incredibly likely a niche and presumptions request so ignore it if you don't jive.......

but could you draw your favourite primate in your art style? i ask, bc your caninape fursona is SO iconic to me! and i recall you once, way long ago on deviantart, saying you actually like primates more than the way-too-common wolves... 😶‍🌫️

I don't really have favourites, I don't think.

I do have a bit of a bias towards domestic cats (two out of my three tattoos are cat themed, there's a reason), but other than that I honestly don't think I can ever rank animals in order. My favourite species at any given time is whatever was the subject of the latest documentary I'd seen.

There was a point in my life when wolves had suffered some serious inflation after obsessing over them for a good chunk of my teen years, and I kinda grew out of identifying as strongly with them.

They're still good animals on their own right, don't get me wrong, they just don't really feel like me anymore, hence why I don't picture myself as a wolf anymore.

so a worldbuilding question. One of the ideas i had for one of my stories for a subart of Airbending, is an art the in universe characters call "Dustbending", though we would probably call it "Erosionbending", as it's basically using their mastery over air to speed up the process of corosion, doing what air does over centuries in a few moments.

in universe, this is an art that the air nomads that would eventually form the four great temples and thus ultimately become the dominant and longest lasting airbender culture, simply didn't adopt due to its immense lethal capacity for destruction, but as this is at a very early point in the avatar worlds history(the 6th avatar has just died and been reborn), there are still other competing cultures different, yet closely related to the air nomads who practice it.

my question is, as a sub-art of airbending, how plausible would you rank "Dustbending" compared to the other sub-arts? the idea i had was that compared to "Flight", which is all about spirituality, "Dustbending" is instead the airbending equivalent of magmabending, as all it requires is a deeper understanding of how air affects things around it, as well as the will to actually use it.

thematically speaking, i wanted it to be the complete opposite of airbender philosophy and ideals. An art of war, with very little application outside of destruction of everything it is used on, the use of which in turn leads to plenty of conflict between two different people that by all accounts should be kin.

The concept of sub-arts is always something I'm hesitant to deal with in fanworks, as even LoK couldn't crawl to the finish line without creating a bunch that feel like bad fanfic. Airbending especially seems to have really drawn the short straw, getting only Flight and Spiritual Projection, and partially that's because Airbending is already so versatile that it's hard to come up with stuff that most Airbenders can't already do with their base 'power set.'

So, with that in mind, I'm not really clear on what Dust/Erosion-bending actually is. I get the concept of corrosion, but not what's actually going on. Is an Airbender waving his hands at a piece of iron and it's crumbling to rust? Is an Airbender circling a mountain on her glider and the winds are shaping its peak? What is actually happening in terms of the Airbender's will or actions that's doing something different than normal Airbending? Flight and Lightning, for example, turn the focus of the Bender more inward and have unique movements. Metalbending and Bloodbending are about seeing the element as a component in a mixture rather than something isolated, and the latter also uses unique forms (and Metalbending used to before the comics and LoK got hold of it).

You compare this to Magmabending, but that's actually a problem for me, as I've never understood Magmabending and why it's a mutant power only some Earthbenders are born with. I would expect such a thing to be more about forms, having to draw on lessons from Firebending (extending one's energies to create heat in the target) and Waterbending (the methods of manipulating liquids) in addition to the regular mindset of Earthbending, and mixing those is something that would be difficult for most Earthbenders.

But "a deeper understanding of how air affects things around it, as well as the will to actually use it" doesn't sound like much of a change from Airbending, just a level of precision and depth that most never aspire to or cultivate. Thinking on it, perhaps you're saying that 'regular' Airbending philosophy is about separation from the world and seeing Air as being above the rest of the world? I don't see that as part of the basis for Airbending or society of the Air Nomads. Yeah, they have their relatively isolated temples, but even before we see one of those in AtLA, we hear about how Aang traveled extensively and having friends all over the world. The lack of empathy we do see is more a flaw of the Elders who tried to take Aang away from Gyatso, and all the nations have flawed leaders. The fact that Gyatso is so revered by Air Nomad society that a statue was made of him in their central court before he even died is a sign that the Elders might be more the exception than the rule.

I also think a part of the problem is that, philosophically, I'm not sure destruction is really anathema to Air Nomads? They value (animal) life, and are against the taking of that life, but destruction itself is a natural part of the world. Mountains crumble, metal rusts, plants are harvested and eaten and broken down in the digestive system. Like martial arts, it's the kind of thing that can be used to harm, but can also be used productively.

Perhaps I'm focused too much on Air Nomad society as we know it and not the flavor that you're contrasting with the Dustbenders?

So, I have trouble doing world building for short stories, especially when it comes to places/cultures. I don't want to burn through word count doing expository stuff, either. What are some suggestions you have for subtly working in world building details without overloading the story with exposition?

Werew: My favorite method is to come up with the scene, the details, the weirdness, etc, and then put yourself in the place of the character and think about what they'd actually notice about the scene. For example, I have a short story where the main character talks to people of a non-human race that have very sharp teeth, and their teeth make it hard to pronounce some sounds in the english language. However, anyone who knows anything about that race in the world knows that their teeth make it hard for them to speak english, so why would my character mentally comment on it? So what I did was to include the difficulty with sounds in the dialogue, and then throw in the sharp teeth in separately; the character mentally remarks about their sharp teeth when one of them smiles. I left it to the reader to draw the connection.

If the detail isn't relevant, don't bend over backwards to fit it in. Including too many details can make stories harder to read. If something is common knowledge, treat it as common knowledge and don't bother explaining it. Unless it seems to conflict with something else in the world, most readers will just go "oh okay, so apples are poisonous if picked on Tuesday, got it" and go on reading, and you don't need to explain the story about the fickle sorcerer hundreds of years ago who bit into a worm and had a fit about it. (This is a ridiculous example, but often readers will accept even ridiculous things as just being part of the world if they are presented correctly)

Bina: In addition to Werew's point, readers will fill in any worldbuilding gaps with their own imaginations. They'll make their own background exposition for something if it makes them stop and wonder 'that's cool, but why is that?' So scattering tidbits around has the bonus of a potentially richer imaginative experience for your reader! I know that wasn't really related to your question, but I wanted to add in an extra bonus for your decision to avoid expositing.

constablewrites: It can help to read other short stories to get a feel for the level of detail that readers expect. Some publications that specialize in SFF short stories:LightspeedClarkesworldFiresideFiyahUncanny MagazineBeneath Ceaseless SkiesStrange Horizons

constablewrites: There are also loads of anthologies you can check out as well. One of the best ways to place a story in one of these venues is to read the stuff they acquire so you know the sort of thing they look for, so it's a good habit to cultivate if you're interested in the form.

Mirintala: I primarily write flash fiction and short story, and definitely stick to only including important facts as they come up. When you grab a short story, you aren't expecting to read the Silmarillion. "Just the facts, ma'am." A lot of my characters don't even have a description until/unless a fact about it is needed to progress the story.  A short story is a single photograph out of an album.

MareeB: it can help to think about what your goal is when you write a short story. It's not a narrative so much as a moment in time. Focus on the details that are relevant to that single moment and ignore everything else. The reader doesn't need to know

MareeB: Now if you are really loving the world you've created and want to explore it more, think about either writing more stories in it,  or writing a longer work. Some stories don't fit in short form, and that's okay. Others are like pieces you can use to build up a larger world view.