Writing Tips and Reviews

Defining terms

What is one of the ways to alienate your reader? Well, that's to insert a whole bunch of terms and not once define them. You're writing a story, not a history textbook, don't give your readers homework, and don't think those footnotes are going to help. Those are for citing sources and extra comments, they're not a replacement for definitions.

Made up terms:

No matter what the term is, you have to explain what it is. Even if it's derived from a real word, the audience isn't going to know what it is or want to do research. If you make up something like a species name and put in front of every name, the reader is not only going to think it's a family name, they're going to be driven insane if it's repeated too much.

If it's a real word that has a different definition and you never give that definition, the reader will assume it has the same definition as the real-world counterpart. Take for instance, the servants from the fate series. We all know what a real-world servant is, but not everyone knows what a fate servant is. That's why fate media will always explain what a "servant" is before people are confused with the real-world counterpart.

Terms used in real life:

Just because it's a word used in real life doesn't mean everyone knows what it is. "He launched a mordhau," I want an actual head count of people who know what a mordhau is, and I mean the fighting technique, not the game. Probably less than 10% of you. This here is a fencing technique, now, how many of you are fencers and know this term? Yeah, not a lot.

Despite it being on Wikipedia, you still need to explain what it is to your reader, making them do homework to understand what you're writing is not good storytelling. The reader is more likely to skip over it or put in their own version of what happened to fill in the blanks than do homework. Worst case scenario they'll say, "screw this" and go to read something else. There are few terms you can use that don't need an explanation, but those are probably the ones you don't want to be using.

"Once the reader has a vidid image of what a Mordhau is, what it looks like, and that it's a combat technique, you are much more free to just say Mordhau from then on."

Footnotes for defining terms:

That's not what a footnote is. Footnotes, according to Wikipedia, "[are] a string of text placed at the bottom of a page in a book or document or at the end of a chapter, volume or the whole text. The note can provide an author's comments on the main text or citations of a reference work in support of the text." Does it say it's for defining terms? No, it doesn't. Using a footnote to define a term instead of integrating it into your story makes it hard for the reader.

They have to follow a number all the way down to a note, read what that is, go back and apply that to the story. That's the kind of shit people deal with in school, not a fictional story. Not mention that there are some people who skip footnotes, like me, so aren't going to have a single clue what's going on since the only definition in the entire story is in a footnote they missed or skipped.

Quotes from real people who write about defining things in footnotes:

"That's...usually not the best except in a textbook. It forces the reader to move their eyes to the bottom of the page, or worse, to the end of the book, to understand what's going on."

"Yeah, if you're writing a story, you can't use footnotes and anecdotes like that. It *completely* destroys immersion. And feels a tad bit like the writer is just throwing around big words and *expects* you to know what that is."

"It's far more interesting to explain the martial technique being used instead of just going 'yeah, he used a Mordhau, which I'm not going to explain to you right now'."