Novelist's Desk Forum Setting

Some readers go for a story just because of the setting. The one thing I like about Stephanie Meyers' books is the idea of setting them in Forks, Washington where the nearly constant cloud cover makes it possible for the vampires to come out in the day time. Nero Wolf is defined by his reluctance to leave his New York Brownstone. The Number One Lady's Detective Agency could not take place outside of Botswana. The Notebook is a story in and of the American south.

And then there is the Hunchback of Notre Dame. Remember the part in the middle? Oh, you skipped that too? Page after page of tedious detail about the layout of Paris at the time the story took place. I think the only people who read that are English teacher, who pass on this technique gone wrong to their students, emploring them to write descriptions that draw the reader into the story. Publishers see it in focus groups all the time - readers skip the descriptions.

So whats a writer to do? The setting is important, but you can't write a description. Here is a neat idea I heard for backstory, that I think can work for setting:

1) Write down everything you want to get across about the setting. When, when, what it looks like, how it smells, the feelings it gives the main character and so on.

2) Print it out and cut the paper up so that just a sentence or phrase appears on each piece.

3) Write your story

4) Occasionally, sift through the pile and pull out a single sentence.

5) Figure out how the sentence impacts the characters or the action where you are in the story.

6) If you like what you come up with stick it in.

7) Repeat from step 3 until all the sentences are used up

Re-read Twilight to see how Ms. Meyers handled introducing Forks. She could have used the steps above.

OK - time for your comments.

I'd love to here about the settings you are using and what role they play in the story.

Okay, on the main subject, I think you have a good point. Over describing your setting is a bad thing, but I have to disagree with you on using Stephine Meyer as a good example. Meyer is a great storyteller, and by the time she got to her last book and The Host, her writing had improved, but that first book was over descriptive and full of cliches. She's not someone whose writing I would chose to emmulate.

That being said, adn before I get an inbox full of hate mail, I do love her books. As I said, she is an EXCELLENT storyteller, and her writing skill is improving greatly.

N~

OK, I shouldn't have picked such a controversial example.

Or, maybe that was a good thing since it got people posting. :-)

As for what is the right amount of detail, I think that is a you'll-know-it-when-you-see-it thing. Actually, your readers will know it. We tend to love our darlings and refuse to see their flaws. I like to put a piece aside for awhile to get some distance from it. Then, I can see when a description is getting in the way or when a scene can use a bit more depth.

I think it is a mistake to simply dismiss the opinions of readers and tell publishers to get over themselves. Whether you write to sell books, entertain people or just because it makes you feel good, you probably want to do the best job you can. Otherwise, why come to a site like this? Yeah, there are some stupid things that get into reviews, but there is might also be a nugget of help in their too.

Whatever the story needs, no more no less.

I heard a review recently that said the story, "Could have taken place in a white room." If the story is good enough, who cares? I have also read descriptions that are so moving that I wonder if it would be possible for the writer to over describe.

The trick is knowing when the piece is working and when it isn't.

I can completely agree with yoshi's post on allowing the reader to sense their surroundings, then giving them the ability to draw the rest from the pages.

Something I say when people demand for descriptions is this, "This is my world but I want my world to yours, to mold and conform to your own ideas", I want readers to quite literally take part in my books, I had such fun creating this world why can't others enjoy the same feelings?

As to the setting of a book I do have a basic need which I satisfy right off the bat, creating a situation, a scene in the first paragraph that hooks the reader. I imply difficulties and present interest. I then create a setting that equals the first paragraph, a locale that captures the imagination.

I've done this with every one of my books, Crimson Dust takes place in a mental hospital in the first paragraphs which peeks the interest of the reader immediately. Keeping to the namesake, the sequel to Crimson Dust, Crimson Machine takes place within a hospital in the first paragraphs further speaking to the readers imagination. Frequency (name pending) takes place in hoover dam within the gigantic halls. As I've done with all my books I created an apocalyptic, or creepy situation to keep the reader intrigued.

Coming up with a great setting is really a simple thing, think "How weird can I make this?" Or, "How can I make this setting intriguing?" all within the bounds of realism.

I think the amount of setting needed changes with each story. For instance, the project I'm working on, FireFall takes place in Atlanta during the holidays. I want the reader concentrating on the character and her story, so my setting is basic and not fleshed. I let the reader create that. However, the book I finished in August, Knot of Intent took quite a bit more setting, since it moved from Flordia to Crete to Egypt. But even that did not take as much as the fantasy trilogy I'm working on. Since that world and major races are my creations, I have to let the reader see that, but not over do. Difficult and I tend to need more description, but Its a learning process.

N~