"See You in Hell, Jedi!" - Audible Cracks in Sci-Fi Worldbuilding

I know, I'm late to the party - but I finally finished Season 1 of The Acolyte last night. I really enjoyed it, and was trying to understand the vitriol I'd seen hurled at it on social media. I liked the story - although I thought it needed some fleshing out in terms of Osha's and Mae's background and the considerable powers of the witches - and its lightsaber scenes were excellent. Sure, there were parts of it I didn't like, but there were parts of pretty much every Star Wars movies and series I didn't like or think they could have done without - except, of course, for Rogue One and Andor. Bring on Andor Season 2!!!

The impetus for this post was the line that has since becomes famous (although not without precedent) in Star Wars fandom - "See you in Hell, Jedi!". What's my problem with it, you may ask? Well, for one, a belief in Hell requires a cultural connection with Earthbound religions, and the story is, after all, supposed to be set "a long time ago in a galaxy far, far away". Ooh, did people from that galaxy come to ours and start up our modern religions? Nope, that's ridiculous, and would completely break down the credibility of the Star Wars literary universe - in my humble opinion, of course.

Now, it's not hard to find discussions about this online, and apparently an entire backstory has emerged to legitimise the use of the word 'hell' since Han Solo used it in Empire Strikes Back (I honestly don't remember if I took issue with it way back then). It's not that the galaxy far, far away shouldn't or wouldn't have a concept of some sort of underworld or netherworld or dark afterlife in which people suffer for eternity (but couldn't they use such labels instead?). It's not even that - as some have suggested - the use of the word 'hell' refers to falling to the Dark Side (again, why use a metaphorical term instead of a culturally appropriate one?). The problem for me - pedantic as I am - is that there was a sort of 'switch' in my head (and yes, I'm treading on hyperbolic ground here) when I heard this word that momentarily disconnected me from my immersion in the 'otherworld' nature of what I was watching.

Now, none of this is to say that I'm not guilty of articulating this disconnect in my own writing. It's difficult to maintain a cultural distance from one's own language, and easy to lapse into one's vernacular. In fact, I sometimes feel that writers of SFF do this to relate to their readers or viewers. But the risks are real, as they threatenen the suspension of disbelief required to immerse oneself in a completely fictional world.

In an early (beta) version of my 'Gods of Kiranis', one reader said that he found it silly that no one on the Nostradamus (the main ship featured) would know that someone had boarded the ship, captured a crew member and was holding her captive, as if security systems wouldn't have alerted the crew. He said this was his 'flying snowman' moment, meaning that everything else was fine up until this point. The other elements of the story were credible - that is, as credible as a talking snowman befriending a boy or a telekinetic intruder on a spaceship can be - but this was the one that stopped him from taking it 'seriously'. Our ability to suspend our disbelief in Sci-Fi/Fantasy is determined by the strength of interconnecting elements of our worldbuilding, the pieces that don't contradict each other or throw another off kilter.

Unfortunately, in our own immersion in our creation, we often don't recognise the features that might cause someone to 'switch off' and not make the connections that maintain this important continuity of 'belief'. And that's the keyword - continuity: it's why you need to keep going back over your work and asking yourself questions like, "Would they really have said that?" or "Would that really happen in a world that has this other thing going on?" I'm sure you can think of alternatives to those questions. Overall, how has your worldbuilding laid the foundation for the language used, the vernacular or in-world references that speak of cultural immersion, and how much do you risk by making concessions to your own cultural references?

It's strange, really - I can watch movies and TV/streaming shows and remark on the quality or nature of the acting or directing without it damaging my immersion in them. I can admire the talent of an actor like Bryan Cranston, for example, as he delivers a mesmerizing 10-minute monologue in Sneaky Pete, and still find myself in the room with the characters rather than the actors. However, this ability to remain immersed is usually in movies or shows set in modern times. Isn't that weird? That the more 'alien' a creation is the more I expect it to be credible in its 'alienness'?

I won't go much further into worldbuilding here - there are other posts covering the tricks and tips, and I have one on exposition - but suffice to say that these 'audible' cracks in Sci-Fi worldbuilding can damage the continuity you've worked hard to create, and all that you ask of your readers in terms of their suspension of disbelief can be undone by using a word which would be 'alien' to your characters but perfectly natural to you. One thing's for sure, it ain't easy.

Keep writing, everyone. :)