A question about the use of historically accurate terms.

[TheNovelist2000]

I’m writing a long fantasy erotica involving the Spanish Crown, sirens, magic, amulets, galleys, carts, horses, and farms. But I’m reluctant to use historically accurate terms for garments and sex—words like chemise, drawers, and undergarments. I prefer modern words like panties, bras, skirts, cunt, pussy, tits. Would that feel jarring or out of place in a story like this? Or is it acceptable to keep the language modern for clarity and tone? As a reader, what would you personally prefer?

Here is an excerpt.

Luca’s expression hardened as he replied, "The courts don’t give a damn about excuses. As far as the Crown is concerned, your father is a thief and will be tried as such." He went closer to her, whispering: "Your father is a good navigator though. Losing him would be a shame.”

"What do you want from me?" Anne said meekly, her heart racing faster. She had always noticed the way he looked at her whenever they met on the deck. His gaze always wandered to her intimate places—though the same could be said for the whole crew—piercing through her clothes.

“I want you…,” he murmured. “You are not like those whores that money can buy. But you will give yourself to me tonight”. Anne flinched as his hand touched her cheek, the warmth of it sickening.

“You are gonna comeback to this place at midnight when everyone is asleep,” Luca smiled. Whoever is awake will be assigned to the deck for something to do. So, in the sleeping quarter, it is gonna be only you and sleeping men.”

His hand travelled to her lip, making Anne quiver. “There, you take off your dress,” he said. “Underwear and everything. You fold them neatly and put them in your trunk. You will then take your favorite pair of panties in your hand and return here. Then, wait for me,” he ended the conversation.

 

[Kelliezgirl]

Will some people complain?
Yes
Will some people complain regardless of what you write.
Also yes.
Some people here get upset about the use of the word panties regardless of when the story is set.

 

[TheNovelist2000]

Will some people complain?
Yes
Will some people complain regardless of what you write.
Also yes.
Some people here get upset about the use of the word panties regardless of when the story is set.

Ok...I feel that if I use archaic words for sex scenes, people won't be able to imagine very well. Maybe it's fine to use modern language for intimate scenes while keeping everything else time-appropriate. As long as people don’t stop reading my 50,000-word story the moment they see the word "panties," I’ll be okay. That would crush me otherwise.

 

[Kelliezgirl]

Ok...I feel that if I use archaic words for sex scenes, people won't be able to imagine very well. Maybe, it's fine to turn to modern words when it comes to intimate scenes and keep Everything else should be time-appropriate. As long as people don’t stop reading my 50,000-word story the moment they see the word "panties," I’ll be okay. That would crush me otherwise.

Someone absolutely will, might even bitch about it in the comments.
You can't please everyone.

And you are writing about the Spanish Crown in English! One would assume you are just translating the archaic Spanish to modern English.

 

[kellyt1994]

I think step-ins works as middle ground for panties. Not sure how historically accurate but I'd prefer it over drawers.

And cunt and cunny go back to Latin. Entirely historically accurate. Tits might have been teats but that's pretty minor. Not sure about pussy.

 

[NotWise]

Galleys? or Galleons? They're different ships.

Women's panties didn't exist until the 1930's. Before that the word referred to young boys' pants. The bra was patented in 1914. I suspect that In whatever time frame you're thinking of, women didn't wear anything like modern underwear. They were probably just wearing layers of skirts.

You're probably better off doing some research.

 

[Bamagan]

Ok...I feel that if I use archaic words for sex scenes, people won't be able to imagine very well. Maybe it's fine to use modern language for intimate scenes while keeping everything else time-appropriate. As long as people don’t stop reading my 50,000-word story the moment they see the word "panties," I’ll be okay. That would crush me otherwise.

Who is your intended audience? By that I mean, are you writing for people who are actually interested in the period or culture? If so, then they will probably already understand at least most of the archaic terminology, and may decide you don't know what you're writing about if you use anachronisms. But such readers are probably not all that numerous. If you're writing for a more generalized audience, why offer such a different setting if not to immerse them? How well can you immerse them if you're defaulting to everyday speech? I don't know where the best balance point is between readability and authenticity regarding the dialogue, but nouns are some of the easiest words to understand from context. So, if you're going to use period language at all, I would think clothes and body parts are some of the best choices, especially in an erotic context, where such things are likely to be doffed or dandled.

 

[ElectricBlue]

I’m writing a long fantasy erotica involving the Spanish Crown, sirens, magic, amulets, galleys, carts, horses, and farms. But I’m reluctant to use historically accurate terms for garments and sex—words like chemise, drawers, and undergarments. I prefer modern words like panties, bras, skirts, cunt, pussy, tits. Would that feel jarring or out of place in a story like this?

Yes. Use contemporary language like that creates an immediate anachronism. What's the point of a historical setting if you try to bring it into 2025?

Or is it acceptable to keep the language modern for clarity and tone? As a reader, what would you personally prefer?

If you're conjuring your world well enough, you can take a few short cuts, but not the ones you propose. You should at least pretend to care about the century you set the story in.

 

[TheNovelist2000]

I think step-ins works as middle ground for panties. Not sure how historically accurate but I'd prefer it over drawers.

And cunt and cunny go back to Latin. Entirely historically accurate. Tits might have been teats but that's pretty minor. Not sure about pussy.

Yes, I guess. Would someone taking off a woman's step-ins excite you or not? That's the crux of the matter. At the end of the day, I'm writing this story to evoke a sexual response from the readers.

 

[kellyt1994]

More than drawers. Lacy step-ins, dainty step-ins. But maybe the character's level of modesty would paint the picture more than the individual word.

 

[kellyt1994]

I think the Romans wore a unisex linen diaper type thing as underwear. No idea about Middle Age/Renaissance period.

 

[TheNovelist2000]

Galleys? or Galleons? They're different ships.

Women's panties didn't exist until the 1930's. Before that the word referred to young boys' pants. The bra was patented in 1914. I suspect that In whatever time frame you're thinking of, women didn't wear anything like modern underwear. They were probably just wearing layers of skirts.

You're probably better off doing some research.

The exact type of the ship doesn't matter much. The only reason the story is set in a historical period is because discovering sirens and enslaving them in this day and age will break the immersion. I don't mind going full on with historical terms for other things, but I don't want this story to be an accurate but boring piece of literature. I want this story to be highly erotic. But if panties and bras are gonna put people off, I have no choice but to use those archaic terms for erotic scenes.

 

[TheNovelist2000]

Who is your intended audience? By that I mean, are you writing for people who are actually interested in the period or culture? If so, then they will probably already understand at least most of the archaic terminology, and may decide you don't know what you're writing about if you use anachronisms. But such readers are probably not all that numerous. If you're writing for a more generalized audience, why offer such a different setting if not to immerse them? How well can you immerse them if you're defaulting to everyday speech? I don't know where the best balance point is between readability and authenticity regarding the dialogue, but nouns are some of the easiest words to understand from context. So, if you're going to use period language at all, I would think clothes and body parts are some of the best choices, especially in an erotic context, where such things are likely to be doffed or dandled.

The intended audience is Lerotica readers. I want this story to be well-received. That is that people find it to be highly erotic. The only reason I am setting this story in a historical period is because the story requires the main character to find sirens on an island and enslave them. So, a historical period when people can buy and sell other people and when the folks believe in things like mermaids and sirens is essential for the plot.

 

[TheNovelist2000]

Yes. Use contemporary language like that creates an immediate anachronism. What's the point of a historical setting if you try to bring it into 2025?

If you're conjuring your world well enough, you can take a few short cuts, but not the ones you propose. You should at least pretend to care about the century you set the story in.

Ok...I think...most people here want me to stick to historically accurate terms. That answers my question for this thread. Thank you all.

 

[kellyt1994]

I'll read it for sure. Siren slave girls sound hot.

 

[Bamagan]

The intended audience is Lerotica readers. I want this story to be well-received. That is that people find it to be highly erotic. The only reason I am setting is story in historical context is because the story requires the main character to find sirens on an island and enslave them. So, a historical period when people can buy and sell other people and when the folks believe in things like mermaids and sirens is essential for the plot.

A truly monolithic bunch if I've ever seen one.

I guess I could reframe things as: if I'm a reader looking for history-adjacent fantasy, what are my turn-ons and turn-offs compared to readers who are not interested in that subgenre? I don't mean that in just sexual terms, either. How many of the readers (who are interested in that kind of content) demand a high degree of fidelity to whatever they consider its tropes and boundaries? I don't have an answer for that, aside from acknowledging that I generally avoid such content because I have read too many that seemingly only embraced the fantasy elements to justify not learning much about the historical elements.

On a separate note, believing in an alternate present where slavery is legal and sirens are discovered does not seem significantly different than believing in an alternate past where the same conditions are true. I mean, there are people who insist that Bigfoot is out there, that Elvis faked his death, that fluoride taints our precious bodily fluids, etc.

If you want to use contemporary language because the archaic stuff feels awkward to you, it might be better to find a way to set your story in a contemporary world. If writing the scenes to have believable dialogue for the time takes you out of the eroticism, your readers may well lose the moment, too.

 

[Britva415]

This isn't entirely, or even primarily, a matter of language.

The reason things like clothing come off as anachronistic isn't because the word is anachronistic, it's because the garment itself is. The thing we call "panties" was not the thing they wore at that time in that place.

Maybe they didn't call breasts "breasts" back then, but, we're still talking about the thing we call "breasts." Not some different thing. So, writing "breasts" in the story isn't anywhere near as anachronistic as writing "panties." And since presumably the English-language dialogue is translated from Spanish, "breasts" is a perfectly cromulent thing to write. There is not necessarily any obligation to translate an archaic Spanish word into an archaic English word for the same thing. The contemporary one serves just fine.

So, this is the kind of thing to keep in mind while being careful about what you call things and not wanting to introduce jarring anachronisms. It isn't necessarily about the word, it's about the object.

 

[TheNovelist2000]

A truly monolithic bunch if I've ever seen one.

I guess I could reframe things as: if I'm a reader looking for history-adjacent fantasy, what are my turn-ons and turn-offs compared to readers who are not interested in that subgenre? I don't mean that in just sexual terms, either. How many of the readers (who are interested in that kind of content) demand a high degree of fidelity to whatever they consider its tropes and boundaries? I don't have an answer for that, aside from acknowledging that I generally avoid such content because I have read too many that seemingly only embraced the fantasy elements to justify not learning much about the historical elements.

On a separate note, believing in an alternate present where slavery is legal and sirens are discovered does not seem significantly different than believing in an alternate past where the same conditions are true. I mean, there are people who insist that Bigfoot is out there, that Elvis faked his death, that fluoride taints our precious bodily fluids, etc.

If you want to use contemporary language because the archaic stuff feels awkward to you, it might be better to find a way to set your story in a contemporary world. If writing the scenes to have believable dialogue for the time takes you out of the eroticism, your readers may well lose the moment, too.

Alright. I understand your point. I will try to get a feel of how the story sounds myself and write accordingly. Setting the story in a modern era is not possible since I'd already written about 46,000 words so far and most the plot only stands in a historical context. (I wrote the story for myself about a year ago. So, I paid little attention to accuracy and suitability to readers. After reading the story again yesterday with a pair of fresh eyes, I found the story to be really compelling. So, I am editing it now to make it work and possibly finish it with a satisfying conclusion.)

 

[TheRedChamber]

It's a thorny issue. Look up some of the articles about Deadwood. The writers wanted to write it with authentic profanity but quickly found that writing the characters speaking the actual slang and swearwords of the time was more comical than shocking. They ended up falling back on a bunch of tried and tested Anglo-Saxon words that never go out of fashion.

Similarly you have the Tiffany effect where something looks way more modern than it is. The name Tiffany first appears in English in the 1600s and there are French equivalents back to 1200s. But stick one in your Elizabethan period drama and she'll stick out like a sore thumb.

Mostly it's a case of balance between being too obviously wrong and too willfully obscure.

 

[TheNovelist2000]

This isn't entirely, or even primarily, a matter of language.

The reason things like clothing come off as anachronistic isn't because the word is anachronistic, it's because the garment itself is. The thing we call "panties" was not the thing they wore at that time in that place.

Maybe they didn't call breasts "breasts" back then, but, we're still talking about the thing we call "breasts." Not some different thing. So, writing "breasts" in the story isn't anywhere near as anachronistic as writing "panties." And since presumably the English-language dialogue is translated from Spanish, "breasts" is a perfectly cromulent thing to write. There is not necessarily any obligation to translate an archaic Spanish word into an archaic English word for the same thing. The contemporary one serves just fine.

So, this is the kind of thing to keep in mind while being careful about what you call things and not wanting to introduce jarring anachronisms. It isn't necessarily about the word, it's about the object.

You know... even in mainstream fantasy, there are books like A Song of Ice and Fire that try to stay very accurate, and there are others that only borrow the historical atmosphere while using modern language. I don’t have an example for historical fantasy off the top of my head, but a book like 1984 isn’t actually accurate with its terms either. But it feels so authentic. Isn't it permissible for me to incorporate historical elements as much as I can while leaving the sex stuff quite modern?

 

[TheNovelist2000]

It's a thorny issue. Look up some of the articles about Deadwood. The writers wanted to write it with authentic profanity but quickly found that writing the characters speaking the actual slang and swearwords of the time was more comical than shocking. They ended up falling back on a bunch of tried and tested Anglo-Saxon words that never go out of fashion.

Similarly you have the Tiffany effect where something looks way more modern than it is. The name Tiffany first appears in English in the 1600s and there are French equivalents back to 1200s. But stick one in your Elizabethan period drama and she'll stick out like a sore thumb.

Mostly it's a case of balance between being too obviously wrong and too willfully obscure.

Ok...Your mentions of Deadwood and "the Tiffany effect" really help. I get your point. Keep it as real as possible. But don't over do it.

 

[Britva415]

You know... even in mainstream fantasy, there are books like A Song of Ice and Fire that try to stay very accurate, and there are others that only borrow the historical atmosphere while using modern language. I don’t have an example for historical fantasy off the top of my head, but a book like 1984 isn’t actually accurate with its terms either. But it feels so authentic. Isn't it permissible for me to incorporate historical elements as much as I can while leaving the sex stuff quite modern?

Sure

 

[jehoram]

I guess it boils down to how much you want to transport the reader into the world you create. But there's a good book on how to avoid some of the more common anachronisms:

https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/15997779-medieval-underpants-and-other-blunders

 

[TheRedChamber]

I don’t have an example for historical fantasy off the top of my head, but a book like 1984 isn’t actually accurate with its terms either. But it feels so authentic.

I'm confused and probably completely missing the point, but 1984 was written in 1948 and the language of the imagined future was very much at the front of Orwell's mind.

 

[Britva415]

a book like 1984 isn’t actually accurate with its terms either

How could it have been? It was written a generation before 1984.