No MTV moments, please.
by celinekiernan on Mar.30, 2010, under Celine Kiernan and Glenda Larke
Hi Glenda, *waves* Hi babel-clashers.
World building, huh? I guess I‘m very different to Glenda in this approach – world building is something I admire in other writers, but not something upon which I primarily base a story.
Me, I love politics, characters and plot. All my stories start with those three things and grow from there. My approach to writing is to basically know my plot inside out ( it’s usually something quite high concept, like: Career soldiers on five year diplomatic posting to foreign planet become entangled in intergalactic drug war involving the only cross-species narcotic.)
Once I have my plot fixed, the world builds itself around it. For example, what kind of personal differences would you face if going to live on a habitable but foreign planet – would they have chairs, for example? (not in my world, no) Would you be able to wear deodorant? (not in my world you wouldn’t – it would kill the local populous) How would an inter-species narcotic work? What dangers/benefits would it present to the different species? How would differing intergalactic governments and law enforcement agencies react to it? From this foundation, social structures, political alliances and ecosystems grow. But the driving force of my stories is always ‘what way does this impact on the characters?’
Even Aliens need to Frown
And I know those characters like the back of my hand. I’m not fond of lone wolves. My abiding love for team stories, means that I tend to explore the complexities and grey areas of friendship/family ties under pressure. But I hate soaps and melodrama, so the pressures and complexities are less ‘Why doesn’t s/he love me?’ and more ‘how do we get her/him off this planet before the atmosphere eats their respiratory system?’ Again, the world building comes into the way relationships are structured. Would the military structure of an alien race be based on family groups for example? Modern Earth armies generally feel that family ties within a unit weaken battle resolve, would some alien militaries feel it strengthens it? And what would that kind of a structure do to the families involved and to the general midset of the military itself.
This is how I approach my sci-fi writing ( which is generally geared towards graphic novel work) But my fantasy work is very similar, only upside down :0D In my sci-fi I take the mundane ( friendship, legality, medical concerns) and place them in a fantastical setting. In my fantasy work I take the preternatural (visitations, werewolves, prophecy etc) and place them into mundane or historically based settings in order to create the sort of skewed reality I can play with.
It’s all good and it’s all fun, but I think it’s solid too because I do nothing for effect. Doing things for effect only is what I call ‘MTV’ thinking. You know what I mean? Like those cool music videos that are nothing but a series of awesome visuals but mean nothing and resonate no deeper than that? I try never to do that. Every fantastical element I introduce to my work has a solid foundation in the world it’s based in, and has been introduced either for symbolic reasons ( the ghosts and cats and Wolves in Moorehawke for example) or because it makes sense within the plot and the historical/technological/environmental settings of the story ( the Bloody Machine)
that’s it I think - the thought processes behind my approach to world building :0D
Related posts:
- From the turbulent and insubstantial fog. Yesterday Glenda wrote a fascinating piece about how her world building is influenced by the many and varied places she has lived, and the differing physical and social landscapes she has found herself adapting to. It got me thinking about how much of our internal landscape we bring to...
- Playing God It looks as if I am the first to the party - I guess because Tuesday starts earlier here; I live in Malaysia. Terry is still in bed in the US and Celine is just getting up in Ireland. I believe the topic is world-building, which for me is the...
- Shades of Grey and the Cult of the Gun. Don’t get me wrong, I love a good Die Hard movie as much as the next person; I love a good western. I like it when a clearly defined good guy beats a clearly defined bad guy over the head with his truncheon and everyone wins in the end....
March 30th, 2010 on 10:52 am
Really interesting! I love reading these two different ways to writing. I like how you know your characters and plot, and create the world to them. This is an interesting take too.
Thank you so much for sharing this with us! This book is another I am looking forward to getting and reading.
March 30th, 2010 on 11:13 am
Thanks so much, Melissa!
March 30th, 2010 on 1:52 pm
“I tend to explore the complexities and grey areas of friendship/family ties under pressure. But I hate soaps and melodrama…”
I think this is where many fantasy stories fall short. They tend to lean too heavily on the magic or fantasy rather than creating a world that feels as if real people could actually exist there. All too often it seems that the author was really excited about the creatures, technology, or superpowers in their work and forgot about the emotions of the characters.
In the end, how do you create realistic relationships in a fantastical or paranormal setting without falling into a cliched stereotype?
March 30th, 2010 on 3:53 pm
“how do you create realistic relationships in a fantastical or paranormal setting without falling into a cliched stereotype?”
Well first off I can only try and do that, because one person’s realistic relationship is another’s boring load of tripe (LOL!) But I try and give my characters motivations deep rooted in their own social and personal histories,then put them at odds with the circumstances in which they find themselves (Christopher Garron, for example, comes from a society where strength very much wins out over weakness, and so has learned that the best way to win a fight is to slit your opponent’s throat and walk away - at the same time he is a kind, considerate person and so finds himself appalled by Razi’s ruthless use of torture. Razi is a doctor, a truly honourable, moral person, yet he oversee’s this appalling barbarity because he feels it is necessary to save his father’s kingdom. Wynter is a warm, loving, kind person - but she is also a hardened courtier who is capable of asking ‘what did you get out of him?’ despite her disgust at the victim’s treatment during an inquisition.) This complexity would, of course, colour every relationship in the book as all the characters are part of a bigger picture, and all are trying hard to not only make their way through the storm - but to fix things as best they can, while also keeping their loved ones safe. Talking cats, ghosts, robots or spaceships don’t change any of that :0D
March 30th, 2010 on 10:26 pm
So Celine you start with character, politics and plot - and that gives you the world. I start with the world - and that gives me the characters, politics and plot! At a guess, I bet there are loads of writers who start somewhere else. With a single incident, for example, that suggest all sorts of other stuff.
Maybe someone out there is a writer like that?
This is fascinating!
March 31st, 2010 on 1:59 am
For me, it changes from story to story. The one I’m currently working is a retelling so a lot of the politics and the plot was already there. There’s another I’m still developing and that started with a building in singapore and a pondering over what it was used for. From that developed a world (including characters) rather than plot. There’s a lot I can do from this one. There’s another that came from an incident and the world/plot is developing around that.
I guess for me, it depends upon the initial idea.
March 31st, 2010 on 3:25 am
HI Glenda! I really do think it changes from writer to writer - I know quite a few for whom it starta with a ’scene’ and grows from there. I agree, it’s fascinating! We’re a diverse bunch, us professional liars.
March 31st, 2010 on 4:22 am
Probably Mitenae has the best idea - be adaptable!