I've just written the first chapter of a new story.
In it, I wanted to describe how a roughly spherical object grew based on comparisons with everyday items or landmarks. I cheated for the starting size - about a foot in diameter - and went rapidly downhill from there. As big as a car? As big as a semi-detached house? As big as a mansion? No excuses - those last three are dire. They're not even remotely circular in most instances.
Suggestions for improvements please.
AJ
For spherical objects under a couple of feet most people compare them to everyday sports balls like a soccer ball or a baseball or a golf ball. For larger objects most people tend to go with descriptions like: "It was a ball big enough for a person to stand upright in." or "The ball was so big you could stand in it, jump, and not hit the top with your outstretched hand." Once you go above about ten feet many people just go with the diameter in feet etc.
Once you go above about ten feet many people just go with the diameter in feet etc.
Thanks.
I think that using feet instead of a physical comparison doesn't have the same impact. And a protagonist saying, "About 100 feet in diameter," strikes me as having the same weakness as saying, "She had D-cup breasts." :-(
AJ
And a protagonist saying, "About 100 feet in diameter,"
At that size you can have them say something like: "it was bigger than a football field." But once you get much bigger you're entering the realm of people not being able to comprehend the size at all, as there are limitations to what they can envision.
You almost have no choice but to go with measurements after you hit a certain size... there are no real comparable items until you hit "That's no moon..."
Before planetary size, but after your object is larger than a frat-party beachball, you can get silly...
As big as the globe on the Daily Planet building.
Big enough to encompass the Chicago Bean!
As big around as a circus tent!
Then there is the old classic, "Almost as big as yo mamma."
As big around as a circus tent!
I'm considering using that - it's more 'spherical' than a house. But aren't circus tents in the USA bigger than in the UK? UK circuses typically only have one activity going on at once, but my impression from the media is that US circuses typically have many concurrent activities.
AJ
But aren't circus tents in the USA bigger than in the UK? UK circuses typically only have one activity going on at once
There were only a couple of really big circus operations in the US that had more than one ring in them. The circus they use in that Bond film is very typical of them world wide. Ringling Bros Circus used to advertise the biggest tent and had three slightly smaller rings than usual in use. Most circuses did not go that route due to the huge expenses involve in the tied up equipment and the time putting them up.
From what I read years ago, the Ringling Bros 3 ring circus ended up that way as they had just combined with a couple of other operations about the same time the main tent needed to be replaced so they had a much larger one made to put all three rings in it. Such operations require more than 3 times the number of seats and take about 5 times as long to put up and take down. Thus expenses go up and you have to charge a lot more.
If you're looking for size comparisons, check out these fictional starships ....
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aTPwbVqU6lc
Thanks.
I've got a good idea of the typical size of a hot air balloon and a vague impression of the size of a water tower from the entertainment media.
I've no idea how big the Epcot sphere is. I didn't use the UK's Millennium Dome for the same lack of universality reasons.
AJ
Bigger than a;
Blimp,
Aircraft carrier,
Football stadium,
Mountain.
After that, it gets into celestial objects. I assume the 'average person, relatable is a prerequisite.
I assume the 'average person, relatable is a prerequisite.
Yes. I don't think there's any point in using eg the dome of St Paul's or St Basil's.
AJ
Bigger than a;
Blimp,
Aircraft carrier,
Football stadium,
Mountain.
Would 'the size of a castle' be adequately evocative and relatable for readers? As well as having a large footprint, they usually have a significant vertical presence too. The combination is probably closer to spherical than most buildings.
AJ
Would 'the size of a castle' be adequately evocative and relatable for readers?
Maybe for readers in England and Europe, where there are still existing castles.
I don't think many modern American or Canadian readers would have a good feel for the size of a castle.
Would 'the size of a castle' be adequately evocative and relatable for readers?
Maybe for readers in England and Europe, where there are still existing castles.
I don't think many modern American or Canadian readers would have a good feel for the size of a castle.
size of a castle.
"Hearst Castle
mansion, San Simeon, California, United States
BY Amy Tikkanen View Edit History
FULL ARTICLE
Hearst Castle, also called La Casa Grande ("The Big House"), main residence of an estate in San Simeon, California, that originally belonged to William Randolph Hearst. The Mediterranean Revival mansion was designed by Julia Morgan in 1919–47 and is known for its opulence. Since 1958 the castle and estate have been part of the Hearst San Simeon State Historical Monument.
San Simeon: La Casa Grande
San Simeon: La Casa Grande
La Casa Grande, San Simeon, California.
David L. Jennings
In 1865 American gold-mine owner George Hearst purchased some 40,000 acres (16,200 hectares) of land in the area around San Simeon Bay. He continued to acquire property in the vicinity, eventually amassing some 250,000 acres [101,150 hectares]). In 1919 his son, William Randolph, inherited the land, which was then known as Camp Hill and offered little in the way of amenities. That year he commissioned Morgan "to build a little something." The project evolved into a series of luxurious buildings and gardens on a 127-acre (51-hectare) estate that Hearst named La Cuesta Encantada ("The Enchanted Hill"). Working in collaboration with Hearst, Morgan sought to capture the grandeur of European architecture, and many features were inspired by foreign buildings and artworks. Construction continued into the late 1940s.
Hearst, William Randolph
Hearst, William Randolph
William Randolph Hearst.
Library of Congress, Washington, D.C. (digital file no. 3b16392)
The centrepiece of the estate is the main residence, which became known as Hearst Castle. It was designed in the Mediterranean Revival style, and its facade suggests a Spanish cathedral with its bell towers and ornate decorations. The main entrance is flanked by bas-reliefs of knights, and a sculpture of Mary holding the infant Jesus is perched in a niche over the massive door. The splendor of the exterior continues inside the mansion. Covering 68,500 square feet (6,360 square metres), Hearst Castle contains 115 rooms, including 38 bedrooms, more than 40 bathrooms, a theatre, and a beauty salon. Typifying the mansion's opulence is the Doge's Suite, which was inspired by the Doges' Palace in Venice and was reportedly reserved for Hearst's most important guests. The sitting room features walls adorned with velvet fabric, and the 18th-century painted ceiling was originally in an Italian palazzo. The suite's marble balcony includes an elaborate loggia. In addition, Hearst's extensive collection of antiques and artworks is prominently displayed in the suite as well as throughout the rest of the mansion.
Hearst Castle
Hearst Castle
Hearst Castle, San Simeon, California; designed by Julia Morgan.
© Dan Schreiber/Shutterstock.com
Skip Ad
La Cuesta Encantada also included three palatial guest houses. The largest, Casa del Mar, is 5,350 square feet (490 square metres) and contains eight bedrooms, while the smallest, Casa del Monte, measures 2,550 square feet (235 square metres) and includes four bedrooms. Among the estate's most iconic features are its two pools. The indoor Roman Pool was based on ancient Roman baths and features blue- and gold-coloured mosaic tiles throughout; some of the patterns were reportedly inspired by the Mausoleum of Galla Placidia in Ravenna, Italy. The Neptune Pool is located outside. It is surrounded by sculptures and colonnades, and the facade of a reconstructed Roman temple stands at one end. Completing the setting is a waterfall. The estate was also once home to reportedly the world's largest private zoo, which featured large enclosures that allowed a number of creatures to freely roam. Among the zoo's more notable animals were white fallow deer, camels, zebras, giraffes, and kangaroos.
San Simeon: Hearst Castle
San Simeon: Hearst Castle
The Neptune Pool at Hearst Castle, San Simeon, California; designed by Julia Morgan.
© Evan Meyer/Shutterstock.com
Morgan, Julia: Hearst Castle
Morgan, Julia: Hearst Castle
The Neptune Pool at Hearst Castle, San Simeon, California; designed by Julia Morgan.
Michael Darter
La Cuesta Encantada was visited by numerous luminaries, and it was the site of lavish parties, many of which were hosted by Marion Davies, with whom the married Hearst had an affair that lasted some three decades. Visitors could arrive via the estate's private airfield.
Hearst died in 1951, and three years later La Cuesta Encantada became a California state park. In 1958 the Hearst San Simeon State Historical Monument was established, and that year the estate was opened to public tours. It became one of the state's more popular attractions, and some one million people visit annually."
I too have visited the castle, and it is quite large.
It became one of the state's more popular attractions, and some one million people visit annually.
And the population of the US is somewhere around 328 million.
1 million people annually doesn't mean much. To get a meaningful number you would need to exclude repeat visitors and foreign tourists.
That said, assuming all 1 million visitors every year are unique first visits by US residents (in my opinion this is exceedingly unlikely), the site has only been open to the public for 63 years, which would mean at most a little under 20% of the US population has seen it.
I don't think many modern American or Canadian readers would have a good feel for the size of a castle.
Really? I thought the entire population of America had visited Windsor just so they could point out what a shame it is that the Queen had Windsor Castle built under a Heathrow flight path ;-)
AJ
I thought the entire population of America had visited Windsor just so they could point out what a shame it is that the Queen had Windsor Castle built under a Heathrow flight path ;-)
The majority of Americans have never left the borders of America. Outside of military efforts, it generally requires a passport, which is something only ~43% of Americans have.
https://travel.state.gov/content/travel/en/about-us/reports-and-statistics.html
That is a sore point to me, as many of them talk a lot of trash about places around the world, yet they couldn't and haven't been there themselves. Much less Heathrow or Windsor Palace.
Windsor Palace
Where did you get Windsor Palace from? All other posters have used the correct name, Windsor Castle.
Where did you get Windsor Palace from?
I was having a conversation with my wife regarding places to stay in Rio De Janeiro. Windsor Palace Hotel came up. At the time I incorrectly inserted palace.
Would 'the size of a castle' be adequately evocative and relatable for readers?
Castles can vary in size from very small ("Molly's Lodge", less than 1000 square feet) to huge complexes that span multiple acres. So useless for comparison.
Castles can vary in size from very small ("Molly's Lodge", less than 1000 square feet) to huge complexes that span multiple acres. So useless for comparison.
That may be true but that's equally true of most of the other comparators, but we continue to use them anyway. I guess there's an implication of 'average'. But even then I have no idea what an average castle size is; I thought the vertical implications, the towers and turrets, might make for an evocative descriptor.
AJ
That may be true but that's equally true of most of the other comparators, but we continue to use them anyway. I guess there's an implication of 'average'.
True, but the variation in sizes for castles is much wider and more difficult to imagine than, for example, Olympic pools which have a defined size.
Would 'the size of a castle' be adequately evocative and relatable for readers?
Depends on the reader. Castles come in a variety of sizes and shapes. As noted by DS, it wouldn't mean much to a US reader.
They're not even remotely circular in most instances.
Why do they have to be circular as a size comparison?
Why do they have to be circular as a size comparison?
Because you are trying to describe the size of a sphere.
If you compare a sphere to a house (or some other large rectangular object) for size, do you mean the largest sphere that would fit inside the space occupied by the house, or the smallest sphere that would fully contain the house?
Because you are trying to describe the size of a sphere.
I see it as trying to describe a relative size. The shape is irrelevant. But that's me.
I see it as trying to describe a relative size. The shape is irrelevant. But that's me.
But the problems when you are describing relative of shape A by comparison to shape B is that they don't fit into the same space, so do you mean the largest A that would fit in B or the smallest A that would contain B?
There is a significant size difference between the largest sphere that would fit in a given cube and the smallest sphere that could contain that cube.
Or perhaps you mean a sphere of the same total volume? But I don't think most people could easily picture that and are going to go for one of my first two comparison suggestions.
But the problems when you are describing relative of shape
I just reread the OP and saw the "object grew." I didn't notice that before. So you're right, the image in the reader's mind should be a sphere growing.
I didn't notice that before. So you're right, the image in the reader's mind should be a sphere growing.
Spheres don't grow, they expand.
:)
Spheres don't grow, they expand.
I found this on wikidiff:
As verbs the difference between grow and expand is that grow is (ergative) to become bigger while expand is (label) to change (something) from a smaller form and/or size to a larger one.
Not sure what that means.
As verbs the difference between grow and expand is that grow is (ergative) to become bigger while expand is (label) to change (something) from a smaller form and/or size to a larger one.
The way I read that, growth comes from something internal to the object and expand is a result of some outside force acting on the object.
The way I read that, growth comes from something internal to the object and expand is a result of some outside force acting on the object.
If a delectable female mercilessly teases a hetero male, do his testicles grow or do they expand?
If someone has to loosen their belt after a large meal, has their stomach grown or expanded?
AJ
There is a significant size difference between the largest sphere that would fit in a given cube and the smallest sphere that could contain that cube.
Or perhaps you mean a sphere of the same total volume?
I easily and automatically envision each of those options, but I know to have weird, and exceptionally visual, mind.
However, I think such comparisons, like, "it could fit in a [room or other relatively defined space]" versus "a [room or other relatively defined space] could fit into it"
using basically the same references twice could be very expressive for the growth sensation of the object.
I easily and automatically envision each of those options, but I know to have weird, and exceptionally visual, mind.
The first to should be easy for most people to visualize/conceptualize.
The one that's hard for most people to visualize is the third one, a sphere of the same volume as a given (roughly) cubic object.
The problem is, in that third case the sphere is too large to fit in the cube, but also too small to fully contain the cube, it's somewhere in the middle.
However, I think such comparisons, like, "it could fit in a [room or other relatively defined space]" versus "a [room or other relatively defined space] could fit into it"
Those work because you are defining the comparison more precisely.
The problem is if the author just says "a sphere as big as [some non-spherical reference object]."
Then the reader is guessing at the correct comparison.
You could go with "the diameter was bigger than my car is long" then it was taller than my house then it was as tall as a 3 story building etc. The size of a double-decker bus would be fairly universally understood, even if people are in a country where they aren't used.
Remember that "football field" has different connotations in different parts of the world, but don't let that stop you from comparing is diameter to the length of a soccer field which would be fairly universally understood.
Or you could go the animal route, up to the size of an elephant. Then start with comparisons - "It was so big an elephant standing on the top of it would look like a mouse standing on a basketball. Then the elephant becomes "like an ant running on the surface of a basketball. Until you're ready to say it's the size of a mountain, and then it becomes the size of the moon, (at which point it would be stuffing up earth's gravity and rotation quite noticeably)
People really do have a problem understanding the scale of really really big things. In Australia, we have a unit of volume called the SydHarb. It literally is the amount of water it takes to fill Sydney Harbour. Then we talk about a dam containing 3 SydHarbs of water etc.
Some very useful suggestions - thank you.
It literally is the amount of water it takes to fill Sydney Harbour.
How much is that?
AJ
It literally is the amount of water it takes to fill Sydney Harbour.
How much is that?
500 Gigalitres/
Now I guess you want to know how big a Giglitre is:
A standard Olympic-sized swimming pool measuring 50m long and 25m wide, contains 2.5 ML or 2.5 million litres of water. One gigalitre (GL) equals 1,000,000,000 litres or 1,000 ML, so approx 400 Olympic swimming pools.
So the Sydney Harbour contains enough water to fill 200,000 Olympic sized swimming pools.
So the Sydney Harbour contains enough water to fill 200,000 Olympic sized swimming pools.
Only in theory.
As you remove the water to fill the pools more flows in from the sea and the river and creeks.
:)
Are you describing a physical object, or a sphere of influence?
For influence, you could still use "X feet/meters/parsecs away".
For objects, you might have to go to describing aspects of it. "I could stand up inside that" or "I could park my car under that and it wouldn't get rained on".
Are you describing a physical object, or a sphere of influence?
A physical object ;-)
AJ
