Vivid Character Descriptions

Character description is no more that taste, like any other description. Some writers and reader like it long and detailed, some like it short and simple.

Likewise, some genres generally have a lot of detailed character description, some use very little.

Like all description, write it the way you like to read it.

I agree that I like minimal character descriptions because it makes the character more alive in my imagination. If I'm told exactly what the character looks like down to the smallest detail, then I almost find it harder to think of what they look like and they become less real. It's kind of how you are always disappointed with whoever gets cast for the role in a movie adaptation of a novel, because they always look different in your mind.

As much as I'd like to say that there's no right or wrong way to describe a character, writing "she had flowy blonde hair, sparkling blue eyes, a button nose," etc, etc, and then proceeding with what she wore in minute detail seems overly Mary Sue-y and amateurish. Unless it's extremely vital that we know these things (is it ever?).

I do have my own particular weakness, which is hair. If I don't get to describe anything else about my character, then at least let me describe the hair! (An example: my current WIP begins with a character playing with their hair.) But I like thinking of roundabout ways of describing things. For example, instead of saying a character has long hair, I get another character to tell them that she/he/xe is overdue for a haircut.

Writing and reading/doing crit for screenplays, I've found the rule of three is golden. You basically want to use as few words as possible to convey the character as quickly as possible. Something like: "Charlie [Sixteen, spotty, compulsive gamer]", gives me a good idea of what Charlie's like. I don't have to know everything about him, I've already built an image in my head. I try to keep that in mind.

I detest too much description, either for character or setting. Give me the bare bones and I'll fill in the rest.

I think the KISS rule applies to nearly all description. But I am a minimalist xD

I enjoy best the stories that describe the character through his/her/its dialogue and interactions with other story elements. Elmore Leonard and Terry Pratchett come to mind since I've been reading both lately.
This topic seems like a good example of two writing rules-of-thumb at work here, "Show, Don't Tell" and "Write What You Know".
Developing a believable, multi-faceted character is what I think Stephen King refers to when he says that, at a certain point during the writing process, his characters take on a life of their own; he merely watches what they do next and writes it all down.
I prefer minimal physical description--give me only what is relevant at that particular story point.

I do think POV plays in this. My 11 year old male main character isn't likely to describe how his mom and dad look because he isn't likely to think about this. They look like Mom and Dad. They are too normal for him to notice. But when Mom undergoes cancer treatment and her appearance changes, that would be noticed - and, in the case of this kid, immediately shoved back out of his mind because he doesn't want to think about this.

What works for your POV and the story in terms of description may vary for each story.

Others in the thread have made the point, and I’ve read some of my fave authors make it, that the reader is the one who does most of the work of creating a character or a place or an action in their own imaginations. So too many details get in the way of their creativity. As do too few. They need SOME.

John D. McDonald said that he sought the one to three details which were most evocative to most people. Scents and sounds and other sensations as well as sight.

Of course, every reader, and every writer, is different. What works for some won’t for others. But we can only do our best and hope enough like our particular approach to read our works.

One of the descriptions I like most is Chandler's famous "It was a blonde. A blonde to make a bishop kick a hole in a stained glass window." The only bit of specific information is that she's blonde. Not how tall she is, her eye colour, her figure. But despite that we know this dame is a knockout. It leaves the reader free to picture her as their own idea of what a woman who could provoke that reaction looks like, rather than imposing the author's on them.

I like some description so that I can get a mental image of who everyone in the story is. Basic height, build, eye color that sort of thing. The rest I want to learn through mannerisms.

I do find I struggle in my own writing to find the right balance, but I'm trying to find my way.

As far as scenes go, I like a basic set up for that as well but over detail can distract me from the story.

I was a caricature artist for awhile. I was never anywhere near as good as the pros, but I used to get local gigs working kids birthday parties and such, mostly by word-of-mouth. Caricatures are fascinating to me for the way that only a few well-placed lines, in the hands of a perceptive artist, can evoke a likeness of somebody that's every bit as striking and recognizable as a meticulous oil painting. I like to think of writing character descriptions in the same way.

I have a friend who is a cartoonist. She does the same -- defines a character through a very few well-placed lines. Her 'toons are usually based on real people (personalized cards and such), and despite the lack of detail it's always clear who is who. And despite being mere lines on paper they give an illusion of being 3-D. Quite a nice talent.

Newbie here... so would something like this be a bit too much info?

I looked up to see a grumpy, black giant of a man looming over me. An expression of concern, mixed with annoyance, stretched across his face. I suppose he always looks like that, if and when I skip a meal. Intentionally or not. And maybe I did happen go to bed early last night, without dinner first. Oops. To say he looked imposing right now, was an understatement. Joel towered at just two inches shy of seven feet in height, with about two hundred and eighty pounds of solid body mass to throw around. Add a bald head to that, red bandana around it, white tank top, some cargo pants and black combat boots, the guy looked more like someone who should be carrying around a bazooka, rather than cooking our daily meals in a kitchen. But—
—he was also a big softy.
“The crew aint gonna function right, if our Boss passes out from skippin’ meals or lackin’ sleep,” Joel stated flatly.

Sorry, wasn't sure how to make the letters bigger or add my indents in where they were supposed to be. New here, so just learning to play with the reply box.

Smeasking said:

Newbie here... so would something like this be a bit too much info?

I looked up to see a grumpy, black giant of a man looming over me. An expression of concern, mixed with annoyance, stretched across his face. I suppose he always looks like that, if and when I skip a meal. Intentionally or not. And maybe I did happen go to bed early last night, without dinner first. Oops. To say he looked imposing right now, was an understatement. Joel towered at just two inches shy of seven feet in height, with about two hundred and eighty pounds of solid body mass to throw around. Add a bald head to that, red bandana around it, white tank top, some cargo pants and black combat boots, the guy looked more like someone who should be carrying around a bazooka, rather than cooking our daily meals in a kitchen. But—
—he was also a big softy.
“The crew aint gonna function right, if our Boss passes out from skippin’ meals or lackin’ sleep,” Joel stated flatly.

Click to expand...

There are some visuals there that are redundant. The parts I bolded in blue are echoed by the ones in red. In the blue part, the writer does a good job of conveying that he's imposing without specifically telling the reader. The red part tells the reader he is imposing and is extremely specific about the height and weight of this giant looming man.

Unless the character narrating is the type of person who goes about their day thinking about the exact height and weight of their associates, it doesn't make a lot of narrative sense. Personally I'd pick one or the other, but not both. Whichever one fits the voice of the character.

There's a bit here and there that repeats itself, like "cooking our daily meals in a kitchen". By default meals are cooked in kitchens, and meals are eaten daily. So daily and kitchen can be inferred by the reader and trimmed to:

"rather than cooking our meals."

Sorry guys. I just read in another post, where a guy asked for input on his first paragraph and was told it should be in SYW spot. I didn't realize that when I posted my bits a few moments ago.

I just put them on there because I thought it was relevant to the questions of character descriptions. Namely because originally I didn't have any descriptions, until one beta reader said she wished there was more on what the characters looked like. Personalities were distinguishable, but not their looks. So since everyone has such great input, I wanted to throw some examples up and see what was considered too much info in the descriptions. Make sense?

Canotila said:

There are some visuals there that are redundant. The parts I bolded in blue are echoed by the ones in red. In the blue part, the writer does a good job of conveying that he's imposing without specifically telling the reader. The red part tells the reader he is imposing and is extremely specific about the height and weight of this giant looming man.

Unless the character narrating is the type of person who goes about their day thinking about the exact height and weight of their associates, it doesn't make a lot of narrative sense. Personally I'd pick one or the other, but not both. Whichever one fits the voice of the character.

There's a bit here and there that repeats itself, like "cooking our daily meals in a kitchen". By default meals are cooked in kitchens, and meals are eaten daily. So daily and kitchen can be inferred by the reader and trimmed to:

"rather than cooking our meals."

Click to expand...

THANK YOU SO MUCH! That's the kind of feedback I needed. (I'm a total newbie, so I appreciate your insight) That gives me a lot to think about as I do my revisions.

The problem is that if the appearance has no relevance to their character, the reader may forget. We remember what people look like when they make a strong impression on us.

If you're gonna do it, do it early and do it creatively.

Smeasking said:

I looked up to see a grumpy, black giant of a man looming over me. An expression of concern, mixed with annoyance, stretched across his face. I suppose he always looks like that, if and when I skip a meal. Intentionally or not. And maybe I did happen go to bed early last night, without dinner first. Oops. To say he looked imposing right now, was an understatement. Joel towered at just two inches shy of seven feet in height, with about two hundred and eighty pounds of solid body mass to throw around. Add a bald head to that, red bandana around it, white tank top, some cargo pants and black combat boots, the guy looked more like someone who should be carrying around a bazooka, rather than cooking our daily meals in a kitchen. But—
—he was also a big softy.
“The crew aint gonna function right, if our Boss passes out from skippin’ meals or lackin’ sleep,” Joel stated flatly.

Click to expand...

Canotila said:

There are some visuals there that are redundant. The parts I bolded in blue are echoed by the ones in red. In the blue part, the writer does a good job of conveying that he's imposing without specifically telling the reader. The red part tells the reader he is imposing and is extremely specific about the height and weight of this giant looming man.

Unless the character narrating is the type of person who goes about their day thinking about the exact height and weight of their associates, it doesn't make a lot of narrative sense. Personally I'd pick one or the other, but not both. Whichever one fits the voice of the character.

There's a bit here and there that repeats itself, like "cooking our daily meals in a kitchen". By default meals are cooked in kitchens, and meals are eaten daily. So daily and kitchen can be inferred by the reader and trimmed to:

"rather than cooking our meals."

Click to expand...

I don't completely agree here. I like the voice of the narrator and the all the descriptions. Personally I would notice a person's height and weight. I would remove only the word "giant" and stick with everything else.

Overall, I agree that I like brief descriptions that are effective because they invoke action or character opinion, or are memorable in some other way. But I think an important exception to this relates to writing non-white characters. Although I know non-white authors have cringed at phrases like "chocolate-colored skin" (rightly so), it also seems that readers default to assuming a character is white unless given some explicit details to the contrary.

Now, I'm sure there are ways to write non-white characters without stating skin color in some contexts, in some stories--perhaps one of the easiest ways being by using different names. But I still think it might be helpful to clarify, especially in cases where the non-white characters are not included for a specific reason that would make their background obvious (e.g., a Japanese ninja in a YA historical fantasy).

I typically use vivid description of characters for only two reasons:

1. To characterize the person who is doing the describing. I enjoy having a character describe how hot someone is, and then another character coming along later saying 'Girl, he's ugly'. The descriptions primarily serve to show how the pov character thinks.

2. If the description is vital to the story.

As a personal preference, of course, I prefer a lot of description, but I don't want it infodumped. A paragraph describing a character is not for me; sprinkled things like "pale skin", "long fingers", "dark eyes", "braids" throughout the story paints a better and more seamless picture for me.

For what it's worth, I would never include weight in a description, unless that description involved the character lying on top of the POV one - I can look at a guy and have no idea if he weighs 160 or 250, so weight as a descriptor means nothing to me and it feels unrealistic that it would to the characters.

Wouldn't this be effected by genre? Real world settings can survive a lot less description then fantasy/sciifi worlds. Even if you taking a totally human setting, in a made up world everything has to be defined. I notice in contemporary writing, thrillers and such, I like brevity, but in fantasy/sci-fi world building is half the fun for me so enjoy good description that serves both showing character and setting.

I have tried to go with the idea of no more three descriptive details, most often less, but they need to be what the POV would notice and they need to be distinct, not generic.

Skaer said:

I've realized recently that many of my favorite authors never really stop to describe the characters, or only spend a few words on them, and yet I think I know exactly what they look like

Click to expand...

I've found this before too. One of my favourite authors has described a character fairly well... or at least I thought, since half way through the second series he is described as reappearing with a freshly trimmed beard..... when the heck did he get a beard! Was my first reaction. The way it's written implies he has always had it, but since it was never mentioned before I'm not completely sure.

ShaunHorton said:

This is something I have an issue with in my writing. My first trip through, there is almost no description at all unless it has significance to the story. It's not until my second or third draft that I drop in bits here and there describing eye color, hair color, and general build.

Click to expand...

Yeah I did that too. I had these two main characters who went on this great adventure and no one knew anything about their physical appearance what so ever.

The rest of your post there Shaun, I do somewhat agree with, though if I get more details I try to include them in my mental image of a character, not that I'm always successful. But I still think it's important to try. And there will no doubt be someone out there who actually does pay attention to what we write.

BethS said:

I'm in favor of vivid descriptions of everything, not just characters. The best ones are generally short and center on some detail or set of details that can be memorably captured in a sketch. Metaphors and similes can work well for that.

Click to expand...

I kind of work that way too. I think setting is as important as the people who are there. And you can help set the emotion of a scene when you're describing a place.