McAnally's (The Community Pub) > Author Craft
Proper practice???
Jabberwockey:
Lan, OZ, thank you both for great advice. Lan, not exactly sure what you mean by bottom up and top down. If I understand you, in a nutshell bottom up is taking the main character and building the world/story around them and top down is taking the world and building the details in it until you get down to the main character?
Lanodantheon:
--- Quote from: Jabberwockey on March 28, 2012, 01:22:46 PM ---Lan, OZ, thank you both for great advice. Lan, not exactly sure what you mean by bottom up and top down. If I understand you, in a nutshell bottom up is taking the main character and building the world/story around them and top down is taking the world and building the details in it until you get down to the main character?
--- End quote ---
Bottom Up and Top Down are approaches to Design in Engineering. Synonyms would be Inside-Out & Outside-In. I think... don't quote me on that.
But yes, that is basically it.
When applied to world building:
In the Bottom-Up or Inside-Out approach, you start with your main character, the setting the story first takes place in and then move outward as the story requires it.
AN example would be if you were writing The Hobbit, you'd start with the character of Bilbo, then move onto his neighborhood and the Shire as a whole. As the story advances and moves out of that initial location you'd build the rest of the world as you interact with it.
The advantage of that approach is that you are not worrying about anything outside the scope of the story you are telling. You can just get up and go.
The disadvantage is that whenever you build the next piece of your world; the next kingdom, the next monster, it has to be consistent with everything that has come before. You run the risk of having a world that exists in a lot of vacuums. "This big kingdom is right next to the Shire....why couldn't we see it back then?"
The Top-Down or Outside-In approach is the opposite. You start with the grand view of things, then add detail as needed to specific parts. You start with maybe the Continent if not the planet, then the countries, etc. You don't need to build everything in this grand view, just bullet-points.
The Advantage of this approach is that you get a Macrocosm. You get to see the big pieces in relation to the each other.
The Disadvantage of this approach is that you risk getting "World Builder's Disease" a malady of many a writer who spends months if not years building a fantasy world and when they sit down to write it, they spend 400 pages telling you about the world they spent so much time on...to "immerse you" in the world before getting to the actual story.
I personally use both, starting at both ends and meeting in the middle. The only disadvantage I've had with that approach so far is...needing to compromise. But Life is compromise.
cenwolfgirl:
--- Quote from: Lanodantheon on March 28, 2012, 04:06:38 PM ---Bottom Up and Top Down are approaches to Design in Engineering. Synonyms would be Inside-Out & Outside-In. I think... don't quote me on that.
But yes, that is basically it.
When applied to world building:
In the Bottom-Up or Inside-Out approach, you start with your main character, the setting the story first takes place in and then move outward as the story requires it.
AN example would be if you were writing The Hobbit, you'd start with the character of Bilbo, then move onto his neighborhood and the Shire as a whole. As the story advances and moves out of that initial location you'd build the rest of the world as you interact with it.
The advantage of that approach is that you are not worrying about anything outside the scope of the story you are telling. You can just get up and go.
The disadvantage is that whenever you build the next piece of your world; the next kingdom, the next monster, it has to be consistent with everything that has come before. You run the risk of having a world that exists in a lot of vacuums. "This big kingdom is right next to the Shire....why couldn't we see it back then?"
The Top-Down or Outside-In approach is the opposite. You start with the grand view of things, then add detail as needed to specific parts. You start with maybe the Continent if not the planet, then the countries, etc. You don't need to build everything in this grand view, just bullet-points.
The Advantage of this approach is that you get a Macrocosm. You get to see the big pieces in relation to the each other.
The Disadvantage of this approach is that you risk getting "World Builder's Disease" a malady of many a writer who spends months if not years building a fantasy world and when they sit down to write it, they spend 400 pages telling you about the world they spent so much time on...to "immerse you" in the world before getting to the actual story.
I personally use both, starting at both ends and meeting in the middle. The only disadvantage I've had with that approach so far is...needing to compromise. But Life is compromise.
--- End quote ---
as i was reading this i thought i was the first type as i didnt realy think about the world
well i had a ruff idea but no fine deatal
i think i am like you work from both ends at the same time and meat in the middle as worlds are also fun to do
i think i like doing the plot best
diciding what you are going to do with these grat charictors in this world of yours that the big one thats the one you should realy spend the most time on :)
meg_evonne:
Give them motivation that arrives from backstory.
Give them a secret.
Give them connections with as many of the other characters as possible.
Read Jim's blog on writing off the home page.
Visit writingexcuses.com.
Take a course on creating characters on line or in person.
Top down or Down up--the end result is the same. Think of a coloring book--they are boring as hell for an adult. Now, take that and put it into an artist's hands and it turns 3D and beautiful or terrifying or compelling. You want to make sure the end result has maximum impact on your reader. You can't end up with your first thoughts and motivations for these characters; they have to be ten steps beyond your first ideas. Strive for depth, but always logical, realistic and often simple characteristics. If your character isn't speaking to your heart, then it will not speak to the reader. If she can't make you cry, the reader won't either.
cenwolfgirl:
love it
i said that was how i started not what i have now (i was 14 when i started with not that much exspirence the story has more wait now due to exspirence, and other influences, Jim's blog being one of them)
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[*] Previous page
Go to full version