Do people read glossaries?

[Green]

I read glossaries (but generally not DPs), if they're there, but I don't read them (at all) until I've read the main book. I tend to find I can hold a few characters/countries in my head without flicking to the back every ten minutes.

I tend not to bother with maps, either. I don't particularly care about the proportions of distance between places

My favourite example of a good glossary: the one at the end of Bakker's The Thousandfold Thought. Loads of extra history and geek-stuff in there for the interested, but not necessary for enjoyment of the book (or entire series, in fact).

 

[Teresa Edgerton]

Well, I have no rational argument for this, but it annoys me to no end when people pronounce my names wrong.

This may sound like I'm trying to be unpleasant, but it's actually kindly meant. Get used to it. It will happen -- unless you want to give your aliens names like Joe or Bob or Mike -- and Mike may be stretching it. If you don't learn to accept that this kind of thing is going to happen, you have a lot of frustration ahead of you once your book is published.

Another way to help with this problem might be to have a footnote with the pronunciation rules whenever a name is used for the first time. What do you think about that?

I think an agent or an editor would stop reading the first time you did that. If not the first time, surely the second. That footnote wouldn't be there for the sake of the reader's understanding, it would be there to spare you annoyance. And even then, many readers skip footnotes.

One thing you need to realize when you start publishing your work: you are opening your heart to the world and inviting your readers to step in. If your heart isn't big enough and generous enough to accept a few of their foibles, expect it to get bruised ... a lot.

"Ilcas Northstar was tall, with scales of cobalt blue. He pronounced ridges above both eyes, but the right one was chipped - evidently a scar from a past batle."

This describes Ilcas Northstar as an individual.

And it is a very good way to begin describing his species. A few more such descriptions of individuals, and readers will have a very clear idea of what that species looks like. And it will stick much better that way than an entry in a glossary.

Similarly, a "dax" and a "sphyle" is a male and a female Scatha, respectively. But since everyone in the story knows this, I want just use the words without introduction and let the reader look them up.

You can convey this information through the context. Your description of Ilcas shows that you have an eye for the kind of details that tell so much in so few words.

Also, you're not talking about "letting the reader look them up" you would be requiring readers to look it up. Many wouldn't want to, and you would lose those readers very quickly.

I could also use the glossary to describe the appearance of the main characters. This could spare me the trouble of having to covertly work it into the narrative.

You wouldn't be saving yourself trouble, you would be creating it. What you would be doing is saving yourself the effort; good writing involves effort.

 

[Spectrum]

(Lots of things.)

There were many good points in this post. Thanks. I'll try to keep those in mind.

So, the consensus seems to be to make sure that the story doesn't become overly glossary-dependent. Does anyone have specific suggestions on how to ensure that? Any pitfalls I ought to beware?

 

[Omphalos]

...I remember I was disgusted by this attitude. My instinctive reaction is that "if the reader is too stupid to actually read what's in the book, then it's his own fault"...

Well, any author who relies on glossaries and appendices to finish telling his story deserves to be crestfallen when he or she realizes that few people actually complete them. These sections of any fiction book should be for extra information only that is not vital to the story. That being said, once I figured out that one of my ATF books, Dune, had significant information in the appendices, I made the decision to read them all in any work I read going forward.

BTW dude, "disgusted?" Really? It bothered you so much that you were "disgusted?" That seems like a pretty extreme reaction to me. I wonder if they have a pill for that now?

 

[tangaloomababe]

Just on personal level, I only read Glossaries if I really have to. I am to busy reading a story, without having to stop and look up something, for me its more of an annoyance, but thats just me. Maps are different, I will always look at a map and often refer back to it whilst reading.

 

[Spectrum]

BTW dude, "disgusted?" Really? It bothered you so much that you were "disgusted?" That seems like a pretty extreme reaction to me. I wonder if they have a pill for that now?

Yes, I see it as disrespect for the work if the reader is not willing to read all of it and make an effort to understand it.

It also has to do with my own tastes. When I read stories, the thing that interests me the most is generally the world, the setting, the back story and mythology. At times this is more important to me than the main story being told, and it's often more important than the characters. So, from my perspective as a reader, glossaries and other background information is not a redundant appendage, but a vital and integral part of the work.

Anyway, I suppose Teresa is right. I need to learn to hate the reader a little bit less that I am wont to.

I can't wait till I'm big and famous. Then I can finally be a primadonna and treat my fans like vermin. That's going to be great.

 

[Ursa major]

The world is full of important people whose names are not pronounced correctly on TV and the radio, the presidents of many countries included. (How many of us could pronouce the surname of Russia's president elect, Dmitry Anatolyevich Medvedev, correctly? Clue: the use of the English-sounded syllables "med", "ved" and/or "dev" would, I believe, be incorrect.)

Why your characters should be treated any better than these real folk I can't imagine.

 

[Teresa Edgerton]

Good point, Ursa.

Perhaps the fact that my own name gets mangled in every possible way prepared me in advance for readers who can't pronounce the names of my characters.

 

[Spectrum]

The world is full of important people whose names are not pronounced correctly on TV and the radio, the presidents of many countries included. (How many of us could pronouce the surname of Russia's president elect, Dmitry Anatolyevich Medvedev, correctly? Clue: the use of the English-sounded syllables "med", "ved" and/or "dev" would, I believe, be incorrect.)

Why your characters should be treated any better than these real folk I can't imagine.

For two good reasons:

1. The pronunciation guide is more readily available in my book (only a few hundred pages away) than in real life.
2. My writing is more important than real life.

 

[Mattastic]

I'm one of those people who will rarely delve into glossaries and other such things for fiction. This is probably a bit weird for me since I love designing fantasy alphabets and phonetic forms, and tend to develop names with sound combinations that don't exist in English quite often. I love a deep and complex background to any setting, especially when that extends to language as well.

However, this was one of the things that made me put down the first book in the Wheel of Time series after about a hundred pages. By that point I got the expectation that I was meant to have spent five days solid on Wheelopedia before reading page one. This is not a sign that the world has a well developed background so much as that the author missed the point of what novels are for. If at any point during a story the reader has to look something up to know as much as the characters do, then the writer has failed. Fact.

This also extends to pronunciation. No-one will applaud you for putting in clever pronunciation rules for a language that isn't even written in the Latin alphabet anyway. Names should read phonetically, and if they don't look right on paper when written that way, then it's a bad name. If it includes sounds that don't exist in English at all, then don't blame people for mangling the pronunciation. After all, that happens with real-life examples all the time.

Simply put, glossaries and appendecies shouldn't be there to support the story at all. If it isn't in the main story, then it shouldn't be considered vital knowledge.

 

[Omphalos]

I can't wait till I'm big and famous. Then I can finally be a primadonna and treat my fans like vermin. That's going to be great.

Hmmm. Perhaps getting them to read the glossaries wont be your biggest problem. But good luck with all that.

 

[The Procrastinator]

To me glossaries are extras, and a writer should not put vital stuff in there that's not in the main body of the text. I might read a bit of a glossary but I rarely read the whole lot. The story should stand alone without the glossary - that way those who feel like reading it are rewarded with extra tidbits - perhaps a little more depth that would have been out of place in the narrative - but those who don't want to read the glossary still understand and fully appreciate the book.

 

[Spectrum]

If at any point during a story the reader has to look something up to know as much as the characters do, then the writer has failed. Fact.
...
Simply put, glossaries and appendecies shouldn't be there to support the story at all. If it isn't in the main story, then it shouldn't be considered vital knowledge.

Thanks for the reply. However, I find your view pretty extreme. So I don't expect to be accomodating it.

Hmmm. Perhaps getting them to read the glossaries wont be your biggest problem. But good luck with all that.

Well, the above post was a joke.

 

[Malloriel]

One of the reasons I feel I need the glossary is to avoid "state breaks" inside the story. For instance, I have the Scathae (singular: Scatha), a race of reptillian humanoids. They are just as widespread as Humans and everyone knows who they are. So, the first time a Scatha is encountered in the story, it would feel unnatural to have an explanation of what a Scatha looks like. I want to be able to say:

"Ilcas Northstar was tall, with scales of cobalt blue. He pronounced ridges above both eyes, but the right one was chipped - evidently a scar from a past batle."

This describes Ilcas Northstar as an individual. I do not want to have to say:

"The Scatha had a long snout, a body covered in hard scales and a yard-long tail."

Granted, I've not been published, but I have been an avid reader since the tender age of three, diving into fantasy (also granted) much later in life, yet thriving within it, and it has been my experience as both reader and writer in this genre that such things should never BE an issue.

What you're saying here is that that Scathae are a natural part of your world and wish to establish that fact for the reader, yet at the same time you feel that the reader would find it too alien to simply accept as you've dictated your populace does. This is where you find your own conflict, because your desires and your views do not coincide.

Example: I've got a race called the maeyenin (doesn't that look fun to pronounce? Say it however you wish), which has within it four different branches. All speak the same language though, and for this I would use Italics to let the reader know that the use of their own language isn't common knowledge, and should be taken special note of. What SHOULDN'T be taken special note of is the Dorian, the Doriancy, the Dorosai, the Dorai, any of them. These would be the top rulers in the Northern Solivian kingdoms, male, collective, female, and female sibling respectively. Through the context of the introduction of these terms is where the reader gets what the heck you're talking about. So there's no need to give any more information than you would give about a ball. Just because we assume the reader has never seen a ball doesn't mean we describe what a sphere is, how it interacts with gravity, what it's used for or why. We assume they understand terms like toss, bounces, throw, catch, etc, and explain that the ball participates in these things.

Similarly, a "dax" and a "sphyle" is a male and a female Scatha, respectively. But since everyone in the story knows this, I want just use the words without introduction and let the reader look them up.

While I certainly would not object to these terms being included for those who don't catch on immediately, or wish to have suspicions confirmed, I feel that it's the same situation.

Here, follow this.

Ilcas looked to the sphyle with dismay. "You speak out of turn, miss. I never said those things and I dislike that you should even imply that I would."

The Scatha female turned a glower upon him, scales flashing in the sunlight angrily, reflecting the glint now residing in her stubborn gaze. "Then it looks like you'll have to stew in your own displeasure then, for I know what I heard and you'll not have me convinced otherwise."

Ilcas would have said more, his ire inspired once more as he caught the tail end of a muttered curse about dax, and all men, in general. Well! "You think just because you're a sphyle you can speak to me that way?! You're no better than a human female!" At least, that's what he would have said had Jorel not caught his attention just then, his arms waving frantically over his head; the council must have returned their decision.

---

For example. Right there, hopefully, any reader could pick up that a sphyle is at least related to sex in some way, as is dax, even if they don't know that it's specifically male and female, and not some title afforded by station according to sex.

And I do agree that the book shouldn't NEED the glossaries to be understood, but be supplemented and enhanced by them.

 

[Spectrum]

This is where you find your own conflict, because your desires and your views do not coincide.

I'm sorry, what?

Example: I've got a race called the maeyenin (doesn't that look fun to pronounce? Say it however you wish)

MAY-en-in?

Through the context of the introduction of these terms is where the reader gets what the heck you're talking about. So there's no need to give any more information than you would give about a ball. Just because we assume the reader has never seen a ball doesn't mean we describe what a sphere is, how it interacts with gravity, what it's used for or why. We assume they understand terms like toss, bounces, throw, catch, etc, and explain that the ball participates in these things.

So... give detailed descriptions of the context and let the reader figure it out?

Yes... I see the merit in that. Thanks.

While I certainly would not object to these terms being included for those who don't catch on immediately, or wish to have suspicions confirmed, I feel that it's the same situation.

Here, follow this.

Ilcas looked to the sphyle with dismay. "You speak out of turn, miss. I never said those things and I dislike that you should even imply that I would."

The Scatha female turned a glower upon him, scales flashing in the sunlight angrily, reflecting the glint now residing in her stubborn gaze. "Then it looks like you'll have to stew in your own displeasure then, for I know what I heard and you'll not have me convinced otherwise."

Ilcas would have said more, his ire inspired once more as he caught the tail end of a muttered curse about dax, and all men, in general. Well! "You think just because you're a sphyle you can speak to me that way?! You're no better than a human female!" At least, that's what he would have said had Jorel not caught his attention just then, his arms waving frantically over his head; the council must have returned their decision.

I'm impressed at how you (apparently) pulled this entire scene out of thin air. (Also, you look like you've been reading Wheel of Time, with all the references to the "war between the sexes". )

 

[Malloriel]

What you're saying here is that that Scathae are a natural part of your world and wish to establish that fact for the reader, yet at the same time you feel that the reader would find it too alien to simply accept as you've dictated your populace does. This is where you find your own conflict, because your desires and your views do not coincide.

I'm sorry, what?

To make my explanation make sense I've quoted myself. What you tell us is that the Scathae are a natural part of the world you've created, but the way you see them yourself is so different from what IS normal that you're afraid people won't accept them as being as common as you've written them to be. If you can't accept them yourself as being common, everyday, average, normal pieces of your world then how can the reader? Because that's what you'll share in your writing, the way you perceive them. The longer you think of them as being alien and different, the harder it may become to express the way you want them to be seen. Follow?

MAY-en-in?

Indeed, perfect emphasis and everything. It's not the spelling I prefer aesthetically, but it is the way I've pronounced it since the beginning. --Smiles-- At least I know THAT word will come across well.

So... give detailed descriptions of the context and let the reader figure it out?

Yes... I see the merit in that. Thanks.

Absolutely. Here's what I've learned since being on the forum, and analysing more in depth those books of this genre I really enjoy, and that is; often if you're going to write from the third person (as I do), you're telling the story from their perspective with only the knowledge they have, which means you're also expressing their point of view on any given object, person, place, or species. What this really means is even if you see a particular place, say a palace, as being grand and majestic and absolutely spectacular, if you're telling the story from the perspective of an adult who has live there his whole life, the sense of wonder won't be in him as it would for a traveler seeing it for the first time. It's a part of the local's everyday experience and usually not worth much notice, but to a traveler, this could be the most beautiful thing he's ever seen in his life, taking his breath away, making him forget to move, filling him with poetry he can't even begin to know how to write because words just seem too shallow to capture what it is he's seeing. And if THAT is the sense you want your readers to have, you may need to consider a whole new character to introduce. Perspective is what it's all about, so in this case, since you've got a race that's as common as humans, pretend that you're there in that world and write about them as if they ARE humans. We know humans exist and accept that without question. As long as you give hints through the context as to what we should expect from them and then not change up the rules randomly later, we'll take just about anything you give us.

I'm impressed at how you (apparently) pulled this entire scene out of thin air. (Also, you look like you've been reading Wheel of Time, with all the references to the "war between the sexes". )

I did, in fact make it up on the spot. ^_^ I thought it would work best using a name you'd already given to make it more tailored, and I felt the situation helped to explain what a dax and sphyle were without sitting down and saying "Now, within the Scathae there are males and females just like there are with humans, but they're called dax and sphyle instead." You shouldn't even have a character with an inner dialog like that (which was a major part of the above point too), because a lot of times you can use inner dialog and perspective to give information without infodumping, but you're limited to what the person knows and feels, so someone who knows how a lamp works isn't going to look at one and in his head explain why it works, even if it's technically a mystical object. Now if it's a mystical object that only a few people have, the character being one of the few, and knows how it works, might pause a moment to think on the mechanics, but not if lamps themselves are also common.

And yes, I have read most of WoT, but I don't actually like how there's such a separation between the sexes, the women always angry with the men BECAUSE they're MEN, and the men writing of the women because they're WOMEN. That sort of view always kind of annoyed me, but for the purposes of getting the gender thing across, I think it works really well.

 

[JDP]

In my opinion, everything that the reader needs to know should be contained within the body of the novel. That's what writing should be: telling the reader stuff without it getting boring or overcomplicated. You don't have to tell everything about a species/place/character all at once; you dripfeed it, bit-by-bit during the action.

For me, a glossary has two purposes:

1. As an enriching addition to the novel for them wot like that kind of thing.

2. A reminder of details in a particularly epic book/series, when keeping track of everything might be difficult.

Neither is compulsory to the reader. Anyone who reads your work is doing you a favour; if they've bought/borrowed your book, then they've fulfilled any obligation to you, and more, already - so don't expect them to jump through hoops!

In regard to pronounciation, I skim read 95% of the time, so I don't end up (sub)vocalising names, places etc. I often find it hard, when discussing books, to keep track of what the other person's talking about because I'm not used to hearing certain words pronounced!

Also, I only generally read a glossary to check something I've forgotten, or if I've finished the book and am stuck on a plane/train with nothing to do.

 

[Spectrum]

To make my explanation make sense I've quoted myself. What you tell us is that the Scathae are a natural part of the world you've created, but the way you see them yourself is so different from what IS normal that you're afraid people won't accept them as being as common as you've written them to be. If you can't accept them yourself as being common, everyday, average, normal pieces of your world then how can the reader? Because that's what you'll share in your writing, the way you perceive them. The longer you think of them as being alien and different, the harder it may become to express the way you want them to be seen. Follow?

Yeah, makes sense.

Absolutely. Here's what I've learned since being on the forum, and analysing more in depth those books of this genre I really enjoy, and that is; often if you're going to write from the third person (as I do), you're telling the story from their perspective with only the knowledge they have, which means you're also expressing their point of view on any given object, person, place, or species. What this really means is even if you see a particular place, say a palace, as being grand and majestic and absolutely spectacular, if you're telling the story from the perspective of an adult who has live there his whole life, the sense of wonder won't be in him as it would for a traveler seeing it for the first time. It's a part of the local's everyday experience and usually not worth much notice, but to a traveler, this could be the most beautiful thing he's ever seen in his life, taking his breath away, making him forget to move, filling him with poetry he can't even begin to know how to write because words just seem too shallow to capture what it is he's seeing. And if THAT is the sense you want your readers to have, you may need to consider a whole new character to introduce. Perspective is what it's all about, so in this case, since you've got a race that's as common as humans, pretend that you're there in that world and write about them as if they ARE humans. We know humans exist and accept that without question. As long as you give hints through the context as to what we should expect from them and then not change up the rules randomly later, we'll take just about anything you give us.

Good points. Thanks.

And yes, I have read most of WoT, but I don't actually like how there's such a separation between the sexes, the women always angry with the men BECAUSE they're MEN, and the men writing of the women because they're WOMEN.

I agree. It was funny for the first 200-300 pages, but after that it got old really fast. *sigh* WOT has a good story, but it would be more enjoyable if Bob Jordan wasn't such a bad writer...

 

[Malloriel]

I do have to disagree about Jordan being a bad writer as far as style and prose go. I was drawn in (eventually) by the WAY he told the story, even though I hated nearly all the characters (certainly all the women excepting Suan and Leane), and while I still liked Rand and mostly adored Matt, Perrin became whipped by Faile (another name that's beautiful when correctly pronounced, but impossible to know by looking at it how R.J. expects it to be pronounced. If anything there should have been an umlaut over the I to separate the sound of it from the A. Cairhien is another that sounds beautiful, but looks more readily pronounced as care-hine than ky-ree-en) and I felt less attachment to him at that point. At no point did I find his ability to make the world real truly lacking.

I respect the vision he had, as well, spinning this yarn intricately to show how people in completely different places, acting independently of each other and with no knowledge of their actions, can have a cumulative affect on one particular outcome. It's an epic concept with hundreds of characters to juggle about and all their particular storylines. Each of the main characters themselves probably should have had their own series, however, as one of the major problems I had was how he would get you involved in a certain situation with certain characters and then suddenly jump to someone else, about whom I cared very little at that moment. Of course the moment I settle into caring about this character again, he jumps to someone else. Then there was the "cleansing" (all I'll say of that since those who've read will know, and those who haven't won't have it spoiled) where you didn't actually learn what happens in the aftermath till much later in a whole other book! So tense, something is finally done, it's of huge import and!! . . . . Nothing happens for ages that we immediately care about.

Another bad sign, if we learn anything from Mr. Jordan, may he truly rest in peace, is if the first book really only stands as the first chapter in your epic, something isn't quite right. If people have to say "just stick in till the 5th book, then it REALLY takes off!", something isn't quite right. Epic is one thing. Sprawling tales with several main characters are hard to balance, and really take patience, dedication, and attention to detail.

Anyway: I appreciated his glossaries, which helped me realise how helpful they can really be, but I never found them to be what I relied on. Once in a while I'd refresh my memory of a character here or there, though I would have liked later glossaries to be as complete as the first as opposed to removing information about certain places or characters I might want to remember for some other reason than reading, yet keep in the simple things much easier to remember.

So my opinion still is to give context that places the information you want the reader to know and you won't have to lead them by the hand to the trough of information. You can lead a reader to a glossary, but you can't make them read it or acknowledge the pronunciation keys.

 

[daisybee]

I do not tend to read the glossary of a book unless a name really irritates me and it trips me up as I am reading. If I love a book and appreciate the writing, then a glossary may get a glance over, although by then I should know all I need to know about the setting/characters anyway. I normally find some name I've been mis pronouncing too which makes me grateful that I didn't read it first.

I can't say the idea of a glossary has ever occurred to me in my own writing, and certainly not as a method of explaining pieces of information to the reader that are prevalent to the story. Thats the fab part of writing fantasy-finding creative ways of weaving unusual/fresh ideas into the writing and making them as believable as possible at the same time.

By sticking an asterisk beside a species name and giving a basic description at the back of the book you'd be selling the reader short of being truly submerged into your world, and if you have gone to such effort to create it, that would be a shame for you as a writer and the reader too. Pronunciation of names is one thing I'm not altogether precious about either, my name has four letters in it and two are the same and yet you'd be amazed at how many people say it wrong. Thats people for ya.

Have you read 'West of Eden' by Harry Harrison? That prologue is great, sets up species and culture in a fashion and then the story takes over. The mini guide at the back is excellent too-not exactly a glossary, but a treat of sorts, telling you what you didn't need to know for the story perhaps but what you were curious about nonetheless. It felt like a bonus rather than a vital reference guide, and so I read it a lot more avidly than a "how to say .."glossary.