# Fictional worlds that survive close scrutiny
**URL:** https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fictional-worlds-that-survive-close-scrutiny/680718
**Category:** Cafe Society
**Created:** [February 7, 2014, 1:56am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fictional-worlds-that-survive-close-scrutiny/680718 "2014-02-07T01:56:02Z")
**Posts on this page:** 20
**Page:** 2
### Author:  [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)
#### Post date: [February 12, 2014, 2:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fictional-worlds-that-survive-close-scrutiny/680718/21 "2014-02-12T02:04:32Z")
> [@Shalmanese](#):
>
> - The people involved are generally intelligent, common sensical and seek to accomplish their goals
They’re wizards. They are generally intelligent, commonsensical and seek to accomplish their goals, but they’re a little crazy.
---
### Author:  [@Chimera](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chimera)
#### Post date: [February 12, 2014, 2:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fictional-worlds-that-survive-close-scrutiny/680718/22 "2014-02-12T02:10:11Z")
> [@The\_Lurker\_Above](#):
>
> That and every possible thing going right for the Draka/wrong for everyone else was pretty hard to swallow.
I find a lot of the ‘Alternate Earth History’ stuff like that. There’s far too much ‘everything goes right for X’ and totally unbelievable developments outside of the even remotely theoretically possible.
---
### Author:  [@Ken001](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ken001)
#### Post date: [February 12, 2014, 6:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fictional-worlds-that-survive-close-scrutiny/680718/23 "2014-02-12T06:27:37Z")
Ok, how about Earth in Harry Harrison’s “West of Eden”?
---
### Author:  [@sentrix](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/sentrix)
#### Post date: [February 12, 2014, 6:36am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fictional-worlds-that-survive-close-scrutiny/680718/24 "2014-02-12T06:36:15Z")
i’d go for tolkein. loved his stuff as a teen.
---
### Author:  [@Yookeroo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Yookeroo)
#### Post date: [February 12, 2014, 7:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fictional-worlds-that-survive-close-scrutiny/680718/25 "2014-02-12T07:01:02Z")
> [@Jragon](#):
>
> Now, Quidditch is pretty dumb, IMO, but one of the main complaints I disagree with, for instance, is that I don’t think it’s necessarily fair to think that someone catching the snitch and losing could or never would happen in a real professional game.
Maybe. But never ever in the biggest match of the year when it is still very close.
> [@Lamia](#):
>
> This is basically how I feel about every sport that actually exists,
Then you have absolutely no understanding of any sport whatsoever. You may hate the sports, but they make sense unlike Quidditch.
---
### Author:  [@grude](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/grude)
#### Post date: [February 12, 2014, 10:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fictional-worlds-that-survive-close-scrutiny/680718/26 "2014-02-12T10:11:45Z")
The setting of the Ice and Fire books is so detailed and laid out it starts to feel suffocating, I mean you can literally build family trees for characters going back generations! There are even “oh right duh” moments to be gleaned from this, like realizing people are actually related.
I don’t know how to describe it but this felt like the opposite to poor world building, this felt too thought out and constricting.
---
### Author:  [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)
#### Post date: [February 12, 2014, 3:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fictional-worlds-that-survive-close-scrutiny/680718/27 "2014-02-12T15:32:33Z")
> [@Ken001](#):
>
> Ok, how about Earth in Harry Harrison’s “West of Eden”?
An AH where no extinction-level event ever wiped out the dinos, and yet \*H. sapiens \*evolved, on the same planet, in a form undistinguishable from us?
---
### Author:  [@Mrs.Cake](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mrs.Cake)
#### Post date: [February 14, 2014, 9:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fictional-worlds-that-survive-close-scrutiny/680718/28 "2014-02-14T21:17:40Z")
Pretty much any Ursula K. LeGuin world feels well-thought-out. Earthsea has already been mentioned, and the cultures in _Left Hand of Darkenss_ feels very genuine to me. Lots of nice detail, like they have never built flying machines because nothing bigger than an insect has evolved on this planet, so no looking at a bird and imagining what it must be like to fly. I always thought that throwaway bit, along with countless others make the society feel completely real and logical.
---
### Author:  [@eburacum45](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/eburacum45)
#### Post date: [February 16, 2014, 12:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fictional-worlds-that-survive-close-scrutiny/680718/29 "2014-02-16T00:19:21Z")
I’m a big fan of Ursula LeGuin’s stories, especially the Hainish cycle.
However my favourite scene from The Dispossessed would be quite unlikely to occur in reality. LeGuin described the twin world Annares rising in the sky of Urras; but in a real double planet the two worlds would almost certainly be tidally locked to each other, assuming they were nearly the same mass, and more than a billion years old or so.
So no moonrises.
---
### Author:  [@Miller](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Miller)
#### Post date: [February 16, 2014, 2:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fictional-worlds-that-survive-close-scrutiny/680718/30 "2014-02-16T02:10:16Z")
> [@Lamia](#):
>
> This is basically how I feel about every sport that actually exists, but for some reason otherwise intelligent, rational people get upset when you tell them that their favorite sport is a stupid waste of time.
That’s not what **Shalmanese** is saying, though. He’s not saying that interest in the sport makes no sense, he’s saying that _how the sport is designed_ makes no sense. Just as there are “rules” for, say, writing effective fiction, there are “rules” for making a good game. Quidditch is the sporting equivalent of having a gun in the first act that never goes off.
---
### Author:  [@Animastryfe](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Animastryfe)
#### Post date: [February 16, 2014, 3:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fictional-worlds-that-survive-close-scrutiny/680718/31 "2014-02-16T03:37:56Z")
My favorite criticism of Quidditch’s design is from [_Harry Potter and the Methods of Rationality_](http://hpmor.com/chapter/7):
> [@](#):
>
> “So let me get this straight,” Harry said as it seemed that Ron’s explanation (with associated hand gestures) was winding down. "Catching the Snitch is worth one hundred and fifty points? "
>
> “Yeah -”
>
> “How many ten-point goals does one side usually score not counting the Snitch?”
>
> “Um, maybe fifteen or twenty in professional games -”
>
> “That’s just wrong. That violates every possible rule of game design. Look, the rest of this game sounds like it might make sense, sort of, for a sport I mean, but you’re basically saying that catching the Snitch overwhelms almost any ordinary point spread. The two Seekers are up there flying around looking for the Snitch and usually not interacting with anyone else, spotting the Snitch first is going to be mostly luck -”
>
> “It’s not luck!” protested Ron. “You’ve got to keep your eyes moving in the right pattern -”
>
> “That’s not interactive, there’s no back-and-forth with the other player and how much fun is it to watch someone incredibly good at moving their eyes? And then whichever Seeker gets lucky swoops in and grabs the Snitch and makes everyone else’s work moot. It’s like someone took a real game and grafted on this pointless extra position so that you could be the Most Important Player without needing to really get involved or learn the rest of it. Who was the first Seeker, the King’s idiot son who wanted to play Quidditch but couldn’t understand the rules?” Actually, now that Harry thought about it, that seemed like a surprisingly good hypothesis. Put him on a broomstick and tell him to catch the shiny thing…
>
> Ron’s face pulled into a scowl. “If you don’t like Quidditch, you don’t have to make fun of it!”
>
> “If you can’t criticise, you can’t optimise. I’m suggesting how to improve the game. And it’s very simple. Get rid of the Snitch.”
---
### Author:  [@harmonicamoon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/harmonicamoon)
#### Post date: [February 16, 2014, 3:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fictional-worlds-that-survive-close-scrutiny/680718/32 "2014-02-16T03:51:37Z")
Good thread. I recently watched _Contact_. I had no problem swallowing the story line as a possibility.
---
### Author:  [@Trinopus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Trinopus)
#### Post date: [February 16, 2014, 4:24am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fictional-worlds-that-survive-close-scrutiny/680718/33 "2014-02-16T04:24:27Z")
Jack Vance excelled at creating worlds which don’t seem to survive scrutiny…but then papering over the problems with elegant explanations.
His “Tschai: Planet of Adventure” quadrology is, by and large, an updating of Burroughs’ Barsoom stories, but with just enough justification bolted on to make it not blatantly absurd.
The same for the “Oikumene” in his “Demon Princes” quintology (sf, not fantasy, even given the title.) At first glance, the level of scientific knowledge seems to contradict the sociological depiction. But he introduces “The Institute,” a powerful anti-knowledge element in that society, and, with a twist and a wriggle and a wrench and a writhe, things kind of make sense again.
---
### Author:  [@Lamia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lamia)
#### Post date: [February 16, 2014, 6:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fictional-worlds-that-survive-close-scrutiny/680718/34 "2014-02-16T06:10:12Z")
> [@Miller](#):
>
> That’s not what **Shalmanese** is saying, though. He’s not saying that interest in the sport makes no sense, he’s saying that _how the sport is designed_ makes no sense. Just as there are “rules” for, say, writing effective fiction, there are “rules” for making a good game. Quidditch is the sporting equivalent of having a gun in the first act that never goes off.
Bad fiction and bad games both exist in the real world. It does not strain my suspension of disbelief to accept that they might also exist in a fictional world. And as pleasant as it would be to believe that something I think is bad, stupid, or boring could never become popular, reality once again provides plenty of evidence to the contrary.
---
### Author:  [@Yookeroo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Yookeroo)
#### Post date: [February 16, 2014, 7:26am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fictional-worlds-that-survive-close-scrutiny/680718/35 "2014-02-16T07:26:54Z")
> [@Lamia](#):
>
> Bad fiction and bad games both exist in the real world.
Point us to a sport as poorly designed as Quidditch that is any kind of success. You really don’t understand what you’re talking about.
---
### Author:  [@Lamia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lamia)
#### Post date: [February 16, 2014, 5:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fictional-worlds-that-survive-close-scrutiny/680718/36 "2014-02-16T17:27:10Z")
> [@Yookeroo](#):
>
> Point us to a sport as poorly designed as Quidditch that is any kind of success. You really don’t understand what you’re talking about.
And yet you keep trying to get me to talk about it, even though I don’t want to. I’m not sure what I’ve done to give three different posters the impression that I was interested in discussing Quidditch, but whatever it was I deeply regret it. When I said I considered all real sports to be a stupid waste of time, I did not mean that I preferred _imaginary_ sports.
There is a current thread about [harry potter stuff that bothers you](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=714864), so I’d suggest going there if you want to talk about how much Quidditch bothers you.
---
### Author:  [@well\_he\_s\_back](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/well_he_s_back)
#### Post date: [February 16, 2014, 10:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fictional-worlds-that-survive-close-scrutiny/680718/37 "2014-02-16T22:55:13Z")
Does Middle Earth survive close scrutiny? I’d sure say so. JRRT’s world-building is one of the things that makes LOTR an enduring classic. Is this so obvious we don’t need to mention it or are there folks who would like to disagree?
---
### Author:  [@Trinopus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Trinopus)
#### Post date: [February 17, 2014, 12:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fictional-worlds-that-survive-close-scrutiny/680718/38 "2014-02-17T00:07:24Z")
I would say that Tolkien’s Middle Earth, alas, does not survive very close scrutiny.
It’s good. Very good, just about the best example of world-building ever performed. But… There are still problems.
Bombadil and the Old Forest are a problem. Treebeard is a problem. Perhaps more to the point, these two entities have remained hidden, unknown, absolutely reclusive, for aeons, but when just a handful of Hobbits pop up, bang, they reveal themselves to the world openly, even blatantly.
Middle Earth is constructed rather as a whole bunch of mouse-traps, all set and waiting to be sprung. The lightest touch, and—SNAP! The Watcher in the Water; the Balrog; Rivendell and Lorien; the Wood-Woses; the Dead. Heck, the One Ring!
In a “real world” kind of world, a lot of these traps would have been sprung long ago…or would simply have rusted shut and wouldn’t snap if you whacked 'em with Gimli’s axe.
For dramatic reasons (and damn fine ones, I will say!) every one of these traps is snapped during a very short period of time. It’s superlative storytelling…but it just isn’t all that defensible in terms of “reality.”
---
### Author:  [@BMalion](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BMalion)
#### Post date: [February 17, 2014, 3:30am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fictional-worlds-that-survive-close-scrutiny/680718/39 "2014-02-17T03:30:56Z")
Niven’s _The Smoke Ring_ stories.
---
### Author:  [@Measure\_for\_Measure](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Measure_for_Measure)
#### Post date: [February 17, 2014, 3:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fictional-worlds-that-survive-close-scrutiny/680718/40 "2014-02-17T03:32:27Z")
Also, I’m sorry to say that it’s highly unlikely that 2 hobbits with no military experience could penetrate Tyrannia (ok, Mordor) and destroy their superweapon. I don’t think there are any dramatic problems in the book: Tolkein explains the preceding by saying that the good guys use a decoy strategy. But realistically, I’m sorry to say that Frodo and Sam would have either been executed or died of exposure on the way to Orodruin. So no, although Middle Earth is _believable_ and _credible_, it does not survive close scrutiny.
I partly had that example in mind, though admittedly I pitched the OP as referring to world-building and not specific plot developments. The other motivation is that every time I construct fiction in mind (albeit casually) I tend to address realism problems that quite frankly would make for dull story telling. Dull as in, “Who cares?” That in turn leads me to question whether fiction provides anything other than light entertainment, and that its ennobling abilities are largely illusory. Even with the good stuff. Backing up further, while I sense an underlying set of _principles_ and _structures_ of good and bad fiction (and oh yes Tolkein is definitely part of the first category), I can’t quite grasp them.
[Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fictional-worlds-that-survive-close-scrutiny/680718.md?page=1)
[Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fictional-worlds-that-survive-close-scrutiny/680718.md?page=3)