Something I’ve always thought about is how much worldbuilding does a story need to have? It’s especially daunting when writing a story in either a fantasy or science fiction setting in a fictional world. There’s a lot that goes into establishing a setting for the story but there’s a question of the balance between worldbuilding and plot progression. Ideally both happening concurrently would be the best outcome, but that can’t always the case. Exposition is usually the key to explaining the world and usually that involves a break in the action. I used to think more worldbuilding was always the right answer, but now I’m not so sure.
How much worldbuilding does a writer need to account for when writing a book? I used to think as much as someone could reasonably include without ruining the flow of the book. It was always a bit of a concern as it could be detrimental to the flow of the story depending on the amount of information given. If it’s a lot, it becomes almost too much of a slog to read through. It’s often an issue I hear people having when they try and read The Lord of the Rings series. Anyone whose every played Arknights knows that some of the stories become a real slog just because it’s so dense with set up and worldbuilding it’s hard to keep focus sometimes. I always thought that was generally the case until I read Yumi and the Nightmare Painter by Brandon Sanderson.
Some stories typically have breaks in the plot for exposition, having one character take time to explain to the others (and subsequently the reader) key elements of the world, applicable magic systems, and anything else important to know for the story to make sense to the reader. Almost no one enjoys a story that’s resolved in some inexplicable way that feels cheap and hollow. Sometimes a story can interweave the worldbuilding into the action seamlessly but often still has to temporarily break the flow of the story to provide some exposition. But in Yumi and the Nightmare Painter, there was barely any exposition that I could recall. All of the worldbuilding was done through context clues given during the action scenes, dialogue or inner thoughts in a smooth and natural way. It was left to the reader to conclude how the rules of the world worked. These weren’t always obvious, but some careful thought with the clues provided made things clear.
But while I came to eventually enjoy this method of worldbuilding, it wasn’t without it’s faults. While I could understand enough for the story to make sense, I didn’t understand the why behind it. For example, I could understand what Painter’s abilities did and why he does it, but it was never quite clear how it worked. It’s such a bizarre ability but not really explained how it worked just that it worked. But when I was thinking about it after finishing the story, I realized it didn’t quite matter that I didn’t really know why it worked. Not knowing why Painter’s powers worked the way they did wasn’t relevant to the overall story at the end of the day. It didn’t make his character development feel lacking, still able to tell the story of a struggling artist and motivation. However, there was one glaring issue that did come up. it was very evident that not enough worldbuilding was done as the climax was interrupted for the narrator to explain why the climax was even happening. While the climax was still great, the interruption was quite unwelcome and broke the flow of the overall story.
While Yumi and the Nightmare Painter wasn’t perfect in how it conveyed it’s worldbuilding, it did help to understand just how much worldbuilding a writer should include. A reader doesn’t necessarily need to know the history of the fictional world written nor do they need an in-depth explanation on how special powers really work. It’s a nice to include element in the story, but if it breaks the flow of the story it’s not necessary to include. That being said, the writer should always know the history of the fictional world and how the special powers work. It’s vital and important to make sure the story stays consistent and doesn’t end up in a Deus Ex Machina situation at the climax that ruins the ending. Knowing the full picture helps to set limits and understand what the writer can get away with and how to direct the story without the reader being lost. But the reader doesn’t need to know everything. If the story has nothing to do with the creation of the world, the reader doesn’t need to know it. But the creation of the world and it’s history shapes the world the story takes place in so the writer needs to know it.
It sounds like quite a lot for a writer to do but ultimately it’s needed to write the best version of their story they can create. But it’s needed for the background knowledge for the writer, not necessarily for the reader unless the story doesn’t make sense without it.
– Raphael
Raph's Cozy Musings 