Sci-fi advice for me??? - Writers Forum

Flexbile Garphite · 06-19-2006, 08:04 PM

Hello, I am attempting to write a science-fiction novel, and would like some advice, specifically, do you think it's a good idea to provide the readers with a narrative section at the beginning with background on the world that they're about to be immersed in? I figure it might work because it will save the reader from having to simultaneously learn crucial things about the history, places, or technologies of that world while they are reading, and allows them to focus on the story instead. Without the extra narrative, description aimed at explaining future technologies might get in the way of the story itself. However, I also think a pre-narrative could be a “bad writer’s cop-out”, meaning that a good writer should be able to explain the technologies and history sufficiently enough to make it both believable and easy to read.

What are your thoughts on this? I am still on the fence… George Orwell included an appendix on Newspeak in 1984, and I am inclined to do something similar in my novel…

Dreamingsinger · 06-19-2006, 08:18 PM

I think that it is a good idea to use a nerritive, as long as it ins't too long, and won't bore the readers. Well writen, it will save the readers a lot of confussion over details of a made up world, but, badly done, it could turn reader off the entire book.

Anarkos · 06-19-2006, 08:27 PM

Bad idea, especially at the begining. An appendix is one thing, but a long infodump at the start? Not keen!

darthwader · 06-19-2006, 08:53 PM

It all comes down to the delivery. If you write it in an entertaining fashion, then it is fine, but when it is nothing but blocks of information, then it is a bad idea.

If you do write one, write it as though it's a story in its own right, and try not to put too much unnecessary information into it. You can always post it on the site to see what people think too.

I say give it a shot. Worst case scenario: it doesn't work, in which case you simply remove it from your story.

imrhati · 06-19-2006, 09:40 PM

it could work but it is less likely to work than putting the actual info in the story. I know that graphite read fragments recently and in that i have shown various bits of technology used throughout the intro. I show them by putting my MC in situations where he is using them in his daily life. This i feel is the best way but depending on the exact details and one's own wriitng style ti could be different for someone else as with all things.

my best advice is to try it, you can always change it afterwards. or even write a short both ways and ask people to guage what they liek better. experimentation is the writer's best tool in my mind.

simon woodhouse · 06-19-2006, 11:17 PM

Your writing ability will benefit a lot if you try to incorporate it into the story. Though your main concern is the reader (which is good), and saving them from having to appreciate two things at once – the plot and the world it's taking place in, most readers are used to doing this.

Also, what happens if further on in the book you have more background info you need to share, are you going to stop the flow of the story and insert another chunk of narrative describing the environment?

Flexbile Garphite · 06-19-2006, 11:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by imrhati

my best advice is to try it, you can always change it afterwards. or even write a short both ways and ask people to guage what they liek better. experimentation is the writer's best tool in my mind.

imrhati, I enjoyed your fragment and thought you did a good job working the technology into the story. I have tried doing this as well, but find that knowing about the technology is not that important when compared with character development. I think as long as the use of technology is consistent throughout the story, it wouldn't matter what it was or how complicated it was (as long as it's not too complicated, of course)

I agree with some of the other comments, a huge info dump at the beginning is a bad idea; maybe to put it in an appendix is best. I will definately post after I put something together.

Anarkos · 06-20-2006, 12:48 AM

One good rule I've found for sci-fi is to always focus on the impacts of the technology on people, not the technology itself. Your reader doesn't need to know precisely how your spaceships travel faster than light; he/she just needs to know that they do.

Mike C · 06-20-2006, 01:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Flexbile Garphite

I also think a pre-narrative could be a “bad writer’s cop-out”, meaning that a good writer should be able to explain the technologies and history sufficiently enough to make it both believable and easy to read.

Most people skip the prologue anyway. You've answered your own question - it's a cop-out.

Quote:

George Orwell included an appendix on Newspeak in 1984, and I am inclined to do something similar in my novel…

The appendix in 1984 was totally different. It was purposely at the end, so you didn't have to read it to understand the story, and it was as much Orwell's exploration of a theory as it was information for the reader.

imrhati · 06-20-2006, 08:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Flexbile Garphite

imrhati, I enjoyed your fragment and thought you did a good job working the technology into the story. I have tried doing this as well, but find that knowing about the technology is not that important when compared with character development. I think as long as the use of technology is consistent throughout the story, it wouldn't matter what it was or how complicated it was (as long as it's not too complicated, of course)

why not USE technology for character development. It would be a good hybrid of explaining the two. an example: Bob slammed his fist against the screen, "Damn it, why did (insert technology) screw up?!"

okay maybe not the best example but hopefully it helps explain my point.

woodcut.evolution · 06-21-2006, 05:46 PM

Another way to combine the technology with the character development is knowledgable character explaining it to a naive one. For example, an explorer from an advanced planet visits a backwater world. One of the inhabitants joins the hero and is amazed by all the advanced technology, and subsiquently asks how it works.

Be careful using this technique though. As always, to detailed a discription of technology can make good fiction read like a technical manual when used overmuch.

ghent96 · 06-23-2006, 12:19 PM

In my story, just such a "scientist" character takes care of explaining various things to other characters. Other aspects of my setting's history and technology are just explained on the fly, with flashbacks, or quick asides.

An intro, if present, should be a paragraph or two, and lead-in to the story. The best Sci-Fi, imo, always deals more with characters and a moral point regarding humanities ethical & technological choices... not just the actual raw science. That'd be more of a fictional tech manual.

underwood · 07-12-2006, 11:12 PM

I think an intro to the world is only necessary if the world is so completely foreign that the reader would give up without encouragement (i.e. Dune), or if your story is so centered on the science that it can't do without a preamble (i.e. Red Mars). In either case, I think a very short intro at the beginning of each chapter is the way to go. No one reads the appendix.

I like Anarkos' comment about the effects on the characters rather than the technology itself. The technology and time period are incidental to good sci-fi, to any writing. Think of the way Phillip K Dick dealt with technology. It wasn't, "Everyone shut up while I talk about Psychohistory for three pages," it was, "My electric sheep is malfunctioning. If I don't get it fixed pronto the neighbors will know that mine isn't a real animal either."

ghent96 · 11-01-2006, 04:57 AM

True. Isn't that what "real" sci-fi is all about - the ethical implications of technology and its affects on people?

Mike C · 11-01-2006, 01:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by imrhati

why not USE technology for character development. It would be a good hybrid of explaining the two. an example: Bob slammed his fist against the screen, "Damn it, why did (insert technology) screw up?!"

okay maybe not the best example but hopefully it helps explain my point.

Why not? Because it's a cliché, a device that's used far too often. PLEASE avoid describing any technology that isn't necessary, or making up sf-ish words like 'plastisteel'. You may be in love with your imaginary environment - the reader just wants to know what happens next.

If I pick up my cellphone and make a call, do you want to know how it works, or do you want to know who I talk to? No difference if I'm here, now, on a cellphone, or a thousand years in the future using a trans-galactic communication device.

Try summarising your story, taking out all technological references. If it doesn't work without the tech, it doesn't work at all.