James Latimer's Blog - Posts Tagged "fantasy"
Anachronism and World Building
My last blog was about tropes in fantasy/sci-fi and how they can be a turn off (hopefully not just for me). I got thinking some more along those lines, especially as they regard the art of good world building, which is vital to any speculative fiction (or any fiction, probably).
The first thing that turns me off a book is anachronism, something that just doesn't fit. (Actually, sometimes it's an overused trope or stock character, and the anachronism is just the final nail in the coffin.). I think what annoys me most about anachronism is the laziness and missed opportunity. Every time medieval characters eat modern breakfast is a chance to have added something fantastic instead. Every time sci-fi spaceships defy physics the author misses the chance to make something intelligent rather than convenient. If they did a little research, the real history or science might inspire them to even deeper creativity.
Of course you don't have to slavishly copy history, or leave out hyperspace because it (probably) doesn't exist. It just means that there has to be some governing logic to your world, and it has to make sense. If you are going to do something impossible, you will have go spend the effort to explain it, at least in a hand-waving way that acknowledges it. Consider the economy, politics, social issues of the world you are creating--it may sound boring or hard work, but it will lead to a more realistic and compelling world--and story.
However, if you are using the anachronism excuse to justify leaving women or people of colour on the sidelines of your medieval fantasy, then you have not done your research, either. I made this mistake at the start, thinking it was too extraordinary to have women fighting battles or one of the three musketeers be mixed race (BBC 2014). But women did fight battles, and Alexandre Dumas was mixed race himself! And even if these are exceptions to the rules, don't we after all read and write speculative fiction to experience something out of the ordinary?
Anyway, time for a few more common turn-offs in world building.
Many genre writers also get lazy with names and languages. Using too many real world names, especially alongside made-up ones, risks ruining the illusion. William may sound regal, for obvious reasons, but it's still in use and looks odd surrounded by Aragorns and Boramirs. (You are allowed one, of course, as long as it's short like Sam.)
Languages, similarly, are a point of laziness. The Common Tongue and Universal Translators (though I'm sure Google are working on it) are too convenient. How many languages still exist today in the world, even with centuries of colonisation and trade? You don't have to make them all up, just acknowledge that they exist.
Of course, there can be a problem with names if you go too far the other way. The vampire, orc- or elf-by-any-other-name is annoying as well. The same sometimes goes for Willums, Jons, Thoms or other nearly names (of course, George R.R. Martin does this, and well, but I still say its risky--plus if you do it now everyone will think you are copying). Google shmeerps if you want to see more on this.
Magic is a big one to get right, and far-future super-technology is often just as tricky. There have to be some limitations and rules that balance its power. Unrestricted magic or technology can destroy the logic of any economic, military or political system, so you have to be careful preserving these realisms. Many of the new 'grimdark' writers are staying away from magic for the most part.
I know some people get a kick out of magic systems, but that's not what I mean by rules. And there's certainly no need to go as far as midi-chloreans. Sometimes magic can be magic. I read a great blog recently (though it's from 2012) by N.K. Jemisin in favour of more mystical and less systematic (D&D-style) magic...but you still can't just let it run wild in your world, at least without acknowledging the consequences.
So yeah, a few thoughts on fantasy world-building, the way I like it.
The first thing that turns me off a book is anachronism, something that just doesn't fit. (Actually, sometimes it's an overused trope or stock character, and the anachronism is just the final nail in the coffin.). I think what annoys me most about anachronism is the laziness and missed opportunity. Every time medieval characters eat modern breakfast is a chance to have added something fantastic instead. Every time sci-fi spaceships defy physics the author misses the chance to make something intelligent rather than convenient. If they did a little research, the real history or science might inspire them to even deeper creativity.
Of course you don't have to slavishly copy history, or leave out hyperspace because it (probably) doesn't exist. It just means that there has to be some governing logic to your world, and it has to make sense. If you are going to do something impossible, you will have go spend the effort to explain it, at least in a hand-waving way that acknowledges it. Consider the economy, politics, social issues of the world you are creating--it may sound boring or hard work, but it will lead to a more realistic and compelling world--and story.
However, if you are using the anachronism excuse to justify leaving women or people of colour on the sidelines of your medieval fantasy, then you have not done your research, either. I made this mistake at the start, thinking it was too extraordinary to have women fighting battles or one of the three musketeers be mixed race (BBC 2014). But women did fight battles, and Alexandre Dumas was mixed race himself! And even if these are exceptions to the rules, don't we after all read and write speculative fiction to experience something out of the ordinary?
Anyway, time for a few more common turn-offs in world building.
Many genre writers also get lazy with names and languages. Using too many real world names, especially alongside made-up ones, risks ruining the illusion. William may sound regal, for obvious reasons, but it's still in use and looks odd surrounded by Aragorns and Boramirs. (You are allowed one, of course, as long as it's short like Sam.)
Languages, similarly, are a point of laziness. The Common Tongue and Universal Translators (though I'm sure Google are working on it) are too convenient. How many languages still exist today in the world, even with centuries of colonisation and trade? You don't have to make them all up, just acknowledge that they exist.
Of course, there can be a problem with names if you go too far the other way. The vampire, orc- or elf-by-any-other-name is annoying as well. The same sometimes goes for Willums, Jons, Thoms or other nearly names (of course, George R.R. Martin does this, and well, but I still say its risky--plus if you do it now everyone will think you are copying). Google shmeerps if you want to see more on this.
Magic is a big one to get right, and far-future super-technology is often just as tricky. There have to be some limitations and rules that balance its power. Unrestricted magic or technology can destroy the logic of any economic, military or political system, so you have to be careful preserving these realisms. Many of the new 'grimdark' writers are staying away from magic for the most part.
I know some people get a kick out of magic systems, but that's not what I mean by rules. And there's certainly no need to go as far as midi-chloreans. Sometimes magic can be magic. I read a great blog recently (though it's from 2012) by N.K. Jemisin in favour of more mystical and less systematic (D&D-style) magic...but you still can't just let it run wild in your world, at least without acknowledging the consequences.
So yeah, a few thoughts on fantasy world-building, the way I like it.
