I am far more interested in the story than world-building, so I only do what I need to tell the story. I may do some world-building in my mind but I don’t go to extremes. I mainly write short fiction so it isn’t often that necessary.
However, I did write a space sitcom serial for a while and had to create new planets. I did enjoy that, but most of it was in my head. Then I used my mental vision of the planet to describe the planet when necessary. But I don’t like overly descriptive writing. So it was just enough to paint a picture and stir the reader’s imagination.
'Just enough' is the way to go, especially when working it into the actual writing. I remember talking to writers of historical fiction who said that the big temptation to avoid is showing off how much research you've done. Better to have it trickle through via osmosis, rather than dumping it in front of the reader!
I appreciate a well-thought out world as a reader far more than I do as a writer (lazy). I like to drop hints at a larger world, casual references to reality off-camera, but I'm only interested in writing the story.
To be honest, not to date. Sci-fi lends itself to a myriad of worlds, so where I've wanted a specific setup, I don't need to retool, I can just put my crew on their ship and send them off. I've kept things small and self-contained as well, so the larger world I've hinted at is more for flavour than plot. Maybe next time out that will change
Ah, that's really interesting. Planets are often proxies for 'countries' in science fiction (especially on screen), which results in them being quite enmeshed in each other culturally/politically/etc. But defining your planets as being quite distinct and separate (as would more often be the case, probably, given the distances/logistics involved) does indeed free you up to generate new settings as and when they're required, but withotu getting bogged down in ever-deepening lore.
I'm another proponent of the "do just enough" sort of worldbuilding. Often it's just good enough for me to know that something exists in that world without making the details of it--for example, my fantasy world does have a calendar and money, but I don't go into gory details about it. Should I? Well, if it's relevant to the story, I will. Otherwise, there's other things to consider.
I suppose that's one reason why I'm not real wild about those "character building exercises" that some folks are really into (just wait, this will probably jump up and bite me in the rear). I don't really care about some of the questions they ask, in part because my focus is different. What is my character trying to achieve? What are their interactions with the rest of the characters? Why?
I feel the same about general worldbuilding questions. I think it's more important to ask "what is important about this world to character X?" Then figure out details. Additionally, with some worldbuilding and character elements, I've learned that the characters aren't always straightforward with me...
Anyway. As I build my characters, so grows my world and the things I need to know about it.
I think some of those exercises can be useful as prompts, but I don't tend to go down that route myself, either. A bit overly prescriptive, often. I tend to work out a bit of backstory and general attitudes and work the rest out as I go, unless a character is especially intertwined in the events of the plot.
I am far more interested in the story than world-building, so I only do what I need to tell the story. I may do some world-building in my mind but I don’t go to extremes. I mainly write short fiction so it isn’t often that necessary.
However, I did write a space sitcom serial for a while and had to create new planets. I did enjoy that, but most of it was in my head. Then I used my mental vision of the planet to describe the planet when necessary. But I don’t like overly descriptive writing. So it was just enough to paint a picture and stir the reader’s imagination.
'Just enough' is the way to go, especially when working it into the actual writing. I remember talking to writers of historical fiction who said that the big temptation to avoid is showing off how much research you've done. Better to have it trickle through via osmosis, rather than dumping it in front of the reader!
I appreciate a well-thought out world as a reader far more than I do as a writer (lazy). I like to drop hints at a larger world, casual references to reality off-camera, but I'm only interested in writing the story.
Do you ever find yourself retooling the setting to suit where you want the story to go?
To be honest, not to date. Sci-fi lends itself to a myriad of worlds, so where I've wanted a specific setup, I don't need to retool, I can just put my crew on their ship and send them off. I've kept things small and self-contained as well, so the larger world I've hinted at is more for flavour than plot. Maybe next time out that will change
Ah, that's really interesting. Planets are often proxies for 'countries' in science fiction (especially on screen), which results in them being quite enmeshed in each other culturally/politically/etc. But defining your planets as being quite distinct and separate (as would more often be the case, probably, given the distances/logistics involved) does indeed free you up to generate new settings as and when they're required, but withotu getting bogged down in ever-deepening lore.
Nice!
I'm another proponent of the "do just enough" sort of worldbuilding. Often it's just good enough for me to know that something exists in that world without making the details of it--for example, my fantasy world does have a calendar and money, but I don't go into gory details about it. Should I? Well, if it's relevant to the story, I will. Otherwise, there's other things to consider.
I suppose that's one reason why I'm not real wild about those "character building exercises" that some folks are really into (just wait, this will probably jump up and bite me in the rear). I don't really care about some of the questions they ask, in part because my focus is different. What is my character trying to achieve? What are their interactions with the rest of the characters? Why?
I feel the same about general worldbuilding questions. I think it's more important to ask "what is important about this world to character X?" Then figure out details. Additionally, with some worldbuilding and character elements, I've learned that the characters aren't always straightforward with me...
Anyway. As I build my characters, so grows my world and the things I need to know about it.
I think some of those exercises can be useful as prompts, but I don't tend to go down that route myself, either. A bit overly prescriptive, often. I tend to work out a bit of backstory and general attitudes and work the rest out as I go, unless a character is especially intertwined in the events of the plot.