China Miéville is the author of King Rat; Perdido Street Station, winner of the Arthur C. Clarke Award and the British Fantasy Award; The Scar, winner of the Locus Award and the British Fantasy Award; Iron Council,...read more
China Miéville is the author of King Rat; Perdido Street Station, winner of the Arthur C. Clarke Award and the British Fantasy Award; The Scar, winner of the Locus Award and the British Fantasy Award; Iron Council, winner of the Locus Award and the Arthur C. Clarke Award; Looking for Jake, a collection of short stories; and Un Lun Dun, his New York Times bestselling book for younger readers. He lives and works in London.
China Mieville is still in his twenties, but he's already forging a formidable writing career. His first novel King Rat was nominated for both the International Horror Guild Award and The Bram Stoker Prize. Perdido Street Station, his second novel, has generated enormous buzz and extraordinary reviews in the UK, and is currently nominated for both the Arthur C. Clarke Award and the British Science Fiction Association Award. Scheduled for a March 2001 release in the States, Perdido Street Station is a huge, sweeping novel revolving around the fantastical city of New Crobuzon, a place that Time Out described as "one of the finest creations in speculative fiction."
To find out what Mieville thinks about when he's developing alternate worlds, read on.
'Some seventeen notable empires rose in the Middle Period of Earth. These were the Afternoon Cultures. All but one are unimportant to this narrative...'
These are the opening lines of M. John Harrison's stunning Viriconium sequence, in which he casually writes the most important rule about world-building that I know. Histories, laws, cultures, aesthetics - worlds - are colossal, and colossally complex. There is no way you can ever tell the story of a whole world. No matter how detailed your timeline or carefully illustrated your bestiary, you can't possibly explain everything. If something's not important to the narrative, then don't try - there are only so many info-dumps a story can take, and I save mine for the stuff that the reader has to understand. The rest of the strange things, or races, or places - they're just there. They just happen. Put them in, describe them, and leave them alone, even if that leaves the reader uncertain. That's fine. In fact, it's good - it's culture shock. Hopefully it communicates a sense that there is a world beyond the book, in which the story occurs, rather than a story with a few fantasy props thrown in.
There are few greater pleasures in Weird Fiction than a really cool monster, an unusual alien race. Which is why it makes no sense to me to cull your creatures from the list of the usual suspects. Elf, dwarf, centaur - you know the drill.
The best of the fantastic tradition - take Surrealism - is all about using the fantastic to challenge, to alienate, to create a grotesquerie that keeps the reader surprised. Usually, identikit aliens serve the opposite function, because they're not alien at all. They're comforting, because they're so recognisable. That kind of fantasy isn't nearly fantastic enough.
I'm not saying that it's impossible to write a good, innovative fantasy with elves and dwarfs in it (Michael Swanwick's The Iron Dragon's Daughter gives the lie to that). I'm just saying that I can't do it. And anyway, half the fun is inventing these creatures - why not take the opportunity to create them from scratch, or plunder mythologies more unusual than Tolkienesque fairyland? And once you've invented your race, remember that race, culture and character are three very different things. Few things in fantasy annoy me more than having a particular race act as a signifier for a particular kind of character. Why are elves all clever and fey? Are there any dwarfs out there who aren't gruff and good with their hands? And what happens if you're an orc but you're not, you know, evil?
This is just racial stereotyping in fantasyland. And it makes for explanations as unconvincing as the same activity in the real world. Of course there'll be cultural differences between different races, but there again, why would those races be monolithic? Is it really likely that in your carefully constructed land, two different groups of wing-kobolds thousands of miles apart are going to be basically the same? Surely they'll be as varied as the Aztecs, the !Kung-San and the Victorian British. Just like us, now.
But of course cultures aren't monolithic even within themselves. There are a whole mass of conflicting objective interests and impulses embedded in each one. Conflict is not usually the result of some Dread Dark Lord who is threatening things from the outside. Usually there are quite enough tensions cooking up internally to keep things interesting. Even the nicest 'Good King' has to get that palace from somewhere, and more than likely it's from where his real-life counterparts got theirs: plunder, sharp metal and the unpaid work of the peasantry. Remember that, and your world is likely to be a lot more compelling.
It's paradoxical, trying to depict a world that's simultaneously convincing and utterly fantastic. But one idea unites the two impulses: the recognition that things are not neat and tidy or monolithic, but complex and contradictory, contingent, constantly suprising and far more interesting for all that. That could describe the best and strangest fantasy, and the most hard-headed depiction of reality. That's why Kafka is a realist, and why we can have it both ways.