova's technique only works if those reactions, etc., can be interpreted by the reader - which means the reader must share a whole raft of assumptions, prejudices and cultural references with the character. If you have a completely invented society, and the POV character is a member of that society, then it gets much trickier. It has been done... and I'm trying to think of examples... Courtship Rite by Donald Kingsbury? Nope, I'm stuck...

I didn't mean cultural reactions of someone from our culture reacting to their culture. I meant cultural reactions of someone living within the culture. If everyone is required to wear blue hats or they're put to death and the character sees someone with a red hat, he'll have a cultural reaction towards the person not wearing the blue hat. Even when the red hat wearer is executed, he'll wonder at the bravery of the red hat wearer. It is a stupid example but the best I can think of at 6 in the morning.

It isn't a required thing to have an everyman do all the reacting to the invented society. A good, concise third person limited narrative in which the author thoroughly gets inside the POV character's head will give all the necessary cultural references with how he handles the situations. You'll infer to the reader what the norms are, the taboos are, and what the character expects. With the example above, what made the red hat wearer risk death just to be different? Why are they all wearing blue hats? What events led to the blue hat law? All those questions arise because of the situation, and then the talented author uses one of the best SF narrative techniques, abeyance. The reader holds those questions in abeyance until situations arise where the answers are revealed.

A lot of folks never realize that readers wondering why things happen a certain way, or why the character feels a certain way, can be used as another narrative hook. In these cases the world building you did is used as a plot device and hooks the reader; they're dying to know about the red hat wearer as the POV character begins to question the notion of wearing blue hats. Since no info dump has occured, the reader gets the information trickled in where it is relevant and all the hard work you've put into building the blue hat wearing world pays off with the world being intrinsic to the situation and not only is the reader hooked on wanting to know more about the world (instead of having it dumped on him) but also cheering on the POV character as he discovers the events that led to the brave martyrdom of the red hat wearer.

So Bova's point: After constructing a character and a situation you can do the necessary world building to discover more about the character and situation. By doing it in that order before the writing process begins you not only create an internally consistent world but also make sure that the world you built is completely necessary to the plot, not only necessary but inseperably intwined with the plot.

So, another example of why world building isn't pointless and Harrison is wroooong, according to me and Ben Bova. But hey, Ben Bova is quite the person to disagree with as he is a very popular SF author.

[iansales]

Originally Posted by Marvolo

I didn't mean cultural reactions of someone from our culture reacting to their culture. I meant cultural reactions of someone living within the culture. If everyone is required to wear blue hats or they're put to death and the character sees someone with a red hat, he'll have a cultural reaction towards the person not wearing the blue hat. Even when the red hat wearer is executed, he'll wonder at the bravery of the red hat wearer. It is a stupid example but the best I can think of at 6 in the morning.

If you want the reader to sympathise with the POV character, you can't have them stray too far from the reader's cultural template. You only have to look at how British readers react to US sf to see this. I take your point, but I still think an invented setting will by necessity be tied to the writer's environment - which makes Bova's technique of limited use. If for exmaple, I lived in blue hat land, and saw someone in ared hat, I would know how to react... but why should I explain that reaction to a reader?

"As you know, Bob, wearing red hats in blue hat land is punishable by death."

:-)

Originally Posted by Marvolo

So, another example of why world building isn't pointless and Harrison is wroooong, according to me and Ben Bova. But hey, Ben Bova is quite the person to disagree with as he is a very popular SF author.

AFAIK, every character Bova has written has been a white middle-class American. So it's not like he's trying hard to present other cultures from within. And his recent win of the John W Campbell Memorial Award for Titan has been... controversial, to say the least.

[Marvolo]

"As you know, Bob, wearing red hats in blue hat land is punishable by death."

vs.

Jacob spotted a red dot in the blue horizon. Not far down the street, near the corner of 78th and Main, someone wore a red hat. At first Jacob simply stopped walking, stopping to stare at the inconsistency the red hat made against the fields of blue. Jacob wasn't the only casualty in the sidewalk caravan of blue hats. Others stopped to stare as well. It was madness. Jacob turned and looked around, wondering if perhaps the red hat wearer was lost. Blue hats meant residents of Westtown. Jacob did know what red hats meant.

That was when the whistled blew, the long whining sound that blared seemingly from all directions at once. Then the black van screeched down the street, turning around and through the stopped traffic towards the man in the red hat.

#

It is cheesy, but the best I can give this morning. You can world build through alien character reactions. None of us wear blue hats because it is punishable by death to do different. But a better author than myself could use abeyance and dramatic tension to lead us delicately into the world where that might be the case.

[iansales]

Originally Posted by Marvolo

Jacob did know what red hats meant.

And the only way the reader can find out is if the writer narrates the red hat wearer's arrest, sentencing and execution - which might be completely irrelevent to the plot.

But I get your point. It's a technique that can be used. I just think it can relies overmuch on assumptions about the readers made by the writer - or rather, that can be a danger of the technique, if the writer is not careful...

[Giovanna Clairval]

The arrest could be treated in one sentence. And of course it should be relevant to the plot, but it could also be a good way of showing a character's reactions, her beliefs.
It must be relevant in some way.

Every technique has drawbacks and can go down slow or steep slopes.
This one is certainly better than the "As you know, Bob" dialogue, which must be avoided like the black death.

[HardScienceFan]

an exercise for everyone:
try describing our world to an alien

[Giovanna Clairval]

Hi, Ben. Why don't you start a thread in the Workshop?