SBD: how much world building?

[jmc_bks]

Monday again.  SBD if you have anything you want to share.

I could bitch about every day life.  But, yeah, I'm pretty sure y'all aren't interested in how I've felt nauseated for the past 48 hours, wishing I would just be ill and get it over with.  Or how I stepped on the cat and now she's cowering under the kitchen table, licking her paw.  Or about the large bruise left by the phlebotomist this morning.

So instead I'll bitch about the book I skimmed yesterday -- Nalini Singh's Visions of Heat.  Haven't read the first of the series yet, although it is TBR.  Picked this one up at random at the library on my last trip.  Meh.  The book may have been good, but I was bored and alienated by the politics and other world-building that wasn't explained.  Psy this.  Net that.  Changelings.  Shifters.  Councils.  It was probably explained at some point, but too late, my attention was lost, on to the next thing.  

World building matters, it really does.  But the more I think about it, the more I realize that I have much more patience for it, especially when it is done slowly, in other genres.  I anticipate it in scifi and in fantasy.  I expect the parameters of that world to unfold slowly and be part of the plot; for me, SF/F is at heart an exploration of another universe.  Romance?  Not so much.  It can be in in Elsewhere, but the focus is the relationship (IMO).  So my tolerance is lower -- if the universe of the story isn't the normal world, the author has a limited amount of time to give me the rules.  She has to establish the world and make me care about the h/h relatively quickly.  Without infodumping.

Of course, if I started with the first book of Singh's paranormal series, I probably would've been familiar with all that psy stuff and would've been more tolerant.  Maybe.  But the other thing that put me off was how delicate and fragile the heroine was.  And apparently the heroine of the first book was a fragile flower, too.  Meh.  Fragility and the need to be protected and taken care of by the hero is overrated. 

Random question:  what is it about Jude Law that people find so attractive?  I find him smarmy and unsexy, but seem to be in the minority.  

Can someone explain the appeal of reality shows like The Bachelor?

Comments

[meljeanbrook.livejournal.com]

(Can't answer much about worldbuilding, because maybe I do too much) -- but Jude Law? I think he's out-of-this-world gorgeous. BUT! he also looks smarmy, too, especially in candid photos, and the nanny-thing didn't help. So that's why I like to see his pictures, particularly when they're studio shots, but wouldn't want to get to know him as a person.

Reality shows? No clue.

[jmc-bks.livejournal.com]

Mmm, you include a lot of world building...but it is presented timely. My frustration with VoH was that terms and concepts were dropped in without background, as if I as a reader should already know what a ps-Psy or tk-Psy was. Didn't, and after a while, I stopped caring.

[miladyinsanity.livejournal.com]

Now, I read the first book, and I couldn't remember what a tk-Psy was either.

FWIW, some of the designations were not explicitly explained but there is a glossary on Nalini's site now.

I don't know about other people, but I have a feeling that a very important reason why readers love the Psy books is that the herose are pretty damn hot.

[jmc-bks.livejournal.com]

I didn't hang around long enough to think Vaughn (was that his name?) was hot.

When it comes to world building, I'm lazy. And I subscribe to the four corners theory of fiction reading: as I read, I am not interested in looking up other references (book or 'net), I'm only interested in what is included or explained within the four corners of the book. References to paradigms or archetypes that I miss? Shame on me for being undereducated. References or allusions that are not universal? They need to be explained (without infodumping) as presented or shortly thereafter.

[miladyinsanity.livejournal.com]

I do agree with you, that if I pick up a book, I don't want to need to go hunting for a glossary, even if it's just at the back of the book.

I'm looking at my review again, and I have a distinct feeling that reading StS first would have made a difference.

[(Anonymous)]

You should still read Slave to Sensation. (Aren't I bossy?) It was much better than ViH and the heroine in StS isn't fragile in that annoying way that Faith is.

I don't get reality TV either. Really, just watching the commercials for shows like The Bachelor makes me cringe.

-Jennie

[dogzzz2002.livejournal.com]

Being a paranormal junkie, I loved Singh's world but then I did prefer the first book to the second. I'm looking forward to the next because the heroine is changeling while the hero is Psy.

Bachelor? Never, ever, ever - UGH!! Amazing Race - uberfan!

CindyS