Pacing of information in a fictional world

[meh]

So, to sum up, you're not really looking for the tools by which to do it (the majority of the answers thus far), rather you are polling the level of indirect revelation that has worked for most people here?

The harder bit is issues equivalent to, to stretch your metaphor, polyamory being so much the norm that nobody had ever heard of monogamy for centuries, and that they would never bump into anyone who practised it or have any reason to talk about it or even think about it consciously; the unexamined background assumptions that are different from ours.

One level at which that has definitely worked for me in the past is what Silverberg does in At Winter's End.

[the neurovore of Zur-En-Aargh]

So, to sum up, you're not really looking for the tools by which to do it (the majority of the answers thus far), rather you are polling the level of indirect revelation that has worked for most people here?

Yes, though, tools showing up that I'd not already considered would be a good thing too.

[Aludra]

Yes, though, tools showing up that I'd not already considered would be a good thing too.

The only author I can think of that doesn't use a 'tool' is Neal S.  And you already said you didn't want to try to write like him. And aside from that, he doesn't get the whole of his potential audience because a lot of would-be SciFi readers don't have the patience to learn a new vocabulary every time the pick up a book entirely from context clues.

Although... Have you read Lovelock?  It's by Orson Scott Card & Kathryn Kidd.   If you haven't read it, it's worth a read.  I can't think of any tools that they used.  There's no 'talking book', or 'newbie character' or 'nerdy historian'. 

[the neurovore of Zur-En-Aargh]

The only author I can think of that doesn't use a 'tool' is Neal S.  And you already said you didn't want to try to write like him.

He has a great gift for the interesting infodump - I mean, he can spend a few pages of Cryptonomicon on the best way to eat breakfast cereal and make it compelling.  I am not under the impression that i can do infodumps anywhere near that well.

And aside from that, he doesn't get the whole of his potential audience because a lot of would-be SciFi readers don't have the patience to learn a new vocabulary every time the pick up a book entirely from context clues.

He's not writing SF for non-SF readers, definitely.  I am not at all certain where I would think of myself as being on that issue.

Although... Have you read Lovelock?  It's by Orson Scott Card & Kathryn Kidd.   If you haven't read it, it's worth a read.  I can't think of any tools that they used.  There's no 'talking book', or 'newbie character' or 'nerdy historian'. 

No, I've not; will keep an eye out for it.

[Gruud]

I know one does not have to explain everything, but there's only so much I can leave unexplained; the failure mode there is "A happens for unexplained reason, and then B follows on from A for reasons also unexplained, and then C comes on from that where a contemporary reader would most likely expect D to happen instead", and unless enough of the How Things Work basics are in there somewhere, it just looks like pulling plot from thin air rather than playing fair with the rules of that setting.  I mean, a detective story where one met all the characters and then had the detective present the solution but never got the reasoning between the data and the solution would be at best gimmicky and at worst pointless.

This may not be your cup of tea, but have you considered some simple flow charting?

Taking A, B and C in your example, give each their own box in the flow chart (without any accompanying explanation) and then see what minimums you need to logically get from one to the other.

In this case the flow chart is really just a mechanism to try and isolate the event flow from the rest of the story stuff swirling around in your head, forcing them to stand on their own, logic-wise.

I may not have explained that very well ...

[the neurovore of Zur-En-Aargh]

Taking A, B and C in your example, give each their own box in the flow chart (without any accompanying explanation) and then see what minimums you need to logically get from one to the other.
In this case the flow chart is really just a mechanism to try and isolate the event flow from the rest of the story stuff swirling around in your head, forcing them to stand on their own, logic-wise.

I have done something like this.  And thus far I still find myself thinking things like "now, from X's POV A leads perfectly logically to B because X did her PhD about this particular alien civilisation and knows a fair bit about how they think. But the reader won't.  How can I get enough stuff about the aliens in to make this work ?"

[Aludra]

Maybe put some of her research paper titles into a convo at some point like.
"Wow, it's nice to meet you Dr. Spoopenstein, I really was impressed by your paper, "Blue aliens like Green tea."

[meg_evonne]

Interesting thread flow.  The first two pages reminded me of trying to pin a live butterfly onto a display board with only two fingers of one hand..nigh impossible.

I have done something like this.  And thus far I still find myself thinking things like "now, from X's POV A leads perfectly logically to B because X did her PhD about this particular alien civilisation and knows a fair bit about how they think. But the reader won't.  How can I get enough stuff about the aliens in to make this work ?"

 The obvious answer might be an encounter...  right up front.



My pref is world building shown through dialog and action only, and any info dumps are limited to two paragraphs only.  At that point it must be broken up with dialog or action again.  Yep, YA convention.  Purely my rules and that style will not fit your style.

All I can encourage you to do is to 'trust your readers' and let them participate in the world building.  Their own imaginations will carry them a long way as you slowly release this fictional world on them.  Choose your action scenes carefully so they reveal the most possible about the world organically and the same for the dialog.

You can tell my age here--  I see your style being more similar to a 'social-science' perspective of a Ringworld or Mote in God's Eye.  I'd re-read those to see how they managed such technically complicated but highly successful sci fi books.  Perhaps you can incorporate and apply some of their techniques into your own work.  

The other major world builder is Dune, of course, but it takes an entirely different approach to presenting the world.  Again highly different world that has been popular.

Softer yet would be Heinlein, Bradbury, and Norton, but I think you're aiming for something between the Niven/Pourelle and Herbert type style?

Keep us posted and best wishes!

edit...chose? sheez...  can you tell client came in and pushed send?  :-)

[the neurovore of Zur-En-Aargh]

Interesting thread flow.  The first two pages reminded me of trying to pin a live butterfly onto a display board with only two fingers of one hand..nigh impossible.

That's pretty much how I've been feeling about this project for the last little bit, yes.

Still, if it were easy, it would have been done before.

The obvious answer might be an encounter...  right up front.

I think there will be, and more than one; am now kicking over how much I can get away with POV character briefing other characters in advance, and how much of that I need so that the alien encounter actually makes sense.

All I can encourage you to do is to 'trust your readers' and let them participate in the world building.  Their own imaginations will carry them a long way as you slowly release this fictional world on them.  Chose your action scenes carefully so they reveal the most possible about the world organically and the same for the dialog.

Very much aiming to get the clues in in advance so they hold together, yes.

You can tell my age here--  I see your style being more similar to a 'social-science' perspective of a Ringworld or Mote in God's Eye.  I'd re-read those to see how they managed such technically complicated but highly successful sci fi books.  Perhaps you can incorporate and apply some of their techniques into your own work. 
The other major world builder is Dune, of course, but it takes an entirely different approach to presenting the world.  Again highly different world that has been popular.
Softer yet would be Heinlein, Bradbury, and Norton, but I think you're aiming for something between the Niven/Pourelle and Herbert type style?
Keep us posted and best wishes!

I have read pretty much all of the above.  I would certainly say, informed by how some of those have worked; and also by more recent authors like Iain Banks and Ken MacLeod; am hoping that I have learned enough to get some of the same technical tricks in without coming too close to the acutal voice of authors I like and sounding like stealing from them. 

[belial.1980]

Have you considered using epigraphs? Maybe you could try mixing and matching famous historical quotes, imaginary song lyrics, wedding (or whatever they call polygamous mating) invitations, exerpts from childrens' journals, tech manuscripts featuring hypothetical improvements to existing technology, religious doctrine, etc.

You could even expand them from simple epigraphs to slightly longer interludes of mixed media. Thinking something along the lines of the interludes in Watchmen. Using a method like this might help immerse the readers and give them (hopefully) well-camoflouged info dumps that will lead them to infer certains things about the world you've created.

I dunno if that works for you at all, but I figured I'd toss it out there.

[meg_evonne]

... am hoping that I have learned enough to get some of the same technical tricks in without coming too close to the acutal voice of authors I like and sounding like stealing from them.  

there is so much more to an author's voice than just techniques.  Employing style and technical techniques and evolving them is the whole idea behind the craft.  Other than that marvelous Already Dead that you got me into reading and ee cummings poetry style-- technique is worlds apart from author's voice for me.  I'd never borrow Huston's style for example since it is so clearly unique and that author's.)  

Playing devil's advocate however, what on earth is with this recent fascination with re-writing the classics into cult classics these days?  I counted up only a few stuck around the aisles and checkout registers at my local Borders--Android Karenina, Little Woman-vamp version, Pride and Prejudice and Zombies, the Jane Austin new fic modern books?  That is just wrong, obnoxious, and a rip off IMO---I KNOW they are past copyright dates, but still...  And I know Shakespeare's been redone over and over and over... but come on guys?

Okay I really can buy these since they are so well done from what I've been told...Jane Austin new fic modern books?

Since these aren't genre books

[the neurovore of Zur-En-Aargh]

there is so much more to an author's voice than just techniques.  Employing style and technical techniques and evolving them is the whole idea behind the craft.  Other than that marvelous Already Dead that you got me into reading

Oh goodie. Thank you; it's really heartening to have recommended something that someone liked.

and ee cummings poetry style-- technique is worlds apart from author's voice for me.  I'd never borrow Huston's style for example since it is so clearly unique and that author's.)  

I don't intentionally borrow either, but some styles I just find infectious, and will write a whole chapter and then realise on reread it's been pulled in the direction of Douglas Adams, or Jack Womack, or Livy, or Paarfi of Roundwood...

[meh]

Livy infectious, eh?

[meg_evonne]

I don't intentionally borrow either, but some styles I just find infectious, and will write a whole chapter and then realise on reread it's been pulled in the direction of Douglas Adams, or Jack Womack, or Livy, or Paarfi of Roundwood...

ah geez!  With all your writing experience and you still feel your style varies. That sucks.  I hoped that tendency faded w time.

[meh]

ah geez!  With all your writing experience and you still feel your style varies. That sucks.  I hoped that tendency faded w time.

Why would it not vary?