The fictional worlds we love wouldn’t be the places they are without the fictional technologies that populate them. Here, author Ian Tregillis explains just why it’s so important for fiction to catalogue those technological deviations, and why fiction and technology are so inextricably linked.

Tregillis joined us today to answer questions about his new novel, The Mechanical, including one question about the role of invented technologies in writing alternate histories. He explained just how tightly the two were linked in his book — and how the real world development of the steam engine played into it all:

Alternate history implies an alternate technological evolution, and vice-versa. If one was to be very strict and rigorous about the worldbuilding, they have to be inseparable. That level of rigor can quickly become a dreaded chore instead of a fun brainstorming/creative outlet, though. (At least, it does for me.) So I try to find a balance where I can at least show I’ve thought about the lowest-level questions (even if I haven’t answered them), while also hoping to earn the readers’ goodwill so that when I take things in a direction that chooses fun, or story concerns, over historical rigor, my hope is they’ll go with it.

My approach to this kind of worldbuilding is similar to my feelings about writing magic. My philosophy is that you want readers engaged enough to start asking questions, to try to explore the world and explore its ideas more deeply. But no magic system can ever be truly logically ironclad because they’re not hermetically sealed against the rest of the world. Magic is a violation of the rules, so by definition it will scrape up against certain boundaries inconsistently. (Really great writers, like Tim Powers, can push that boundary far outside where the reader is likely to start peeking under the rug.) So the trick is to anticipate readers’ questions, saying, “Aha. See, I thought of that because of X,” and, “My answer to that is Y,” for maybe the first couple of levels of questioning. But in reality it’s turtles all the way down. So you also want to stop the reader from asking the questions you don’t want to call attention to — you don’t want them picking at the seams of the worldbuilding.

That’s when I toss in an explosion, or somebody gets an eye gouged out, or something. It’s all just a question of throwing chaff before the readers’ eyes to distract them. My approach to the altered historical development of technology is much the same.

I’m not a historian, nor am I a technologist, as is no doubt abundantly clear from my novels. But I did take a few history of science classes in college because it was a subject that fascinated me. One thing that stuck with me was the convoluted history of the development of a good, efficient steam engine. That’s why, in the world of The Mechanical, I posit there are basically no steam engines in the 1920s. It’s hard to invent a really good steam engine; it’s much much easier to say, “Hey, you, ticktock man: go turn that crank 24 hours per day 7 days a week for the next 99 years.”

You can read Tregillis’ whole interview right here.

Top Image: piotreknik / Shutterstock