Understanding the mechanics

[elvet]

I apologize in advance for the uninspired title, or if this has been discussed before.
When I first get into a fantasy book, I usually like to get as quick a grasp as possible about the world the story is set in. I really appreciate a Forward, setting the stage so that I have a vantage point to work from. Some writers are good at leading you by the hand via the story, so that you can get a good understanding of the capabilities of the characters. Or, it's written from the protagonist's view, and he/she is in the dark as much as you are so that you learn about the environment as you go along.
I bring this up because recently I've read 2 books that didn't do this very well. The Black Jewels trilogy that I'm just finishing off had me running to the internet to read up on FAQs from the books (heirarchy, castes, 3 realms). The chronicles of Amber was another. Everytime I thought I had figured out what the Princes were cabable of, it seemed that they ended up having some other attribute that helped them overcome the challenge. It got to the point where I couldn't feel much suspense, because I just expected them to have another trick up their sleeve. Sometimes I think it's just my lack of understanding (I have been accused of speed reading), but I really hate being left in the dark.

 

[HieroGlyph]

I wish I could've been accused of speed-reading... But, maybe because I have never rushed a book (or series), I can be left in the dark for... as long as it takes. I dont find I need to know a new worlds mechanics, if the mechanics are new and different. Oft this might just come from the writing style. And as to predicting character actions form capabilities - I also avoid guessing games. Whats that make me seem like? Patient. If cause and effect connect, I have no quibbles

 

[nixie]

I enjoy being thrown in at the deep end discovering the world and characters as I go along..you think you've worked it out then all of a sudden something else is thrown into the mix,

 

[elvet]

Perhaps predicting is not the best word. It's more like having a sense of their limitations and fallibility. If they are portrayed as being human, it's easy to know where they stand. If they have otherworldy talents - magic, etc. - then I like to have some idea of the rules of engagement, so to speak.
I'm afraid that I'm not that patient with books. I try to take my time, and I've gotten better over the years, but I still tend to rush them. It also means that I forget the finer details pretty quickly after I'm done.

I enjoy being thrown in at the deep end

Good analogy! You've managed to say in a few words what I've been trying to do in 2 posts.

 

[GOLLUM]

I'm with Nixie on this one. The deeper the better provided the overall plot moves along rather than being stalled in minutea if it serves no valid purpose to the story.

I enjoy mental gymnastics as I like having my mind stretched in unexpected directions. One of the highlights of my reading experience.

 

[elvet]

Since I am still fairly new to the genre, I'll teat this issue like aquiring a skill. Hopefully I will get better at allowing the details to come through the story.

 

[Gary Wassner]

As an author, you hit upon one of the most difficult obstacles I have to navigate. If you are too descriptive in the beginning, you risk losing the reader before the story even takes off. Yet as writers of fantasy, we are building worlds and we have to BUILD them. They don't exist off the pages until we put them on the pages. I get a lot of the prep work done in the first few chapters of my current series, and I try very hard to blend it with action and plot development. Some authors prefer to reveal their world more slowly, some more quickly. Some rely upon glossaries and an appendix. It's a choice, and it's an important one.

 

[hermi-nomi]

My preference when reading any book is for action. A couple of paragraphs on the first page should describe the setting, then there should be an event. From thereon in you can explain and describe the mechanics of the fantasy world, but you have to hook the reader first. LotR Fellowship of the Ring par example ~ took me ages to get into the book 'cos there was too much exposition without much happening, Jonathan Strange and Mr Norrel is another example of a novel taking far too long to really hook me ... for me it didn't start getting interesting until roughly chapter 7. And if any of the books had failed to make sense I wouldn't have bothered to finish reading them.

 

[Brian G Turner]

Everytime I thought I had figured out what the Princes were cabable of, it seemed that they ended up having some other attribute that helped them overcome the challenge.

However the world is built, I should hope that Deus Ex Machina is generally discredited as a modern literary device.

 

[Brys]

I actually prefer it when authors don't do this, because it implies that the world they've created is simple enough to be explained quickly in an introduction, and in my mind that makes it pointless, because it is clearly lacking a decent level of depth. I prefer Zelazny's Amber because it doesn't patronise the reader by telling you all the details, and the same is true for Erikson's Malazan series. Establishing atmosphere is another thing entirely, and can work very well - but the rules of the world the reader should discover through the actions of the novel - Show, don't tell.

I didn't think there were many deus ex machinas in Amber - Zelazny didn't write a boring introduction explaining how princes could manipulate shadows etc, but he did get the ideas through pretty quickly (the first book is only 200 pages or so after all). There was one case of deus ex machina I can think of in Zelazny, but that's it, and it seemed to me that Zelazny was much more realistic in how he treated his characters than most fantasy authors - they were by no means successful, and Corwin was hardly able to come up with new attributes every time he faced a challenge, and he certainly lost some times.

 

[Green Knight]

I think the best fantasies work because the action IS the description, and the description IS the action. In other words, the description is so captivating that it becomes dramatic in its own right.

Read the opening pages of Mervyn Peake's Titus Groan. Nothing much happens at all - in fact, whole chapters go by and barely an hour of real time passes. Yet I defy anyone who's not totally averse to the genre to put it down. It's as fascinating as watching an egg hatch.

If a fantasy is done well, one very quickly, instinctively almost, gets to understand what is and isn't possible within the confines of this universe. You don't need a big glossary of spells and powers to know what's legit and what isn't. I think readers come with their own in-built BS-detectors... ;-)

 

[Brys]

Actually, while not a lot of time passes, that's different to saying nothing happens. A remarkable amount happens in the novel as a whole, but it never feels particularly fast paced - or slow paced for that matter. But when you think back on it, you realise that the entire Gormenghast series is barely over 1000 pages, yet there are few modern fantasy novels which manage to incorporate as many events into a single 1000 page novel as happen in the first two Gormenghast novels. Add to that, Peake is one of the best writers there's ever been - I'd hate to see Robert Jordan trying to do the same - in fact, he has, with Crossroads of Twilight, but unfortunately Jordan's description is terrible and isn't evocative in the slightest. Peake's description is the fantasy. I think many non-genre readers would equally appreciate the Gormenghast series - the elements of the fantastic are very limited - and there's no magic.