Great Worldbuilding

[polishgenius]

What I like to see is a sense of dynamism. Feist of all people is/was pretty good at that, Krondor started out as a typical medieval town and by the Serpentwar it had developed into something like an early-modern one, with stock exchanges, coffee houses and football leagues. That's a nice touch.

Pratchett isn't dissimilar in this sense, especially with Ankh-Morpork.

[Liadin]

Martin I think feels a bit unoriginal, it gets better in Daenrys' chapters but it still feels like "generic medieval setting" and "generic "eastern" setting". It's fleshed out well enough that it doesen't feel unbelievable, but it's not very compelling.

[snip]

What I like to see is a sense of dynamism. Feist of all people is/was pretty good at that, Krondor started out as a typical medieval town and by the Serpentwar it had developed into something like an early-modern one, with stock exchanges, coffee houses and football leagues. That's a nice touch.

See, I think Martin's worldbuilding is excellent. I'm a big historical fantasy fan and for me, following a historical setting closely gives the worldbuilding a lot of credibility and verisimilitude that made-up-out-of-thin-air secondary worlds don't have. (I don't know whether it's because I believe historical settings more, or because closely following a historical model means you wind up with a believable society.) So for me, Martin is much more compelling than most because I actually believe in it.

Agree with you on that last point though. Real societies are never in stasis, and fantasy societies almost always are. More secondary worlds with a sense of change would be great.

ETA: I should add that when I talk about Martin's worldbuilding, I mean Westeros. The eastern settings have been pretty flat so far.

[Zahir al Daoud]

I remember reading some stuff about Tolkien's notes, regarding reproduction and the Elves. For one thing, as a species they aren't very fertile. Elrond, being half-halven, has a startling (for Elves) three children. Pregnancy lasted a year or more, while individuals weren't considered adults until their hundredth birthday. Meanwhile, as a race they lose what we would call their sex drive after a certain age.

A lot of Tolkien's world-building presumes certain spiritual premises, including a fallen world that had not fallen as far as in our own epoch.

There's a particularly good world-building, at least IMHO, in Lois McMaster Bujold's Curse of Chalion and its sequels. Essentially the world is a kind of (physically) up-side-down Iberian Peninsula, with Isabella and Ferdinand surrogates. What is interesting is how the shared religion--divided into two very different factions--informs much else. In one, the four Gods (Father, Mother, Son, Daughter) represent the four seasons as well as different aspects of the world. In the other, a fifth God (the Bastard) is the patron of all things "out of season" such as homosexuals, illegitimate children, etc. Thus these have a place within the social structure, not suffering as much prejudice as in the other faction.

[Ser Greguh]

Bakker, for me, probably has the most fully-developed fictional world that works across all levels among books that I've read. Good macro, good micro, with bonus points for still seeming fictional. Martin has done fairly well with certain aspects of Westeros, but his interest is clearly not in the nuts and bolts. Judging his worldbuilding seems a bit like judging that of Guy Gavriel Kay; to the degree to which we believe it works, it's often because he's pillaged directly from Earth-historical equivalents (not that this hampers the overall stories of either author in any way). Feist has commendable macro-building (a bit +1 to the observation that his world is far more dynamic than most) but lamentable micro, with Jordan being at the opposite end of the spectrum.

And though it clearly takes a backseat to the more ... whimsical ... elements of his story, I've a very soft spot for the worldbuilding style of Scott Lynch. It's basically all real food. The proportions are sometimes way out of whack (the sheer volume of organized thieves that the city of Camorr supports is sheer lunacy), and yet the level of thought that's gone into its details is actually quite impressive.

(No worldbuilding, of course, will ever touch that of David Eddings. The sheer balls it took to ask his readers to believe that an entire nation could be comprised of nothing but spies will never be outdone).

[Basileus777]

One aspect of Martin's worldbuilding that has always bothered me is the lack of cities in Westeros. You have major river systems in heavily populated areas like the Mander and the Trident that have no major urban settlements. It's like imagining a 14th or 15th century Europe where the Po, Rhine, and Seine were devoid of cities. It makes no sense with the level of population and development Westeros has.

And then there is King's Landing with a population of over half a million. It strains credulity.

[kungtotte]

And though it clearly takes a backseat to the more ... whimsical ... elements of his story, I've a very soft spot for the worldbuilding style of Scott Lynch. It's basically all real food. The proportions are sometimes way out of whack (the sheer volume of organized thieves that the city of Camorr supports is sheer lunacy), and yet the level of thought that's gone into its details is actually quite impressive.

Do you really think the proportions are that out of whack? I get the sense that there's only about 1000-1500 or so downright thieves (or muscle), people directly connected to a gang and involved with the day-to-day business of thievin'. The rest of the people we meet are people that are just involved with the shady underworld but not actual thieves, i.e the support network for the thieves. People like the black alchemists, fences and dog leeches. Also there's the brothels that are part of the Right People but not out pulling heists or picking pockets.

How big would a city have to be in order to support 1500 steadily working thieves? Venice circa 1550 had a population just north of 170,000 people. You don't think there's work to be had for 1500 thieves there?

[Kat]

And then there is King's Landing with a population of over half a million. It strains credulity.

Leftover magic everywhere else (Westeros only) made people feel spontaneously agoraphobic once a critical population was reached? (Large town size.) Or maybe Valyrian residue has the same effect; in the entire world, people are naturally rural dwellers, but Valyrian vibes make people more prone to forming and living in cities.

Ok, I got nothing. :P

[Matrim Fox Cauthon]

At the risk of setting off an avalanche, I was highly impressed by Stephen Donaldson's world building in Thomas Covenant. What I like about it was how real the magic felt and by how closely tied it was to the Land itself, which also felt as if it was a character in its own right. The magic was fantastical, but it was practical. It was used to shape and craft stone/woodwork. It was used simply for light and heating. The Land heals. The application of magic was simple yet subtle.

Twelve Kingdoms (Juni Kokuki) by Fuyumi Ono: Twelve Kingdoms is a Japanese young adult book series adapted into an anime. The world is definitely artificial feeling, and any look at the map gives you that much of an impression. At times it is almost too perfect in its symmetry, and it has a TON of terminology. Despite this, Fuyumi Ono does with 12 Kingdoms what Bakker did with Earwa and Western metaphysics, she creates a living world that operates with metaphysical assumptions of ancient China. It is governed by immutable heavenly laws, the Will of the Heavens. There are gods and immortals who walk among the people. While most people accept these laws for what they are, some people choose to rebel against these laws. Countries without rulers become are struck by famine, conflict, and wandering monsters. A kirin (Chinese unicorn) selects the ruler, who can be from any rank of society. The ruler becomes immortal unless killed or stricken with a disease by the "Will of the Heavens" for their poor conduct. People are not born from wombs but from trees, and this has realistic effects on gender and marriage in society. The world is just so astoundingly cohesive and breathtakingly original.

ETA: How could I forget Stephen Lynch's Camorr? :stunned:

[Datepalm]

ETA: I should add that when I talk about Martin's worldbuilding, I mean Westeros. The eastern settings have been pretty flat so far.

I think for me a certain sense of tonal consistency is important, and I think Martin manages that. I agree that the East is a bit flat, but I also enjoyed it in its way: The uber exotic Quarth and really decadent and corrupt slavers bay and barbaric Dothraki - yeah, a lot of it is rooted in orientalist cliches, (also Dorne, to an extent, but we have well fleshed out local characters there, which ameliorates it.) but becuase its got that shallowness, its actually really fun and meshes well, IMO, with that larger-than-life sense Wesrteros itself has too - giant walls and castles and family trees that go back 8000 years.

Leftover magic everywhere else (Westeros only) made people feel spontaneously agoraphobic once a critical population was reached? (Large town size.) Or maybe Valyrian residue has the same effect; in the entire world, people are naturally rural dwellers, but Valyrian vibes make people more prone to forming and living in cities.

How bout the seasonal swings? Most of the realm essentially has a major once-in-a-generation famine once-twice a decade. It could explain population never building up and agricultural surplus staying low: Enough to support a few large, coastal trade centers propped up by the nobility and the occassional smaller town, but not enough to let those towns develop into major cities.

[kungtotte]

Also the distribution of settlements does follow the major rivers and waterways. Maybe there should be more, but those that are there seem logical to me.

[Ran]

I think the population of King's Landing is more like 250,000, but the the war has swelled the population some.

I think one could probably construct an argument for a political reason for the lack of cities -- many medieval cities developed through sufferance of the nobility, who issued licenses, gave them certain beenfits, and so on. There's a lot of towns that aren't listed on the maps, so the town may be the preferred unit except for certain ports. But it's a fairly weak reason. I think George probably just finds having lots of cities too complicated for his purposes.

[The hairy bear]

IMO, one of the most unrealistic issues in many fantasy settings are the linguistic ones. Given the history and migrations in Westeros it's really hard to explain how the Umbers can speak the same language as the orphans of the Greenblood, in a continent the size of South America that has been unified only after three centuries.

I think George is absolutely great in providing vivid descriptions, and making landscapes and cultures come to live. But I'm not as sure that he is as brilliant at making up believable, logically constructed worlds.

[Cantabile]

As for worldbuilding being original or not: is there truly such thing as an original fictional world? The human brain is not capable of creative output without input; worldbuilding in fantasy is simply the alteration of customs, religions, architecture,politics, and other cultural components of our own world, with modifications. Everything is rooted in reality. I don't really see more modifications necessarily being a case of more 'originality' persay, so much as a different taste. Is a world based off of Medieval England, but then mixed and mashed with traits of Ancient Egypt, modern social systems, blah blah blah, really different than just creating an alteration of Medieval England? I don't think mixing more colors makes the final hue more original, just more varied, and variation is a very different beast than originality.

All of that aside, my hat personally goes off to Bakker for worldbuilding.

[wolverine]

Agree with you on that last point though. Real societies are never in stasis, and fantasy societies almost always are. More secondary worlds with a sense of change would be great.

What about North and South American natives? Aobrigines? African tribes? Southeast Asian island natives?

I am not saying that their societies were in permanent stasis, but there is very little technological change for hundreds or thousands of years.

Some of these places also did not necessarily have the conditions for civilization, which motivates change, but even places where civilization thrived had similar technologies for thousands of years until about the invention/proliferation of gunpowder then industry/machines.

And really I don't think people were living that differently 500 years ago than they were 10,000 years ago.

When you multiply that by 10 or 100 like some books histories of 100's of thousands of years that is getting pretty excessive for a static society.

[Cantabile]

The problem is that in most fantasy works the worlds often have thriving agriculture, resource-rich land, and developed civilizations with disciplines of knowledge. If a society is intellectually developed enough to have libraries, for example, it is pretty big suspension of disbelief to believe that out of the entire world's population there is no thrive for technological development or invention. Of course rates of development vary, but when the human populations have already evolved to the state of possessing agriculture, complex businesses and trade, flourishing cities, religious and political structures, etc. to believe that the advancement would just suddenly stop after coming so far makes no sense.

[wolverine]

The problem is that in most fantasy works the worlds often have thriving agriculture, resource-rich land, and developed civilizations with disciplines of knowledge. If a society is intellectually developed enough to have libraries, for example, it is pretty big suspension of disbelief to believe that out of the entire world's population there is no thrive for technological development or invention. Of course rates of development vary, but when the human populations have already evolved to the state of possessing agriculture, complex businesses and trade, flourishing cities, religious and political structures, etc. to believe that the advancement would just suddenly stop after coming so far makes no sense.

I would agree with this. Over what I consider long periods of time there are still situations without a lot of change. Think about the library at Alexandria and the knowledge of ancient Egyptians, Greeks, and Chinese. I don't see an immense change in how many people live from 500 B.C. to 1500 A.D.

[fionwe1987]

I would agree with this. Over what I consider long periods of time there are still situations without a lot of change. Think about the library at Alexandria and the knowledge of ancient Egyptians, Greeks, and Chinese. I don't see an immense change in how many people live from 500 B.C. to 1500 A.D.

But many of these civilizations ended, were wiped out to large degrees. China may be an exception, but they also had continuous development, if at a slower pace. Same, to a lesser degree, with India. Even Europe wasn't ever completely stagnant.

But with places like Westetros, the same culture has survived for at least a thousand years, and maybe much more. Yet there has apparently been no progression. When was the library Tower of Winterfell built, for example?

[Mathis Waters]

As for worldbuilding being original or not: is there truly such thing as an original fictional world? The human brain is not capable of creative output without input; worldbuilding in fantasy is simply the alteration of customs, religions, architecture,politics, and other cultural components of our own world, with modifications. Everything is rooted in reality. I don't really see more modifications necessarily being a case of more 'originality' persay, so much as a different taste. Is a world based off of Medieval England, but then mixed and mashed with traits of Ancient Egypt, modern social systems, blah blah blah, really different than just creating an alteration of Medieval England? I don't think mixing more colors makes the final hue more original, just more varied, and variation is a very different beast than originality.

All of that aside, my hat personally goes off to Bakker for worldbuilding.

The fact that the human brain requires input for its creative output doesn't mean that no creative output actually gets produced. If "original" has any meaning (and obviously it does have a relatively stable one in actually practiced discourse) then Engypt is, all else being equal, a more original setting than England or Egypt; no actual - or for the sake of argument, written - Engypt exists to copy; the worldbuilder must determine for herself how all these elements fit together. If she does it properly it should be as much a distinct setting as you're a distinct person from your parents.

[RobMRobM]

I'm particularly fond of Robin Hobbs' worldbuilding in all the Elderlings books (Farseer, Liveship, Tawny Man, Rain Wilds). Brilliantly realized, deep and subtlely put together. The same is true of her other series (Soldier's Son). Very impressive writer overall and her world building is a particular strength.

Ditto re Bujold's fantasy worlds (Chalion, Sharing Knife).

[Note: I edited original post to fix my mixing of Hobbs and Bujold worlds.]

Re WoT, there have been nearly constant wars over the past 3,000 years since the breaking (Trolloc Wars, Hawkwing's conquest, wars of the False Dragons, and years of fighting between longtime enemies such as Illian-Tear, Andor-Carhien, all of the countries on the Almoth Plain and Borderlanders versus north). That plus the occasional forays by forces of dark limit the incentives to settle many of the unpopulated areas in Randland. The influx of Seanchan farmers and folk will be a big factor in "normalizing" Randland after the upcoming Last battle.

Rob

[jurble]

I don't see an immense change in how many people live from 500 B.C. to 1500 A.D.

I do, societal structures/population distribution patterns changed massively between those two years. And technology-wise, most stuff developed slow, true, but agriculture changed massively.