Here's something I've been thinking about for some time now. If I were to write a fantasy novel, do I "need" to introduce the reader to it? Think about something like Lord of the Rings, for instance. Tolkien spends a lot of time in those books introducing us to the hobbits, elves, orcs and all that, and he tells us a lot about the world, the history of the world, and all that. But is this really necessary? Put it this way. I read a comic the other day, where two guys are talking about Christmas. One says it has lost most of the magic it used to have, and he remembered especially well Christmas 1980. He was sitting in front of the fireplace, with snow falling outside, a warm cup of tea, and he got shivers down his back when he heard the church bells ring. The other guy agreed it sounded magical, but jokinly asked if he was talking about "Hell's Bells, the opening track on AC/DC's album Back in black". And yeah, it was. But considering they both love that kind of music, both know AC/DC quite well, did he really have to specify what Hell's Bells are? The reader might not know, but his friend sure did. I know that was a weird example, but you get the idea. If I have a fantasy novel, do I really have to describe everything like that? If I have a hobbit in the story, how much description is "required"? Unique races like that is one thing, but things like elves, dwarves, gnomes, orcs, gobins etc are all well known in fantasy. Isn't it enough to say it's a dwarf? Do I really have to specify what a dwarf is, just in case the reader doesn't know? Same goes for the history of the world. Is it ok to reference something that has happened in the past, but without going into detail about it? I mean, if we in the real world talk about the Korean war, you guys know what I'm talking about, right? If this was a story, the reader would know it too. There's a country called Korea, and there was a war there. So if I mention the orcish assault on Krangidur, you know what I'm talking about, right? There's a place called Krangidur, and orcs attacked it. What more do I need to say, if it's not relevant to the story? Even if the heroes travels to the ruins of Krangidur, they only have to mention the orc attack to explain why it's in ruins. Or am I missing something here? I do hope some of this makes sense. I'm not a fantasy writer, and my sci-fi stuff takes place in the real world, and is based on actual science. But I do want to write a fantasy novel, just to see if I can. The problem is finding out how much I need to tell the reader. Tell too much, and it feels like a textbook. Tell too little, and it can be confusing.
Yes in that particular example you need to explain it but to be honest you just did but because I'm not an AC/DC fan it means nothing to me. I don't know if it should be funny or what. As to your whole question, you are going to have to let the audience know what they need to know. It is up to your skills as a writer to know what that is. Read some Ray Bradbury, particularly the Martian Chronicles.
I’m very much a proponent of minimalism when it comes to backstory and world-building. Granted, all of my stories take place in the real world (some with fantasy elements, some without), but my opinion wouldn’t change either way. I have no trouble as a reader just going along with the story, but you have to make good on your promises. If I don’t get the details about something, then I assume I don’t need to know them. If I do need to know them, you better be giving them to me. Of course, this is pretty conventional wisdom. The real challenge is determining which details the reader actually needs to know. That’s going to be a different answer for everyone, I think.
Anything you relay about the world should really be relevant to the plot. If it's not, then you can cut it. What makes you think everything should be explained? Infodump isn't the same as exposition. Do you read fantasy? Because if you don't, I'd advise you do before you attempt to write it. I'm not sure I get your dilemma. Just apply good writing techniques to it, which applies in any genre. It's usually assumed that fantasy writers love to world-build. I'm a fantasy writer who hates world-building... lol
That's why I told her to read "The Martian Chronicles". I don't think Bradbury did a whole lot of explaining about the setting. Just what was necessary. I too believe in minimalism. Just enough. Also, if you are going to be talking history or pop culture then you have to know your intended audience. For instance when she mentioned the Korean War, hardly anybody under 60 knows much unless they are a history buff. You know how many millenials know anything about the Viet Nam War? Not many I bet. I don't get the "Hell's Bells" reference at all, showing my age. Know the audience and the current pop culture. The best sci-fi/ fantasy is when the author builds the world. I think the bottom line is that you have to know the genre. You have to be well read on what is being published right now. Read, read, read.
I think it's not so much a matter of "if" you have to do it but rather "when" are you going to do it and "how much of it" are you going to explore (a.k.a: how long is your exposition dump going to be). Using your example of "the orcish assault on Krangidur": yes it is technically all we need, buuuuuuuuuuut, if you mention the orcish assault and then your character says "This ruin used to be a city called Krangidur but the orcs destroyed it" my immediate reaction is going to be somewhere along the lines of "Yeah, no shit Sherlock"; if you're not going to put any flavor text you might as well say "This must have been a stronghold in ancient times". You don't need to tell us the political structure, culture, and trade routes of the city but give the reader something otherwise, the reader will (probably) not care about your world and then you will find yourself fighting a losing battle. You can always use narrative shortcuts like "high fantasy race #2: Elves"... that is unless your elves are different in some way... like the elves in Harry Potter (they look more like goblins than anything else), and if you are introducing a unique(ish) race then you absolutely have to explain at least physical appearance. Example: I have a race of wolf-people called Vilktakas but they are definitely not werewolves, in fact, referring to them as such is a good way to get into a fight (it would be like greeting a complete stranger saying "yo, how you doing you fucking neandertal?"), because of this I will have to mention the physique of the race (down to specifics if I use one as part of the main/supporting cast). Bottom line, you have to world build enough so that the world feels real and lived in but not so much that the reader will find it sleep-inducing. As to where is the sweet spot, well, that varies on an individual basis so... yeah.
Hello, my friend That depends on the importance each thing have in your story. At least you have to describe the place where your MC is if you don't like to explain to much detail, don't do it. However, at least you have to incorporate these, smell, sight and sound to give the reader a notion of a real place. About races, why don't you explore other stuff? I know Tolkien made the elves being vegetarian and very green, but surely you can find another culture which you can get inspired? On the information issue, again it depends on what you want to do. Let's suppose your MC is looking to construct a massive weapon to destroy his enemy. At least he has to search for some technology that was used before. Now on this example, you can explain how it was the old technology, not by exposition, but someone that worked on that time, this implies your MC was getting involved. However, if you don't want to explain that much, you can always make up an adventured that died but left a journal explaining; or even that explorer is still alive? Read as well some books as some have mentioned. I hope this helps. Keep on good work and have fun
If you're using a familiar fantasy species like dwarf, then very little racial details are required. I specified little rather than none because interpretations of even well-known fantasy creatures can slightly vary. So it's probably best to throw in a few details just to get your readers onboard with your dwarves.
I'm in complete agreement with @Mckk. Describe your character's surroundings only so much as they matter to the story, and of course to convey atmosphere and emotion and foreshadowing and those things. The human brain is quite expert at filling in the blanks. Not long ago I completed work on a ballbuster of a chapter. The scene is of three 12-year-old girls who've been trekking all day in open country and have stopped for the night in a forest clearing. The temptation would be to go into great detail about the dark, scary forest and the night creatures blinking and that kind of nonsense... but to what end? In fact the forest is the least of the girl's worries. I want the reader's butt sitting around the campfire as the girls tell stories and begin to bond as friends... and get drunk on what they think is apple cider. I don't want to pull the reader away on false pretenses to a dark and gloomy forest. What you see below are the only descriptions given of the surroundings the girls find themselves in. The chapter clocks in at nearly 10,000 words, of which I devote a scant 150 or so to the scenery. ______________________________________ Autumn dusk had settled over the rolling hills, setting a quiet fire to the horizon with smears of copper and crimson against a dark violet sky. But how soon the last stroke of twilight had given way to the first twinkling stars, those jewel-eyed ladies of the night that for a threepence will whisper sweet nothings in the dying of the light. Such were the breathless musings of Adeline as she scribbled away in her diary by the crackling fire, over which hung an unlucky rabbit on a crudely fashioned spit that Mabel turned from time to time. ______________________________________ Home, she thought, gazing up at the starry sky and listening to the soughing of the wind through the trees. I want to go home. ______________________________________ A peaceful drowse had fallen over the forest glade on the edge of a grove of oaks. After a short spell, Mabel took from her rucksack the shabby blanket she’d grabbed in haste as they departed her aunt’s cottage. Rosemarie found her bedroll while Adeline pulled out a blue cashmere shawl and soon enough the three girls were huddled warmly around the fire. In the stillness came the distant call of an owl: Oohu-oohu. Oohu-oohu-oohu. Rosemarie listened to the haunting notes floating on the night air, reminiscing. She peered through the dark, her gaze following the slope that led from their little camp to the crest of a steep hill. And there, bathed in moonbeams, was the silhouette of a horned owl that kept watch from a gnarled branch of a sheltering oak. She turned to the other girls, who looked tired and sore and lost in their thoughts. A story might be just the thing. “I knew a courtesan, a close friend of the queen,” Rosemarie said, trying to keep the pride from her voice. “Know a courtesan, that is. Mademoiselle Valerie.” ______________________________________ They all burst into uproarious laughter. The full moon and the potent brew had conspired, as so often they do, to bewitch the three travelers with such merry drunkenness that between them they hadn’t a thimbles worth of cares. When they’d finally settled down, they sat together happily at the foot of the waning fire. Mabel put a log in the pit to burn slowly through the night. Off in the dark woods, the fireflies and crickets were well into their nightly refrain. ______________________________________ “Yes. Something poetic,” said Rosemarie. She thought of a certain courtesan and turned toward the oak tree at the top of the hill. But just like Valerie, the owl had flown off. “Perhaps this will do. Repeat after me: come what come may, the Three Barn Swallows we’ll be forever and a day.” The two girls took their vows, Mabel saying the words with reverence, while Adeline’s voice was shaking. The three of them smooshed their thumbs together. “There,” said Mabel, all smiles. “It’s done.” Adeline took one look at her bloodied thumb and went pale, groaned, dropped the gourd jug, and fell back in a dead faint onto a soft bed of autumn leaves.
@LadyErica I'm familiar with the comic you're talking about. In this example, it's important to keep in mind that a fanatial love of AC/DC is a well established character trait. It's also, you know, an actual band we're talking about, and hardly a very obscure one. I consider this a sort of running gag, and it's not the reader's knowledge of AC/DC that's really important, but the reader's knowledge of the character's obsession with the band. Anyway, I think it's fine, even beneficial, to leave some aspects of worldbuilding vague, or if not vague, then incomplete. I'm gonna take a wild stab here and say that most Fantasy readers are pretty imaginative individuals, and want a chance to use that imagination. You also have to keep viewpoint in mind. The character(s) relaying information to the reader, about a particular race or ancient ruin or what have you, might not be terribly well informed themselves. They might even be very nearly clueless. I think it's a good idea to show that the people living in this world don't have all the answers, just like we don't. Makes if feel deeper, more real and lived in. I'm very fond of this style of worldbuilding myself, and there's nothing more tantalising than a juicy enigma.
It depends what kind of world you're trying to build. Traditional fantasy such as a Brandon Sanderson or Robert Jordan is so complex you often need introduction to every idea and place and character in order to follow along with the story from book to book. In something like Dark Souls however, Hidetaka Miyazaki intentionally gave very little away and said to the player that, if they were really interested, the lore was hidden in the world and ready to be found, you just had to go looking for it. I mention things in my novel, through character conversation usually, that make no difference to the plot but flesh out buildings or plot mechanics, even my magic system... the idea is to form a tapestry of sorts in the background of the main story where ideas a woven together, isolated from one another and insignificant on their own. Then slowly over time and multiple storylines, my aim is to bring them all together so that the reader, on going back to the first in a trilogy for example, realises extra details that give weight to concepts, character movitivations or plot twists. Mentioning things that happened in the past needs to be done with subtlety, otherwise you wind up dumping a load of information onto the reader and that can be unpleasant. I would say leave talk of the past to characters and only when it makes sense to mention it, such as a character noticing shards of iron sticking out from the wall surrounding a city and mentioning some kind of conflict that happened long before his time. He might then notice the design of the shards is modern and couldn't possibly be from that time. It gives the reader the knowledge of a former conflict without dumping information on them as to who fought who, how long it took, where it took place, who won, the implications of that, etc... I understand the dilemma of 'am I saying enough' or 'is this too much description?' and both are questions every author has asked themselves. I wrote a list of every plot element, character trait and world detail I wanted to feature in my story and checked them off as I went along. I knew instinctively where I should be revealing such details and when I was finished, I was satisfied but not wholly. I went back and did a final read-through and included some very small but very necessary details that fleshed out the world and the plot, my characters and the cities in which they lived. If you do the same you'll very quickly realise where things need to be expanded upon and where certain details go on for too long. Read the novels of Stephen Hunt and you'll quickly realise how sci-fi and fantasy can bleed together and how, through glimpses and hints and solitary ideas, you can world build without falling foul of information dumping. The Court of the Air is fantastic reading if you want to understand quality world-building, highly recommended!
I think if you're doing the equivalent of "standard dwarf, see Tolkein for more details", then that runs the risk of making your setting seem very generic and maybe even lazy. If you look at, say Dragon Age, Iron Kingdoms, World of Warcraft, Warhammer Fantasy / Age of Sigmar, etc, the common fantasy races are there and there are some broad similarities (dwarves are stubborn, lawful, live underground, etc), but there's some work done on how they are part of this setting, they haven't been just cut and pasted into them.
Thanks a lot, guys. Some very helpful tips here. To elaborate a bit more on the story, I'm thinking about a fantasy world where the main characters are a unique race or some sort, but where most of the other world is the traditional fantasy stuff. Lord of the Rings have hobbits, Dragonlane has kender. The idea I'm toying with is that all the magic in the world comes from crystals, so it's a very limited supply. But in short, you use the crystals for everything. Put a fire-crystal in a sword, and you have a fire-sword. Put a lightning-crystal in your gun, and you fire lightning-bullets. It means just about anyone can use them, but they are in short supply, as I said. It's not possible to re-create them. But all these crystals had to come from somewhere, and our heroes set off on a journey to find out where the crystals originated. In the end, they find an entire island made from these crystals. It's just a basic plot right now, and I don't even know if I'll write it. But anyway, as I said, most will be traditional fantasy. That means I don't think specifying what the various races are like (other than the unique ones), as they are common races in fantasy. I will mention how they differ from the usual ones, though. The idea is to make the world as familiar as I can, so it's easy to get into it and understand it. But it's also "my" world, so there will be differences. And as for Krangidur, that was just a random name for a random location. I guess what I wonder about is if the heroes point out it was destroyed in an orcish attack fifty years earlier, do you really need to know more than that? It's ancient history. It explains why the place is in ruins, and it would make sense for them to talk a bit about the history. But the attack was a long, long time ago. What does it matter today? It's not really all that relevant. Unless the place was cursed, of course. That would be a different matter. Haha, I love the AC/DC obsession, and the rivalry between Kiss and AC/DC. But in this case, wouldn't it be enough if one guy asked if he's talking about Hell's Bells, and the other confirms it's AC/DC? What more do people need to know? Is naming the album and track number all that relevant? I just think pointing out of all that is too much of an infodump, and takes away the "realism" of the conversation. If you were to mention Mordor, I would simply point out that it's Lord of the Rings. There's no need to point out it's from Lord of the Rings: Return of the king.
True, but if you start World of Warcraft the very first time and pick a dwarf, you pretty much know all you "need" to know already, from the other dwarves. There are differences, yes, but not so much that you need to re-explain the same things every single time. If you think of elves, you tend to think of tall, slim humanoids with pointy ears, that usually live in the forest, and often use magic. Dragonlance changed this around a bit with two seperate elven tribes (Silvanesti and Qualinesti), but even these are minor variation of "standard elf". Even the dimernesti are "standard elf, lives in the sea". And that's the point. If orcs attack Krangidur, does it really matter what those orcs were like? They could even have been the good guys back then. But orcs are orcs. You pretty much know what to expect from them. As a side note, I don't write fantasy, and I'm learning a lot from this thread. Keep it up, guys!
No. In almost every case you should never place a prerequisite of knowledge on the reader. You don't know that everyone in your audience has read a Tolkein-esque fantasy work. Besides, I tend to cringe away from fiction that shamelessly rips off Tolkein-popularized species, and I have trouble imagining that most people don't. That is not to say that using elves, dwarves, orcs, or what have you is wrong, of course, and I have nothing wrong with fantasy that gives us that nod to traditionalism, but to assume there is so little room for variation on these fantasy races that you can expect to say "dwarf" and your audience to read "exactly what they are in Tolkein's works" is not the best idea. You should elaborate upon the nature of dwarves in your story, so long as they're narratively relevant, and provide your own originality to them. If they aren't important enough to warrant explanation, then it may be best to just not write dwarves into the story? No infodump required, but there should be some explanation on what dwarves are in your world -- at least the parts that matter. I think it should have some modicum of relevance. As in, it should matter to some degree, even if its just establishing some aspect of Krangidur. And I think it should have some explanation; which can just be as terse as establishing who the primary residents of Krangidur are and how the assault has effected Krangidur since. The Orcish Assault doesn't need to be overbearingly relevant no, but if Krangidur is an important place, then, yes, and it could play into how Krangidur plays into the overarching story in a rather roundabout way. If Krangidur and the Orcish Assault aren't relevant, then maybe it establishes something important about the Orcs? Is the Orc Assault on Krangidur even details you need to include? Is it just filler details and an offhanded remark? Does it not play into the story at all? Is there nothing you can replace it with so you aren't wasting dialogue, details and space on the page? Details are great, but only insofar as they're details you need, and if you don't need the details, sometimes you can totally omit some point from your story.
More on Krangidur, if Krangidur was totally ruined, does it have to be orcs? Could you make it a more relevant threat to the central plotline? Could it be in rebuilding? Could some new residents have come to live among Krangidur's ruins? Why do the heroes need to come to Krangidur? Perhaps the cause of Krangidur's destruction could relate to the heroes' goals? Just because it happened 50 years ago, doesn't mean it can't have some impact on today.
Well, you have to consider that these guys are hardcore music nerds. Those types just love showing off their knowledge, such as which song is which track of which album. Jokke from the strip is particularly prone to engaging in battles of band triva or competing for sheer dedication where KISS is concerned; it's happened at least once before. For the purposes of this specific strip, I think it's more than enough to play off the contrast between Christmas bells (or sleigh bells or what are they) and Hell's Bells, which are probably somewhat less festive. I'm not familiar with the song, but it's enough that I imagine such a song to make the joke work. So the track number and everything isn't necessary for the joke, but serves to make the dialogue more Jokke-flavored. So to my mind, this heightens the realism rather than diminishing it. EDIT: I'll also posit a more mercenary reason behind the lengthening of the dialogue. It's a comic strip, right? So the bigger your speech bubbles are, the less you have to draw... That probably isn't it, but it's never a bad idea to consider the differences between mediums.
Well, that depends on what you mean by 'specify'. Do you need to drone, "Dwarves are small humanoids who often live underground and mine things. The Dwarf Commonwealth is ruled by a committee of mine owners known as Protectors..." blah blah blah. No. Not even given the fact that that Commonwealth thing would be a creation of your book, never seen in Tolkien. Unless it's entertaining and engaging--I find the description of Hobbits at the beginning of The Hobbit to be entertaining and engaging--you should try to find another way. Let's pretend that Snow White was never written and some people don't know what dwarves are--and in any case, the dwarven government is new to your novel, so a glance at that wouldn't hurt. Frank blinked at the dwarf sitting by the window, then whispered, "What happened to Joe? He looks like he lost a fight." Wilbur shook his head, barely perceptibly. "Shh. Pretend you don't notice. We haven't made the deal yet; I need him in a good mood. And he's not 'Joe' any more, not since his father was promoted; he goes by Joseph." "Fine. Whatever. What happened to him?" "Well, a Protector's son is too good to wear a worn-out cloak that, well, fits him, so he went swanning all over town in a cashmere cloak made for a human child." "Wouldn't that be about a foot too long?" "That's the point. He tripped over it on the seawall stairs and broke his nose." Now we know that dwarves are short and there's some important title of "protector". That's probably enough to get along with. Edited to add: We also know that they're in a town, and a seaside town. You don't need to explain any more unless the 'any more' is relevant to the story--and then it's often best to explain it in some way other than narrative explanation.
I think it's best to weave in the world building, backstory etc. in small bits as it's needed for readers to understand what's going on in the story.
No, you don’t have to explain the world/setting to the reader. See, e.g., the novels of Steven Erikson.
Too short and sweet. You need to tell her in what way he didn't so she'll know if he is worth looking up. Because he has a whole website with an encyclopedia and wiki section. If there is a wiki section this world must have a pretty good description of setting. But I agree with you, she should read something. She needs to read stuff in this genere to see how others did it.
You’ll have to read it to see how it works. He doesn’t really explain much. The reader is meant to piece it all together. One can always look at websites or wikis, but those aren’t part of the novels. I found it enjoyable to read the books without resorting to those.
No. It's not needed. It came well after the novels were published, as far as I know. Or at least after most of them were. I don't know how many of his readers consult the Wiki, but I'd be surprised if it is a majority. You have to put thought into the books, that's all. You can piece things together without having the explanations handed to you. It's part of the fun.
My opinion? Yes, you need to, and I'd argue HAVE to, introduce the reader to a setting if you're doing genuine sci-fi or fantasy. If it's something like Modern/Urban Fantasy where you basically posit the setting is our world but one where sorcery is omnipresent (which opens a variety of other problems but that's another issue) then you can just introduce the characters and roll with it. Or if it's something like ID4 where the setting is basically our world but with aliens invading, the setting kind of writes itself. But for more genuine science fiction or fantasy, like say Blade Runner or Star Wars or LOTR, then you have to establish what kind of world this is, why is it this way, what is going on etc or else you're asking the reader to just follow the characters into a world they've never seen fighting enemies they have no idea of. And that's not impossible to do, or rather not impossible from a story perspective, but it is IMPLAUSIBLE in that it's almost absurd the reader will be able to figure out what the fuck you're talking about. The reason for this is LORE, or rather, backstory. Sci-fi and fantasy tend to build upon immersive, expansive backstories and settings and this requires lore to properly set up. So at some point, something, be it exposition by a character or simply a lore-dump (lol ;p), has to explain it. There are obviously subtle ways to do lore-dumping (lololol) but it is unavoidable in most respects. To put this in perspective, and I say this as an avowed Brony, but MLP had to give direct exposition as to the background and setting of Equestria just to function as a story...and it's a series about magical horses and their cuck dragon friend. But literally minute one of episode one is a kind of prologue explaining the STORY OF GENESIS as viewed by magical ponies. Now as I said there are subtle ways to do this, and of course it's preferable to just an absurd metric shit ton of lore thrown at you all at once. I said this in another thread where the question of HOW do you prefer to set up a setting and open a story came up, and my assessment was that I prefer to introduce at least one or two of the main characters and then, by introducing them and explaining or describing them, explain the world they live in; for example, since like almost everything I write is science-fiction then I describe and dive into a character and through them, their thoughts, their positions and beliefs, etc, I explore what that means in the world and what that world is as subtly as possible before diving into the lore wholesale later. For example, a more direct example, a story I'm currently working on (and God willing get some publishing help with in 2019) involves a post-scarcity far-future theocratic Human Empire in the 23rd millennium where almost everyone has access to the Everlasting: a wellspring of virtual reality "cybercosms", holographic technology and 3D printing via picotech "smart matter" which allows basically everyone to have anything they want at their beck and call...but the truly wealthy and powerful have more physical materials, more genuine wealth and substance, and rule over this capitalist monarchical system as noblemen and noblewomen. And one of the characters is one of these megacorporate aristocrats, and her best friend is a kind of serf or servant girl, so while even the shit-tier servant girl is living like Elon Musk in this future the noblewoman (let's call her Not Elsa since she's basically Queen Elsa but in space) is living like Christ, to our eyes her serf BFF is basically a billionaire but Not Elsa has power we today would consider to be almost implausible since it's like the GDP of the entire Earth. She's a noblewoman which means she has access to rarer, physical wealth more than just some nanoplastic that can be "flash forged" using 3D printing or some VR cyber-realities. And this is explained by basically going through their morning routine with them, prior to the key story, while we explain kinda what it's like living in what amounts to the Culture but ruled by Donald Trump...or as I call it "A Well Written Culture Novel" lol XD (Just kidding! I'm a fan of the series!) This also works for space battles, or ground battles. I kinda learned it from Doc Smith reading the Lensmen series, as he describes what is happening and how the tech works AS IT HAPPENS and then going into it directly later or as he describes it. So when something like the "Negasphere" comes up, he doesn't just say "it's a star system-obliterating WMD which is a chunk of antimatter the size of a world flung at relativistic speeds using a Death Star railgun" even though that's literally what it is. He describes it, offhand almost, then what it does and how it's used, and you discern from this description and the details therein and mention of how it was made and you understand that...well, it's a planet-sized chunk of antimatter flung at a star using a gargantuan railgun which reduces solar systems to burning clouds of plasma. And by doing this, subtly and really during the battle, it feels unlike a lore-dump and more like a guy recalling what is happening in an actual battle that happened. BTW read the fucking Lensmen series it's GODLIKE! Long Live Doc Smith! I also believe that a kind of opening prologue is important, especially when doing a series. George Lucas (or as I call him the Son of Doc) did it best, basically in a couple of paragraphs he manages to almost instantly set up the world, backstory, lore and concept of Star Wars and then scatters a handful references to shit like the Clone Wars or something in the dialogue, and in mere moments he establishes this world. Brilliantly I may add! Then every movie in the series starts this way, and expands and grows while also focusing on the specific setting and movie it's in. Unlike some shitty rehashes of Star Wars *coughlastjedicough* it doesn't require five expanded universe books to explain who these characters are and what is going on. Yunno, like it was written by someone competent. TWIST! ENDING! Anyway, that's longwinded. TLDR: yes setting up your world is VITAL to science-fiction and fantasy, but there are subtle ways to do this without just pinching out lore onto the page. Also Doc Smith is God, read his parables, spread his word! https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lensman_series
