I've been addressing it in two different ways, either making something interesting happen en route, or just mention the time they've traveled and take the story up on their arrival. Both feel somewhat unsatisfying. The former can feel forced if I don't do it right, or there's just too much of it. The second seems to feel artificial. I mean, the characters are living, breathing, thinking, reacting in transit, just as they would resting somewhere. It's not as if their lives are on hold, and then boom! We've arrived at the gates of the town, let's all interact again!
I imagine something between the two would be in order, but I'm curious if other people have similar problems, and how they choose to deal with it.
I would do a combination of both. If there is something interesting that happens--and is relevant to the story you're telling, then expose it en route. Otherwise just blip the story forward. I would be bored by traveling for the sake of traveling, as a reader.
My opinion.
How you do it is pretty much how I do it. If something happens that is interesting, I just say it happens and write about it. If it doesn't I say they travelled to so and so. I usually do a one paragraph description.
I guess I agree that you don't want to act like nothing happened and they stopped existing, but you don't want to describe a boring trip in detail either.
quote:
Sounds to me like a strategy that would add unnecessary length to your story. That's no big deal if you don't care, or if you want that Tolkienesque "drawn out" feeling. But I think anything that adds pages to read and offers very little plot will bore readers and discourage publishers.
I meant along the lines of:
The journey was long but easy. We met a group of traders on the way who had hired some guards. Consequently, we had no trouble with brigands. When we arrived at the city we asked around for lodgings...blah, blah..
Not a full length expo.
[This message has been edited by skadder (edited December 18, 2007).]
What are the goal(s) of the antagonist(s)?
Is it likely that these goals will clash in such a way as to lead to a confrontation on the road?
If you are inventing new antagonists to create the conflicts on the road, then this would bore me because it does not further the plot. Everything that happens must further the plot.
I would much rather you just skip ahead and sum up the trip with a recap of the length of time, and maybe a note about the weather/travel conditions. Yeah, people breath, eat, and pee when we're not actively watching them on the page but really...I don't need to watch them pee unless it's REALLY important and I don't need to sit with them for a 3-week trip through the wilderness unless it's really important in some way.
Leave the random encounters to D&D, and summarize creatively when they get to their destination, is what I would suggest.
Of course, if you need them to travel so far that the climate changes, and you can't simply ascribe it to elevation, then you're stuck with glossing over their trips.
[This message has been edited by rickfisher (edited December 18, 2007).]
The average maximum for a horse and rider or a wagon to travel in one day is about 30 miles.
Large groups of riders and/or wagons tend to go even slower, and the larger the group, the slower it's going to go.
quote:
The journey was long but easy. We met a group of traders on the way who had hired some guards. Consequently, we had no trouble with brigands. When we arrived at the city we asked around for lodgings...blah, blah..
Skadder's example might do if one character is describing his journey to another...as an actual real-time description of the event it is lacking in many ways. His character and his companions aren't named or described in number, nor are the traders or guards. What did they say to get in with the traders and under the protection of their guards---if they hired them, they might be reluctant to let someone else shelter under them without some recompense or reason. Who are the brigands and why does this character worry about trouble with them? What's the name of the city? What about lodgings---where did the traders and guards go, and why not see about hanging out with them in the city?
I think LOTR is a great example of how to do this.
Characters join and leave the party at various stages. They meet people along the way who, variously, give them help, or helpful gifts; add to their knowledge of their enemies; provide resting places; add colour and adventure, sometimes inconveniently but enabling our heroes to show their metal. Some adventures take us to people who remember far back, and help us understand the motivations of good and bad characters. And as someone said, on a long journey there are fallings out and makings up.
The party even breaks up, so now we're reading several stories at once and tension is increased by our hope that they'll all meet up again, that the cavalry will arrive just in time.
I think that in some ways Tolkein saw the long journey as a device for binding together many elements of a complex story and numerous backstories, just as Star Trek's transporter is a device for avoiding tedium.
Hope this helps,
Pat
quote:
Skadder's example might do if one character is describing his journey to another...as an actual real-time description of the event it is lacking in many ways.
Really? That was some of my best work...oh, well back to the video games then...
Show me the travel (or the portion of it) that matters. If nothing happens, don't drag me through there. You can gloss that travel over.
In The Grand Tour by Patricia C. Wrede and Caroline Stevermer, the MCs are on their wedding tour through Europe. While there is magic, travel is restricted to mundane means - ships, wagons, and such. The reader is only taken along on those trips when something important happens or, since they are writing in their journals, when they want to complain about the cold. It is a good example of how travel can be dealt with.
[This message has been edited by TheOnceandFutureMe (edited December 20, 2007).]