I have been reading slightly about the Classical Order, how ancient structures were composed and built and their various terminology. In my universe I have buildings of similar style, even skyscrapers inspired by classical architecture. But how far should I go to describe them? I wonder if the average reader is familiar with terms such as the capital of a column or pillar? The entablature above? I include architecture because for me it is an integral part of the story of a massive Empire. Here are some quick made-up examples; Simplified Example: The black marble pillar with grey streaks stretched far above the the people in the palace, its top part which connected to the roof was adorned with blue coloured stone flowers. Advanced Example: The red marble pillar with streaks of white stretched far above the people in the palace, its capital that connected to the roof was adorned with purple stone flowers. Simplified Example: The grey pillar had grooves traveling up all along its vast height, its uppermost part was adorned with many coloured crystals that shimmered in the dark. The decorations of the large horizontal stone part above depicted a fight between naked humans. Adv Ex: The black pillar was fluted all along its vast height, the capital was adorned with crystals that shimmered in the dark. The decorations of the entablature above depicted a fight between naked humans. What do you think?
I would prefer not to have to read a dictionary of architectural terms alongside a book. I know what fluted means, but apart from that, I would probably just skip over it.
This was my gut feeling. I want my stories to be somewhat easy to read and follow. Anything that will make the reader stop and guess or need a dictionary is in my eyes a structural weakness because it takes the reader out and away from the story.
Speaking of the Writing with Authority thread, I'd definitely go with the advanced terms as if they were everyday words. Cormac McCarthy did this all the time. If there's a scene in a church he'd write about the narthex and the clerestory and other whacko specific words most of us have never heard of. That shit is dope in my opinion.
I suppose it boils down to preference. Some would like it, others not. The question then becomes; what does the majority of people like?
If you want to use those terms, then, IMO, you need to give enough clues in the text to allow the reader to figure it out in context. Don't explain them, but give sufficient detail so it becomes clear what you're referring to.
Definitely going to get a split opinion. I love that stuff when done well and don't mind having to look up new words. How else are you going to learn new stuff? I get the other side, too. It can get annoying if not done well. Yeah, definitely. A lot of times the contextual milieu is good enough. Like with this one: I don't need to look up what an entablature is. My brain will process that sentence as "decorations depicting naked humans" and translate the imagery perfectly without needing more specificity. It kind of gives your imagination a little hit on the subconscious level. I'd add that your word choices should be dependent on your POV, namely where it falls on the depth spectrum between the character and narrator. A more distant narrator, like the classic authors used, would probably use the more specific terms because it's an uncontradictable authority. I don't mean omniscient or objective when I say that, but more of the Hemingway/Faulkner model where the god's eye view kind of moves along with the character. But if you have a tighter, more limited POV broadcasting more from the character's head, then the simple terms might be more appropriate. Things can get wonky if certain projections of expertise don't line up with character's normal day to day thinking.
Homer pretty much covered it, in my take. It really depends on the character, while bearing in mind that the narration is also a character in your story, whether or not it forms an entity that participates. However you describe the architecture, or other uncommon word usage, helps to define who's who and what's happening, consistent unless divergence is deliberate and purposeful. If the story around unfamiliar terms is worth it, I'd have no trouble looking up words or working them out in context. Or skim over them, while accepting their legitimacy in the story unfolding. If it becomes laborious, I'd suggest it's likely too much attention is being paid to architecture for those not particularly interested in it, rather than the specificity of the terms used.
