Setting or Characters?

[Tinker Gnome]

Do you like your fantasy or Sci-Fi novels to focus more on the setting, or the characters? I think a good example of setting would the the Lord of the Rings books. I would say charcters would be any of R.A. Salvatore's Drizzt novels.

 

[John Crichton]

It's all about the characters. The setting is also important but compelling characters will always keep me reading.

 

[mhacdebhandia]

Ideally both. For SF - science fiction, fantasy, alternate history, and so on - the setting is the attraction. For non-SF genre books, like crime fiction, the characters are most important. However, in both cases the best novels do both really well.

 

[warlord]

Bitter Rant: Drizzt he sucks he's a horrible character and shouldn't be used as an example infact nothing RA Salvatore ever did should be as an example. Unless is being used as an example for uber-crappyiness 'cause thats all the Chewbacca killing bastard can make.Bitter Rant

I would have say characters 'cause a book with a great setting and cardboard characters won't be interesting.

 

[Wombat]

Without a strong protagonist, a book is rarely worth reading.

I went all the way through the Patrick O'Brian Aubrey-Maturin series twice, not because of my interest in the Napoleonic Wars (though there is some of that), but because Jack and Stephen are such memorable individuals.

Similarly The Lord of the Rings has a fine setting and great background material, but it would all mean very little without the quiet heroism of Sam, the fierce dignity of Theoden, and the sliminess of Grima Wormtongue.

I think this also explains why there are so few science fiction books I re-read; most of these books that I have read are more interested in a concept and a setting than in characters. There are, of course, wonderful exceptions, but they are indeed exceptions. Sadly, many fantasy books have ended up in the same pile for me of late. For every brilliantly drawn character, there are five Conan-knockoffs without the panache.

Give me an interesting character and I will read your book at least three times.

 

[Mad Hatter]

Depends on what the book is trying to do. Sometimes there might be good characters but the world is so stupid that the book is unreadable. SOmetimes it's just the opposite.

 

[Ankh-Morpork Guard]

Unless is being used as an example for uber-crappyiness 'cause thats all the Chewbacca killing bastard can make.

I've said it before and I'll say it again.

A MOON. It took a freaking MOON!

And really, like him or not NOW, Drizzt was obviously a good enough character to have caught on like he did. Sure, I'm tired of him, too, but that doesn't mean he wasn't a compelling character before he became such a huge cliche.

 

[Ranger REG]

Do you like your fantasy or Sci-Fi novels to focus more on the setting, or the characters? I think a good example of setting would the the Lord of the Rings books. I would say charcters would be any of R.A. Salvatore's Drizzt novels.

Character development, like with Drizzt, or the way Deep Space Nine does.

* @ warlord *

But that does not mean you should neglect the setting as well. After all, the character must interact with the surrounding. The more I can envision the world, the more I can immerse myself in it.

 

[mhacdebhandia]

Oh, yeah, I always forget:

I don't care about the setting because I immerse myself in it; I never do. Immersion is completely alien to my reading experience. I care about setting because - especially in SF - character development usually pales miserably compared to that found in non-genre literature. The world, the big picture, is what's most interesting.

That's why I admire Tolkien even though I don't and won't read him - it's obvious that he's managed the monumental task of creating a living, breathing, fascinating setting. I think his ability to write either characters or prose is vastly overrated, and I don't actually even like his setting very much (proceeding as it does from premises I find pretty damn unpleasant), but I certainly admire his achievement and the effect it's had on multiple generations of his readers.

 

[John Crichton]

Bitter Rant: Drizzt he sucks he's a horrible character and shouldn't be used as an example infact nothing RA Salvatore ever did should be as an example. Unless is being used as an example for uber-crappyiness 'cause thats all the Chewbacca killing bastard can make.Bitter Rant

I would have say characters 'cause a book with a great setting and cardboard characters won't be interesting.

Seriously, tell us how you really feel.