Thread: Chucking the reader into your world (headfirst)

I write science-fiction, so my writing is constantly built around a fantastical world which I and my brother have constructed over years and years of discussion. But how do you think that you should present this to the reader? Should you take no mercy on their mind, or welcome them slowly to your paradise?

It depends how far removed the world is from our world. If you've invented a world in a galaxy far far away, then they'll need a decent explanation of this early on. But what you might want to do is introduce the character and put them in an interesting situation and let the character lead the way for the reader. I suppose its a tricky one for SF, you need to do quite a bit of describing and I think that bogs down the story.

Welcome them slowly. It's tempting to dump mountains of information of your reader after spending so much time world-building, but a story is more than a world. The world gives the story life and character, but should be used as an accent. If you want to season something, you don't bury it in salt; you sprinkle a little on top.

I'll give you an example. There's a fantasy book called Mistborn that apparently is pretty well-received in its circles. However, the author is absolutely obsessed with the magic system he's created and makes every effort to be sure the reader understands and appreciates its supposed depth and complexity (when in reality it's little more than "red mana is for attack spells and white mana is for healing spells"). The writing itself isn't bad, but when the author does his darnedest to hammer his world into the reader's head, it's off-putting.

You give your characters backstories because it determines how they act in the story, but there's no need to actually share the backstories with the readers. They don't need to know that. Similarly, use the world you've created to add flavor to the story, but don't dump it on the reader. Don't force them into it. If it's truly a well-made world, it will enhance the story without any brute force on your part. Just take it easy, and your story will be better for it.

I think it depends on the POV the story comes from.

If first-person, then the best way to work it is to approach as if everything is perfectly normal and sane and to teach the reader about everything via immersion. The Scott Pilgrim series of graphic novels is the best example of this I can provide; though they aren't actually written in first person, they explain by showing things rather than by launching into monologues on any subject.

If third-person, then carefully calculated infodumps when opportunity arises can do the job. You can't throw everything out at the start- never do that, ever- but taking your time to explain what the reader needs to know as events requiring explanation come to pass should do the trick. Just keep readers in the loop, that's about all. Sounds so simple, but it's not.

(The above is personal view, however. Especially with the first-person advice, I'm probably wrong and you should approach it the same as third and just tell it when it needs to be told in order to keep a reader in the know but not overwhelmed. The Dresden Files are prime examples of this in fantasy.)

I agree that slowly inviting them in will often yield a well-told world. In my current book, Freelancer, I mix between slow and fast with the different ideas I present. The technology is demonstrated quite quickly, the aliens come in fast, but the Ancient Arts (scientific magic) are introduced at a slower pace, because they are quite hard to understand. I actually worked out a way to make magic sound scientific, which really benefits a sci-fi.

Total immersion can also reap rewards, though. I think it depends on your character's position within the story. Are they new to this? Go slow. Have they lived in the world for thier whole life? Then, you can befuddle your readers by demonstrating their knowledge of this strange world, as long as your ideas come together.

Just my thoughts, there.

Never confuse a reader intentionally.

I've been reading a book called Shadow. It starts off with the MC finding himself in a ditch and he's lost his memory. The reader then learns with the character about the world, so its slow going. Thats one way.

But I am writing a Sci fi and its in 3rd person so I am introducing the world to the reader as through the actions of the character and his thoughts etc. It is difficult because I keep wondering what the hell the reader is thinking at each point. But I think I am doing ok.

One thing that makes me confident is that if it ever was published there would be an intro on the cover to let the reader know what to expect.

Originally Posted by seyelint

Never confuse a reader intentionally.

Never? But what if it's to demonstrat the intelligence of the world - if you can present ideas in a way that they are confusing but do not put of the reader, I think that is very useful, especially for Sci-Fi. It gives it a fast pace that breeds a sense of intrigue.

Never.

Originally Posted by Cadence

Never? But what if it's to demonstrat the intelligence of the world

Then you're just showing off. If you're truly proud of your world and think it's great for the story, then it's your responsibility to convey what the world is. The only reason to withhold information about the world is if it's crucial to the plot (such as in a murder mystery), and that's not often the case.

Originally Posted by Gamer_2k4

Then you're just showing off. If you're truly proud of your world and think it's great for the story, then it's your responsibility to convey what the world is. The only reason to withhold information about the world is if it's crucial to the plot (such as in a murder mystery), and that's not often the case.

I really have to disagree. Yes, it can generate difficulties with the reader, but it benefits a faster pace and makes the reader interested in a new idea or development. Say I introduce an alien race, and have a large scene involving them, but I don't explain them much. The reader is spurred on by the interest they now have in the race, and hence they read on with vigour. I thne later elaborate on these aliens, and then the reader reflects on the past scene and understands it more, thus building the story as less of a simple sequence of events and more of a narrative that builds upon itself, past present and future.

I understand where you're coming from, Gamer_2k4, but I didn't mean that you are showing off your world - I hate that. I meant that your world have a higher conceptual nature - it's above what the reader already knows about it or can infer from their gathered understanding of science-fiction, so you don't spoon-feed them your ideas, but you withhold some parts of your picture to reveal at a later occasion. Telling them everything would get acroos your image, but I think that's too simple. For example, I have a science/magic system known as the Ancient Arts which flows into much of my sci-fi writing. When I first introduce it, I show its effect and the connotations to its use, but I do not explain its attributes or conceptual foundation until later - but I do say that it has a complexity to it. This means that before it is explained, the reader's imagination ignites, speculating on the numerous ideas that could surround it or support it. I feel that this increases its effectiveness.

I think you should look at the most famous "magic" from a sci fi story. The "Force" in star wars. It is hardly referred to at all in the first film, not until the second film does it get any real explanation. This witholding of information about the force was a strength. Imagine how bored viewers would have been if as soon as Luke met Obi Wan, Obi starts telling him all about the Force....blah blah.

So if you feel you have to explain or describe your ancient arts magic then ask yourself why. Does the reader need to know all about it. I think most SF readers are in it for the escapism and the action, not descriptions of magic etc.

I guess I just took exception with the use of the word "confusion." As you can see from my post further up this page, I'm completely against infodumps. Just because you've created something doesn't mean you have to explain every detail. In fact, I prefer writing that doesn't do that - writing that gives the reader some credit, assuming that they'll understand from context. When the Fellowship is travelling through Moria, for example, there's a scene where Gandalf stays behind for a moment, does some muttering, and finally returns and says, "I have done all that I could. But I have met my match, and have nearly been destroyed." We don't need to know what gods he called upon, or what crystals he clashed together, or what powder he sprinkled into the air. It's enough to know that he has magic, and that something else has magic nearly as strong as his.

It's alright to leave a reader to draw his own conclusions, or to keep him in the dark when it serves your purposes. But when I read your post, I read "confuse the reader" to have a much stronger and more specific meaning. If you're intentionally hindering the reader's enjoyment of your work, you're not doing anyone any favors - not your readers, and certainly not yourself.

But, that's not what you meant, so ignore this, I guess.

Originally Posted by Gamer_2k4

I guess I just took exception with the use of the word "confusion." As you can see from my post further up this page, I'm completely against infodumps. Just because you've created something doesn't mean you have to explain every detail. In fact, I prefer writing that doesn't do that - writing that gives the reader some credit, assuming that they'll understand from context. When the Fellowship is travelling through Moria, for example, there's a scene where Gandalf stays behind for a moment, does some muttering, and finally returns and says, "I have done all that I could. But I have met my match, and have nearly been destroyed." We don't need to know what gods he called upon, or what crystals he clashed together, or what powder he sprinkled into the air. It's enough to know that he has magic, and that something else has magic nearly as strong as his.

It's alright to leave a reader to draw his own conclusions, or to keep him in the dark when it serves your purposes. But when I read your post, I read "confuse the reader" to have a much stronger and more specific meaning. If you're intentionally hindering the reader's enjoyment of your work, you're not doing anyone any favors - not your readers, and certainly not yourself.

But, that's not what you meant, so ignore this, I guess.

Confuse was probably the wrong term. I hate forcing infomation too; it really detracts from the sense of imagination that the reader can share with your work.

Although, I would still argue that there can be some positive aspct to confusing a reader - for example having spontaneous episodes in your story that don't make sense until you get to the end. My main villain is introduced about 60/70 pages into the story, but the reader only knows his name and true form near the end. He is brought in steathily, shown but to such a little extent at the beginning. The reader may be confused about his position in the story, but I think that this aids the atmosphere that he brings with him - the villain is unknown, a person who the main character must uncover. This juxtaposes to my overall main villain for all of Freelancer, who is shown with such clarity that it is impossible not to know him perfectly. I believe that confusion is only useful when it is surrounded by clarity, so that the reader understands that that which they don't know will be revealed.

Well, hmm. I write horror and science fiction. In my next story, which is set in the near future, I kind of gently explain the setting. In the particular piece I'm working on I did that through a journal from a character. In my horror shorts I usually use the world that we all know or at least can relate to.