[DWJ] authors' thoughts on knowing

Allison Marles apm at alumni.uwaterloo.ca
Wed Oct 10 12:28:02 EDT 2007


On Tue, Oct 09, 2007 at 11:33:30AM -0400, deborah.dwj at suberic.net wrote:
> On Tue, 9 Oct 2007, liril at gmx.net wrote:
> 
> >I think this discussion can be tied in to questions of "world-building". 
> >To my mind, "rich" and interesting worlds are those where not every point 
> >or detail is necessarily relevant to the plot, explored or explained. This 
> >way, the invented world seems real, because it "exists" beyond the story 
> >we are told. (ObDWJ: Ha! I can do this: Not all the places on the map must 
> >be visited!)
> >
> >To my mind, this can mean that some mysteries exist in this world that are 
> >not explained in the story (and of course, there's a fine line to this 
> >becoming annoying - also a great starting point for sequels...).
> >
> >Example: Sabriel - importinat points in the mythology remain unexplained, 
> >not all precints are used. And much as I enjoyed the sequels, Sabriel did 
> >not feel "incomplete" to me.
> 
> Ah! This ties exactly into something I've been thinking about
> Robin McKinley and how her writing style has gone downhill in
> the last four books (I'm counting Dragonhaven, which I'm in the
> middle of in galley form right now). She does this very rich
> elaborate world building -- and then puts every single detail of
> it into the book. And it really hurts her storytelling.

That's interesting to read because the opposite was true in Sunshine.
There were so many unanswered questions that I hope there will be a
sequel to explore some of it, and yet it did not bother me because the
main thread of the story felt complete enough.

-- 
Allison Marles
Freelance Writer, Editor, Web Designer, Artist



More information about the Dwj mailing list