Do people read glossaries?

[zoran]

Originally Posted by Teresa Edgerton

Even so. My youngest daughter has a very popular and contemporary name (it was neither when I gave it to her twenty-seven years ago, but between then and now everyone's been using it) and people manage to mispronounce it all of the time.

I thing one should aspire that MOST of the readers pronounce names right... not ALL of them. Because no glossary will help with that

[Green]

I'm sure Theresa (or others) will correct me if I'm wrong here, but doesn't the publisher have a large say in whether or not a book should have a glossary (or map, whatever)?

And since the agent and/or editor has to like the book enough to take it on before the decisions even get as far as whether or not you should have a glossary... perhaps it might be to your detriment if the book depends upon the glossary, since the agent/editor probably isn't going to bother reading a glossary at this early stage.

If that makes sense. Basically, though I love (good) glossaries, I think the narrative should stand on its own merits.

[Spectrum]

Thanks for all the replies.

Originally Posted by Ursa major

But does it really matter how a reader pronounces a name in their head?

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

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? (This would be in addition to a central pronunciation guide, of course, not replacing it.)

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."

This information is an unnatural "state break", because there is no reason why a character would remark on this, since everyone in the story has seen a Scatha before and knows how they look.

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.

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. But that's less essential to the understanding of the story.

[Culhwch]

Originally Posted by Spectrum

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? (This would be in addition to a central pronunciation guide, of course, not replacing it.)

That seems, to me at least, very jarring and a great way to rip a reader out of the narrative. Keep it in the glossary, or put a pronunciation guide at the front - but, as Green pointed out, that's probably not going to be solely your decision if it's published.

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."

I think the first works, quite frankly, without needing to refer to the glossary. By all means keep it in there to add extra details, but don't get so lazy within the narrative that you leave all description to an appendix.

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.

I think this is information that could easily be imparted in the narrative, but again, put it in the glossary anyway.

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. But that's less essential to the understanding of the story.

Now this I don't agree with. This is definitely flirting with the laziness I mentioned above. I'm not saying stop the narrative for a paragraph of description, but if you thread it in organically there's no need to put a physical description in the glossary.

Just as an aside - I'm amazed that so many people relate not discovering a glossary until finishing reading a book. I always flick through the length of a book before I start reading, if only to check the page count....

[Nesacat]

While like HJ I read books cover to cover, it is very aggravating to keep flipping back and forth to the glossary.

It's wonderful that glossaries and appendices provide all kinds of extra information but the reading of the tale per se should bot be dependent upon them.

It makes the reading a tedious process where the rhythm is constantly broken by the flipping and finding and flipping back.

[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]

Originally Posted by Spectrum

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]

Originally Posted by Teresa Edgerton

(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]

Originally Posted by Spectrum

...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]

Originally Posted by Omphalos

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. :P

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]

Originally Posted by 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.

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.