World Building 101
Featuring Robert R. McCammon and Jennifer Roberson; transcribed
by Richard Alan Kaapke
Jennifer Roberson's website
Editor's Note:
The following is a transcript of a panel discussion at the
Continuity 1990 convention in Birmingham, Alabama. The panelists
were Robert R. McCammon and
Jennifer Roberson.
McCammon: Hello. This is world building 101; I'm Professor
McCammon. Class is in session, shut up!
Audience: Do we have to?
McCammon: Yes, you have to. Did you bring an apple for your
teacher? (Serious tone) Close that door, young man. You'll get demerits.
Sit down in front!
My name is Rick McCammon, and we're going to talk about world building.
Roberson: I'm Jennifer Roberson, and I have two different fantasy
series out right now: eight volumes in my Chronicles of the Cheysuli
series, and three of my four-book Sword Dancer series ... all of
which are available in the dealer's room. I also have some short fiction
out, but I write primarily novels.
McCammon: I guess what we ought to do first of all is define what we
mean by world building. How's it different from scene building, or
character building? Jennifer, how does world building differ ... or does
it differ? ... from scene building or character building?
Roberson: I think it's a bigger headache when you're building a
world, but I don't think the process differs that much. If you're building
a character, you have to think of all the ingredients ... the personality,
physical appearance, and so on, and so forth. You do that when you're
world building also. I think gamers do a much better job ... a more
thorough job ... of developing a mythos, a culture, religion, dichotomy,
the physical attributes of the world and everything, which are really
necessary when you're gaming, because you're moving around through all of
this. I think a lot of the times when you're writing a book or a short
story, it is more like scene building, because you tend to plug your
characters into just what you need for that particular scene. Certainly
not all writers do this, because there are writers out there who do a very
good job of describing everything, so you feel that the world is very alive
as are the characters in the story. It really does differ, even though
you're using a lot of imagery.
McCammon: It is much harder to develop a cohesive world in a short
story than it is a novel, because of the time factor ... some of that's
tough to do.
I think as a writer, you have to visual in a different way...
Roberson: I agree. The creative process in painting, drawing,
illustrating and writing may be the same; I can't say, because I'm only a
writer. I don't draw or paint or anything. When you're a writer, you
paint with words. And you have to be very thorough. And you do think
differently. You see an image, that doesn't mean I see a scene. But I've
got sort of a mini-movie in my head. But when I actually start to write
about it, the mini-movie story goes away, and it's just very spontaneous.
I do the first couple of sentences in a paragraph in the opening chapter,
and I don't know what's happening next ... other than it has to fit in with
the general outlook I have for the whole story, the outline. I think it's
much harder to do any kind of illustrating ... to have to get across the
world in one little panel for one cover illustration. As novelists or
short story writers, we have much more room to work with. It's a lot
easier.
McCammon: I agree with the idea of a mini-movie. I think writing is
like a movie, and a writer is a director. You pick the actors, you do the
clothing, the wardrobe, the lighting, sound effects ... everything! So it
is like you're creating a movie, in a way. How do you begin? Do you
outline it? What's the nuts and bolts of putting it together?
Roberson: For the longest time, I didn't outline very much. When I
started the Cheysuli series ... which was supposed to be one book ... I
jotted down notes. That's what a lot of outlining will do for you ...
change one book to eight! I started with a character, and I had this vague
idea of what kind of world I wanted, which sort of solidified as I went
along. My world got a little better with each succeeding book. I
definitely suggest that people do outlining ... as thorough an outline as
they can. You don't have to use all of it You don't have to put all your
research in your work ... it could be very boring. For me, a lot of it is
characters generating a byplay and banter, and it has to fit within the
context of the plot that I wrote. For people who are really starting out
right now ... try to be as thorough as possible. Talk about religion,
develop your economy. Bob Asprin's often joked about the Thieve's
World books ... where he says there is no economy in Sanctuary. When they
run out of money, they have somebody ride in from another world who's very
rich and everybody tries to steal his money. When you're just starting it
out, you really need to be as thorough as you can on all aspects.
McCammon: In horror, you create worlds also. My book,
Stinger, was a real place ... but if I had to create the economy of
Inferno, Texas, and create what characters are locked ... all those things
would to tough to do, because readers are pretty smart. I think they're
going to know if you're fudging or something doesn't hook together quite
properly. I haven't really done a lot of work in fantasy, but to me,
that'd be tougher... To create an economic system ... that'd be tough, I
think.
Roberson: You draw on bits and pieces of historical data. I read a
great deal of history... Medieval history and that sort of thing appealed
to me. You can't help but sort of draw on what you know. You can't lie to
a reader, and ignorance can really do you in. The reader is smart. The
reader is much more sophisticated than the reader used to be. They will
catch you, and believe me, they write! They say, "You know, in such and
such and such a time..." One fan wrote me a letter ... something to do
with castration ... talking about the italian opera, Castriani ... and all
this is like going on and on, lecturing me about all these things. I
think, "You obviously know more about it than I do..." You really have to
be careful even when you're doing a fantasy novel, because if you're going
to draw on any historical facts, you'll really got to twist them and make
them fit within the context of what you're doing. By the same token,
you're dealing with a technology that isn't a technology. When you're
dealing with swordmaking, there's a certain amount of technology that goes
into making a sword. Your transportation is horseback, or feet. So, you
sort of have an odd juxtaposition there, and it's really easy to trip over
it if you're not careful.
McCammon: Did you have to study swordmaking?
Roberson: I did a little research on it, yeah. I didn't have to go
into it in great detail, so I got away with not having to do lots and lots.
McCammon: It's amazing how much writers have to learn and have to
know about their subjects. That can be dumbfounding, sometimes ... to go
back to work that you've finished and realize that you had to do all this
research. How do you do your research?
(Interruption for hurricane warning.)
Roberson: ...I used to rodeo, I know horses inside and out, and I
had more fun when I was doing my Sword Dancer books, because I made
a horse one of the integral characters. I did not romanticize this horse.
He's not the sweet, little thing that you find in little girl's books; he
could bite your head off! Nobody writes me and questions why did you have
the book doing this on page whatever-it-was, because it's obvious that I
knew. I had a background in it. If you have any special knowledge about
anything and you can work it in, that's great.
McCammon: People always say when you ask their advice about writing,
"Write what you know." Is that good advice?
Roberson: Part what you know, but also write what you like.
McCammon: Yeah. Write what you believe. Talking about difficulties
... where readers can catch you on things ... if you're ever writing about
guns, that can be really tough. Guns and bullets and stuff ... and
firearms. I wrote a book called They Thirst and I really messed up
on the gun. I got a letter from a guy in Atlanta. He said that he'd be
very happy to teach me everything I wanted about guns... He's a member of
the Devil's Disciple motorcycle gang in Atlanta. Readers everywhere...
There's something about books that's sort of like tar babies. You get in
the middle of a book with these problems, and you can't get out of it! I
mean, you cannot set yourself free of this tar baby. You try to keep a
book around 430 pages, and the tar baby won't let you finish up. You try to
finish up, try to finish up ... stuff to do. You find that's true?
Roberson: My husband and I have a running joke, because I'll say I
only need 450 pages ... and he looks at what I've jotted down, he laughs,
and he says, "Oh, at least 500 or 550, minimum." And he's right. He's
always right.
McCammon: ...The world grows and it takes off on its own...
Audience: Should a story stay within its original form from its
outline?
Roberson: I've had two single books turn into a 4- and 8-book
series. You can be true to your outline within the confines of that one
particular book, but afterwards, your characters become so alive for you
that they continue to have adventures in your head. So even if you may
resolve that particular book, realize there's a lot more that you can do
with them. I have had arguments with my characters before. Anybody who's
written [long enough] has managed to bring alive their characters to the
point where they really want to argue with them. I wanted to kill a
character off in the first book and they said, "No, people are going to
like me. You're going to need me, and you're going to be real sorry if you
kill me off!" And it's true ... he's gone on to become the bigger
character in the entire 8book series. If you view them with enough light
and enough reality, they can take control. And that's good.
McCammon: As soon as you have an outline, and the outline jumps the
tracks, doesn't mean that you're not disciplined. 'Cause you may let it
follow its own course, but you know when it's getting too far out of line.
You know what you need to cut, or you know when to let the story have its
edge. I think it's true that characters do come alive. You hear that
you're always in control of characters, that don't come alive ... but there
is a point when they do become three-dimensional.
Roberson: You find your subconscious working on it a lot of the
time. You may tell yourself, "I'm done for the day, I don't need to do any
more..." And you go off and you do other things so you're not thinking
about it at all, and then the next thing you know here's an idea that's
popped into your head. You go, "Yeah, I can incorporate that here,"
whatever it is. You just can't keep control of yourself. Sometimes the
imagination is a truly wonderful thing.
One question that every writer is asked is, "Where do you get all your
ideas?" What I want to say is, "Don't you get any of your own? Don't you
know where it comes from?" I understand the root behind that question ...
it's "Tell me what I need to do to become a writer, whatever it is." Where
does anybody get their ideas from? Believe me, writers don't need anybody
else's ideas; they've got too many of their own. It's hard to discipline
yourself, because it's this story then this story and then this story...
McCammon: I don't use an outline; I just have what I call "signpost
scenes." Beginning scene, something in the middle, something that I want to
gear myself toward the end. If the book jumps the tracks ... goes in a
different direction ... I'm still going to keep it disciplined. Keep it in
bounds. I think I'd get bored with an outline. I believe the outline has a
purpose ... I outline mentally. I approach it as a reader would approach
it...
Roberson: This is much closer to the way I work. Sword
Dancer came out at about twelve points... I follow the signpost method,
too.
McCammon: ...Every scene is outlined, everything anybody says is
outlined ... writing a book like that would be boring, because you would
already know what's going to happen, what everybody's going to say.
Writing should be as much of a voyage of self-discovery for the writer as
it is to the reader.
Roberson: By the same token, I caution newer writers, and I suggest
that you do do a thorough outline, because it does take a tremendous amount
of discipline. You have to develop a little editor that sits up here in
your head who says, "You're getting off track; this isn't important."
Basically, every scene has to move the plot along, even if all it does is
develop your character. It may not be information that moves the plot
ahead to the next step, but it gives you some idea of what the character is
thinking about or feeling, and how that's going to impact on the story. You
need to be thorough in the beginning just to get yourself in practice.
McCammon: The only way you can do that is by repetition. Stick with
the writing; see it through. I know a lot of people who are writers ...
they try to be writers ... they'll do maybe half of one book then go, "Oh,
this other idea's more interesting; I think I'll go over and do this one."
That way they'll never get anything done. Most writers will say (as you
said) that a writer is always working. We're probably working here.
Mentally. We're working on scenes; we're working on characters; we're
working on future books.
Audience: Do you practice the fight scenes you write?
Roberson: I know there are people who choreograph a lot of stuff,
and I've had a lot of people tell me I probably should. For instance, with
the sword-dance, just to move it ahead, I don't do a blow-by-blow
description. I'm not into martial arts, or anything like that. The tavern
brawls are always very easy to do when you think about it. You've got
bodies thrashing around, furniture, people jumping up and grabbing beams,
and swinging through the air and stuff like that. You just sort of break
it down step-by-step, so you know what plays, what moves, and what keeps
the reader reading.
...Most of my fight scenes are probably more impressionistic, rather than
by blow-by-blow descriptions. There is another author who as I understand
it is really an expert swordsman. All of his fight scenes are real; he has
to choreograph each and every single move and step that's involved in the
scene as you're reading the book.
McCammon: I do a blow-by-blow, but I don't choreograph. I try to do
a blow-by-blow as much as possible. Fight scenes are really tricky. You'd
think that they're easy to write, but they're not. Even though you've got
bodies falling around, people in collision ... you can really lead yourself
to a scene where the hero cannot possibly survive this massive damage!
Audience: How do you approach writing a book?
McCammon: I go from beginning to end. I want to write as a reader's
going to read a book. I want to start at page 1 and keep on going. If I
have problems between page 1 and page 500 for instance, I've got to deal
with it then. I'm not going to jump around. I think if you jump around
you just have a bunch of scenes. You've got to have some sort of dramatic
thread that runs through the book, and you do have to get excited (I think)
about the book yourself. The excitement that you put into the book, the
reader's going to feel. If it's not there, the reader's not going to get
excited.
Roberson: There's something that we're aware of when you read; it's
called pacing. When you're a writer, to accomplish pacing (which is the
movement) ... there are times where you try to move fast; there are times
when you want to slow the story down ... all are emotional reading. We
create buttons and then we push them. We try to jerk the reader around
emotionally. That's effective writing... For the most part, I work start to
finish because there's a certain pace I want to keep. If you build up an
anxiety within you, the writer ... it's going to translate itself to the
reader, too, and the reader will (hopefully) get just as worked up as
you... I really think you're hurting yourself if you do it terribly
episodically, because you can break down internal tension.
McCammon: ...Writing from the middle or the end ... can be done, but
I don't think it's done very often, or very well.
Do you do cliffhanger endings?
Roberson: ...The Cheysuli series is dynastic. What's in book one is
only peripherally in book two, because I jump a generation each time, to
help keep it alive. By the same token, in the Tiger and Del books, I use
the same two characters each time. You can write a cliffhanger ending...
Anytime you're dealing with the same characters, you're dealing with more
of the immediacy, and more like old serials. In series where you're
dealing with different people in each one, I don't think it's the same
thing. You're introducing brand new characters, and sort of have cameo
walk-ons by people that everybody already knows.
McCammon: Do you get bored with your characters? Do you ever feel
like, "Oh gosh, if I have to deal with this character one more time, I'm
going to scream!"
Roberson: I have characters for whatever reason don't come into like
for me, and others ... man, it's hard for me to deal with them, because
they don't interest me. I have to keep telling myself, "They don't
interest me, they sure not going to interest the reader." ...They're
characters that don't work for whatever reason.
McCammon: It's funny sometimes when you're writing and it doesn't
work, it just seems flat; you know something's not working. When it does
work, it's three-dimensional. It's really magical. It's really neat.
Roberson: (Inaudible question) ...Switching from first person to
third person, I alternate so that the voice is not the same. There are
certain rhythms I develop as a writer when I write as first person as
opposed to third person. If I did the whole series in first person, it'd
all sound the same, even though the characters are different.
McCammon: I'd like to talk a little bit about short stories, since
most of you are probably interested in writing short stories. I don't know
why, because I don't think it's easier than doing a book, really. It is
harder. Why do you think it's harder?
Roberson: There are people who are born short story writers, and
there are novels ... and some people may actually do both. I've published
short stories, but I find it difficult, because you have to do it in this
little, tiny microcosm ... you have to create a world, characters, mood,
dialogue, and everything. But you can't go too far with it, because it's
not a short story anymore. So that's why I write books.
McCammon: Actually, the short story market I think it's tougher to
break into than the novel market. A good novel will more than likely sell,
if it's a big surprise to the audience and publisher. It's harder to make
a lot of money on short stories. When I began, I wrote a novel first, and
then I did short stories later on. I found short stories very difficult to
write, because you do have a limited canvas, a limited framework, and a
limited number of characters you can bring on. Everything's got to be
right there ... it's got to be so sharp, right there...
McCammon: (Repeating question) How hard was it for us to get
published?
Roberson: Well, I wrote my first novel when I was 14 years old. I
didn't get published until I was 28. So, I'm not an overnight success.
Even then I wondered, did I need an agent, or do I not need an agent? Do I
market it on my own? ...It was only after I got an agent did anything get
sold. It took me 5 novels ... I wrote 5 novels between the age of 18 and
when Shape Changers was picked up. So no, it was not easy for me to
get published.
...[Publishers] do read the slush pile. They do need more all the time ...
they're looking for new authors, they want to discover, because old ones
die off. They've got to come from somewhere!
McCammon: In my case, I was working in a college on short stories,
and I couldn't get anything published. I was sending out short stories,
everything came back unpublished. So I was working at a Lovett's, and I
decided to write a novel. I went to an agent, and my first novel was
bought. The first book I ever wrote was Baal. Now that's great,
but in another sense, it wasn't good, because I had to learn to write in
public. By that I mean all my mistakes, all my screw-ups, are out there in
public. And I still find it a little embarrassing. The first few books I
did are OK, but basically I think they leave much to be desired. I think
that reflects where I am now compared to where I was then. It's a hard
business to get into. I think it's important as a writer, to keep doing
your best, to keep growing ... because that's what it's all about. I can
look back now and say, "Why did I do this? Why did I do that?" But I did
the best I could at the time. That's important too ... do the very best
you can do at the time.
Roberson: I think one of the things that all writers run into is
when your early work is discovered later in your career. A reader will
come along who's not familiar with you and they've got ... book one and go,
"Are you serious?" and you, the writer, groan a lot. You know your later
books are much better...
McCammon: (Repeating question) What part does formal education play
in a writing profession?
Roberson: Most creative writing professors are failed writers.
They're teaching because they could not make it in the field of publishing
novels. I started as an English major and switched very quickly to
journalism ... I have a B.S. in Journalism; I was investigative news
reporter, and I was also an advertising copy writer... Advertising copy
writing makes you write one-word paragraphs...
McCammon: I'm also a journalism major, but I couldn't get a job!
Roberson: ...I took a lot of classes in anthropology, psychology ...
even though they had nothing to do with my major, they helped me develop
techniques in writing.
McCammon: I was a journalism major at Alabama, but also took some
great writing courses there. My creative writing teacher had a story
published in Esquire in 1963 ... stories about trains. So, you write about
trains, and you'd get an 'A'. I never wrote a story about trains; I've
never written a story about trains since then ... as far as science fiction
or fantasy was concerned ... forget that. You've got to write
slice-of-life.
Southern writing... People get like, "Why don't you write a good Southern
book? About a good ol' Southern family?" That just doesn't appeal to me
at all. People ask me, "Why don't you write what you know?" ... that is,
set a book in Birmingham, set a book in the South... Because you're a
writer, you can go anywhere! Literally. You can go anywhere and be
anybody for a short period of time... We live through our characters. The
characters are all part of us ... the villains, even. The female
characters, the male characters, are all part of us. I really don't like
labels; I don't like the label "horror fiction." I say either it's a good
book, or it's not a good book ... you like it or don't like it. I just
don't like the labels of "science fiction" or "fantasy" or "horror" or
"adult fantasy" or whatever. Either it's a good book or it's not.
Audience: Do you think about putting your novels into another media
(comic books, etc.)?
Roberson: I think the Sword Dancer book would make a great
comic book. For those of you who aren't familiar with it, it's Conan the
Barbarian meets Gloria Steinem. Once they get together, they have
adventures ... the man gets his consciousness raised... I haven't pursued
it, but it's something that I'd like to pursue.
McCammon: Yeah, it'd be fun... I've thought about a computer game
based on a book...
Roberson: ...Labels [fantasy, SF, etc.] are mostly for
distribution... Distributors have to go in and sell a book in about two
sentences to the bookstore buyer...
McCammon: The publishers are working to beat the system.
Roberson: (Inaudible question) There are certain things that male
writers have women do that a woman would not do. But the only way to work
it out is to have somebody read what you've done. I've had people think
that because I ... wrote from a male point-of-view first person ... a
240-lb, male barbarian/sword slinger ... I've had people think that it's a
man writing using a woman's pseudonym. It's not my fantasy ... to become a
240-lb male barbarian/sword-slinger... The thing you'll have to deal with
[in characterization] is the people. Make them people first. Make the
second characteristics secondary, unless it's something that absolutely has
to have bearing on the scene that you're working with. I do more books
from a male point-of-view than a woman's point-of-view. The strength in
characterization is people. Now, I'm sure there are things I do that a man
wouldn't do, but I can ask my husband...
McCammon: I think you also have to work as a method actor, too.
You've got to learn method acting. You really do, because in my new book,
two women are the lead characters. It's integral to the book that there's
a childbirth scene. I talked to some friends of my wife about childbirth.
I wanted to know about everything. The fluid, the pain... You've got to
be a method actor ... as you write a scene, you've got to feel. You've
really got to feel as much as possible... To get in the skin of your
character.
Roberson: To illustrate a point, a friend of mine wrote a book, and
had his woman villain lying naked on a bed with her legs rather wide apart
... which didn't fit the scene at the time, because a group of strangers
burst through her door, he did not have her close her legs. I'd be willing
to bet you there's not a woman alive who would remain on a bed with her
legs spread. It's that sort of thing ... you can ask other women, "In a
situation like this, how do you think a woman would react like?"
McCammon: Well, we're at the end... Thank you so much!
|