The problem is that no characters are face-to-face. In chapter one they cannot see each other. They cannot even see their own bodies. I planned to save the physical descriptions for chapter two, when the characters actually see each other and I can write the descriptions from a point of view.

The details of the descriptions will be important for the reader to get to know the story's setting. My theory has been that the reader will have already formed images of the characters, and when my descriptions do not fit that image it will be almost a plot twist unto itself.

Could this be a bad idea? Most stories describe the characters in the very early pages. Will waiting until chapter 2 annoy my readers so much as to hurt my story?

[This message has been edited by Doc Brown (edited June 21, 2001).]
 

I've read that character description can often be disjointed or stilted because it doesn't flow from POV. We get this incredible narrative description about every facet of a character's appearance that doesn't naturally spring from what's happening, or from the POV line of sight. (I hope that makes sense!) So in my writing, I've given just enough to help give the reader an impression of the character, and then as more is revealed, these additional tidbits fit right in. The one section (in my most recent chapter) where I didn't give any description at all (well, 1 little line), my critique grouped pointed out that they felt more description was necessary to better flesh out the character and not make them seem like non-entities.

So. I guess my answer would be that you should have some, but if the Revelation is important in chapter 2, then have the description be less visual and more action based... knotting long hair at the back of the neck, scraping long slender fingers against jutting stone, hunkering to fit through a much shorter door, etc.

Hope that helps.

Just some ideas of things that can go on in a story to answer description without saying John was 6’2 with a pot belly and skinny arms.

Shawn

 

If you've read much by Orson Scott Card, you may notice that he doesn't do a lot of description of any kind. He lets the readers create their own versions and he never does anything to contradict them.

If your characters are in the dark in your first chapter, and the readers are clear on this, then they won't expect any description until the characters can see each other.

If there is some other reason why they can't even see their own bodies, and you are clear about it with the readers, that should be okay, too.

The problem with doing description of a character after readers have created their own versions, in order to throw in some kind of "twist," is that you run the risk of making the reader feel cheated or manipulated--you would be playing mind games with your readers that the reader may not appreciate.

Writers have to get readers to trust them. Writers create another world in their stories and invite readers to come in and explore. If writers then booby-trap that world, so that the readers feel that they've been made fools of, even in a small way, they will not trust the writers who do this.

So be very careful to play fair with your readers. Let them suspect things, and feel clever when their suspicions come true. Even if their suspicions don't come out the way they suspect, they'll still enjoy the plot twists when they find out the truth, and the plot twists won't be any less twisty for being suspected.

Don't hit them with a hard ball from left field.

[This message has been edited by Kathleen Dalton Woodbury (edited June 15, 2001).]
 

I don't want to get into too much detail about my chapter one in this thread. Please just assume the characters are astronauts or deep sea divers, wearing garments that cover them from head to toe. There is absolutely no opportunity for them to see each others' skin, eyes, hair, or anything else. They cannot even see their own bodies.

The story is not first person, so it would be awkward for a character to suddenly start thinking about his/her appearance when not looking at himself/herself. If I gave any physical description, I would need to describe things that the characters cannot see. If this were a movie the veiwer could not see them, either.

My hope is that the reader will latch onto the action, and just picture the head-to-toe outer garments in chapter one. Does this work? Hmmmm . . . perhaps I should give a very detailed descriprion of the garments to keep the reader from building too much of a mental image of their faces too early. That is worth some thought.

Kathleen, I have noticed that Orson Scott Card gives only sparse physical descriptions. In addition to making life easy on potential motion picture casting directors, that also leaves the reader freedom to create an image of the characters. But in my case, the physical appearance of the characters will become an important part of the setting. I do not want to make this a plot twist per se, I simply want to start my story at a point where the characters cannot see each other. They can and do talk to each other.

[This message has been edited by Doc Brown (edited June 18, 2001).]
 

One thing you might be able to do is to describe some unique features of the space suits that might suggest things about the aliens wearing them. For example, maybe the suits are heated and insulated from the cold (luckily the laser blast was stopped by the fourth thermal layer) thus suggesting they're warm blooded, or ventilated to allow oxygen to leave the suit (Zorud heard the rythmic hiss of the ventilation exhaust releasing the oxygen into space. The pump worked faster as his pulse and breathing quickened) thus suggesting they breathe something other than oxygen.

Maybe details like that will help keep the eventual description of the aliens from being a plot twist or a shock to the reader's already-formed ideas of what they look like.
 

I have just reached the point in the story when some of the characters first come face to face, about 6,000 words into the story. It will be even farther if I add more details to my description of the flight suit. I am trying to decide whether to tag the scene to the end of chapter one or use it to start chapter two. I am leaning toward chapter one. Chapter one is getting much longer than I had planned.

Is a 7,500 word chapter too long?
 

7500 words is the upper limit for a short story in the Hugo and Nebula award categories. It's not too long for s short story, so it shouldn't be too long for a chapter. (Longer than that and I'd recommend calling it a section, but that's entirely up to you.)
 

Actually, my writing does not call them chapters so far. I simply need subdivisions for parts of the story that take place in different times and places.

Right now I am experimenting with some "future flashbacks" embedded in the chapter (section). The concept seems confusing, but if I handle them well they will allow me to insert lots of background material that otherwise would fit awkwardly.
 

No. Put descriptions in when they're natural. When characters meet, they look each other over and they notice things like hair/eye color.

Don't do the entire "looking in the mirror" bit that writers do to make themselves feel better about *not* having a physical description. Even when you're in the mirror, you really don't think "gee, I've got long, soft medium brown hair". You've had the hair for a while. You just don't notice it.

And most readers look right through the entire mirror bit and see it for the gimmick it is.

As for chapter length, 7,500 isn't too long. I've seen longer. Don't get caught up on chapter length. Especially if you're in the rough draft sort of stage that it sounds like you're in. Worry about chapter length after the rough draft is finished. I find it makes life easier all around.

Good luck on the story!

Write On!
Meg

*****
"State your business in one word or less."
-Hawkeye Pierce
"M*A*S*H"

[This message has been edited by Megara (edited June 23, 2001).]
 

quote:

---

Don't do the entire "looking in the mirror" bit that writers do to make themselves feel better about *not* having a physical description. Even when you're in the mirror, you really don't think "gee, I've got long, soft medium brown hair". You've had the hair for a while. You just don't notice it.

---

While in general I would agree, it can be a useful device 1) when there is something specific that the character notices and 2) it must also be appropriate (i.e. consistent with both the character and the story -- for example if the character is unworried about their appearence then it might not be appropriate).

Here's a short example from a story of mine:

quote:

---

Straightening, he looked in the mirror, and stared back at himself. Brown hair combed to one side – too long, after months of sleep. Deep lines around his eyes – age showing in the tired look behind them. A white scar trailed down his forehead, crossing one eyebrow – no new hair where it puckered his brow.

---

(you can see the whole thing here if you're interested)

[This message has been edited by IonFish (edited July 02, 2001).]
 

I have never liked the technique, but it works particularly well in this story.

In fact, if a writer were looking for an excuse to do a "He looked at himself in the mirror and saw . . ." story he might end up writing "Code to Zero."

It is an interesting premise, but so far "Code to Zero" is not a very thrilling thriller.
 

One thing I think you need to avoid at all costs is to hold a party introducing all your characters at the beginning (no I am not referring to the Fellowship of the Ring). What I mean is I once read something by one of my friends that almost literally read like a wresting announcer yelling "and in this corner Sir Michael at 6'3 154.4 pounds with long hair and wearing plate mail".

But then again maybe someone could make it work in a way I have never thought of.

Don't worry so much about POV. There are many writers out there who describe the character first, then go into his/her head. (eg, Steven Erikson). It's worse not to discribe the characters.

IMO, anyway.
~|O
 

In a recent story, the viewpoint character is undescribed physcially, but we know he's Jewish, a Ph.D. physicist, a talented amatuer musician, and an experienced space-walker.

The other characters I gave simple (physical) tags to:
-Short, with red hair, only female
-Tall, Irish
-80+ years, crew cut gray hair
-Middle-aged, asian

My eyes glaze over and I skip to the next paragraph when an author tells me about their cheekbones and noses and crap. I just pick out one detail and hang that characters name on that detail. Sometimes, I don't even bother with even one detail.

Thus, that is how I write.
 

When I said it's good to describe the characters, I didn't mean every little insignificant detail!

Just wanted to let you know.
 

One tip that I picked up from a 'how to' book was not to treat readers to the mirror treatment (you know all those little pesky details). Just include the details that you would notice about yourself (do you really notice your amber colored hair, or do you notice the streaks of grey lightening your hair?) or what others would notice (would they really notice that you were 6'3", or would they instead notice how they always feel intimidated standing next to you because of your hulking formidable shape).

Anyway, enough rambling. Hope that helped.

One thing to keep in mind when exercising your preference of whether or not and how to describe a character is what the POV character would notice about that person. If the character being described IS the POV character, they usually won't notice much unless there's some specific reason to -- for instance, a change in a appearance, or a personal prediliction with appearance.

If you have a POV character describe her/himself when s/he normally wouldn't pay any attention to her/his looks, you're giving the reader false information, in a way. You're implying that the POV character spends brain time on something that doesn't really come up for them. This is not to say that if your character ignores how s/he looks, you can't get the description in somewhere. If it can be worked smoothly into the story without diverting or stalling it, you can have the description come up in any of a number of ways: For some reason the character is fact-checking identification that describes them, or someone points out a person that looks kind of like your POV character, or they have to describe themselves to someone while on a phone call prior to meeting in a public place, etc. But better to have the momentary lapse of an out-of-character description than to have to take your story off track to provide that kind of opportunity, so what kind of compromise or solution you come up with for that is one of those discretionary things.

About other characters, I'd suggest the same thing applies: That is, you can easily describe things the POV character would probably notice -- and in fact probably should -- but would want to steer away from describing things the POV character wouldn't notice. If the POV character is a "typical" straight male who is not involved in clothing trade or the fashion industry, it would be unusual for him to notice details of another character's clothing without some specific reason. And there are other parts of a woman that he might notice before her cheekbones, if he's in that mindset. (Of course the reverse appplies to, and gay characters with the same sex, and talking goats . . . well, let's not go there.) Not that you have to be coarse, even if your character is.

One interesting frame of reference here is what you remember about how people look -- or what, by talking with friends, you can discover other people remember or notice.

By the way, OSC describes his experience with the novel Saints: He prefers by and large not to describe his main character, to make it easier for the reader to construct that character in a way they like. He asked two women who read Saints before it came out (his editor and his agent? I don't recall for certain) what they though the main character looked like -- and both basically described themselves. Success! Not describing the character in that case seemed to help the readers identify better with the character. Of course that was immediately screwed up because of course they wanted to put a picture of Diana on the cover, but c'est la vie.

Sorry to go on at such length, but another point to make: Physical descriptions of characters can either distract me as a writer or help me focus on who they are. Typically I go out of my way not to make female main characters in my story unusually attractive, because having the same mental limitations as many other straight males, I find attractive women (even fictional ones) distracting.

Another point about appearance: Fiction and media are filled with cookie-cutter "beautiful people." Personally, I always find a character most compelling when they aren't regarded as unusually beautiful by most people (even if they are seen so by a significant other) and have an interesting face. Just my preference.

Luc
 

Regarding getting description into your story in different ways, I think we can overlook the subtleties that can come out of action in our story. For example:

Abigail hiked up her slip and dropped to her hands and knees, squinting, searching for the contact that popped out of her eye. Damn, I don't have time for this. With her nose close to the bathroom tile, she scanned hurriedly for her contact. She repeatedly looped her hair around her ear to keep it out of her face, and it repeatedly fell, too short to stay in place. Arrrgh! Dan's gonna kill me if I'm late for the party. Finally, she found the lens, stood up, ran it (firmly pinched between fingers) under the tap, and popped it into her eye. Great, now where the hell is my eyeliner?!

So, what did you see? Unless I miss the point of this conversation entirely, that was characterization, without someone describing someone else, or looking into a mirror (though later she can notice how the makeup accentuates her facial features and eyes if you want). It happens in the action, as she tries to loop her too short hair behind her ear, as she hikes up her slip (apparently getting ready for a dressy party), she swears (but not too bad), and she's worried about what Dan (her boyfriend?) will say if she's late. I think that tells us a lot about her.

It would say more if I had her put on her "dopy" glasses to find the contact, or not be able to pick it up easily with the long fake nails she had put on this morning at the salon Damn nails, can't do a bloody thing with them, which also tells us she's not used to them.

There are lots of ways to get description and characterization into the story without having someone seeing and describing the object.

Oh, and if it never matters ever at all that her hair is brown or blond, then you don't need to mention it. I didn't above, and you undoubtedly created your own image. But did you really assign a hair color? Some of you yes, some no, I'm sure. But if it matters, then Boy, I hope Dan likes the copper hightlights I got put this morning. I'm pretty sure I digressed here, but my point is that the reader should feel free to form their own image, guided by the important highlights or signposts you give them. You shouldn't worry about the tip of her nose being slightly bent unless it's going to come up as important later. And even if it comes up later (in a minor way), you don't have to give it all to the reader in one chunk. How boring. Let the pieces develop, and as the little pieces that add layers to the character unfold, so will the reader's image. I don't think it's going to throw the reader into a tisy if they didn't know it before you decide to introduce it. (duh, how can they?).

Okay, my 6 cents worth. Back to work I go.

JP
 

But not always.

What you're describing is deep penetration. It's nice sometimes; sometimes, though, it isn't. When it is and when it is not, you decide of course.

There is the simple method also: no character penetration at all; just a cinematic picture for the reader. House description; the house's door opens; the character (you write his name) gets out of the house; the character is described; the characters goes to his job/task/errant, while you write what he sees, hears, smell, and thinks (and now you have deep penetration).

There are many ways to write about something; no point in stiking to one way.

The above could be writen differently: Character gets out of house; notices people looking at him (Why? *Looks at himself* Gods, I'm wearing boots of different color!); goes to his work, secretary makes (negative) comment about his hear; character starts working...

The writer decides which way fits more to his/her story.

Bardos

P.S.: Sorry for the lenght
 

I don't see this as much a "hard" way as a vibrant way, interjecting the action with description. In fact, I consider it in some ways a "cenematic" approach as Bardos puts it, simply seeing the action and while fleshing it out having some of the characterization and description flow to the reader.

And I don't think any of us are saying to stick to one way, or there's a right or wrong way. In fact, quite the opposite, that there are different ways, creative ways that need to be explored and used to fit the story. Bardos's example of the "simple" cenematic approach is certainly valid, and appropriate for all sorts of instances.

And, Bardos, if you have to apologize for the length of that message, I should be self-flagellating with a cat-o-nine-tails right about now.

JP
 

Let's take a sample character (for simplicity, let's use myself) described in a poorly-written scene:

----
Chad's blond hair needed to be washed and trimmed, and fell in front of his thick glasses. He was short, and had a bit of a gut from too many chocolate bars.

His muscular legs were tensed, as were his arms. His arms were bruised and hands bloody from yesterday's martial-arts practice.

He stood in a deep fighting stance, hoping to intimidate the knife-weilding manic into backing off. Christ, he thought, I can't take this guy!

----

The first paragraph slows the story down; the important part starts when we comment about the character's arms, and why they're bruised. The other stuff just gets in the way of the upcoming action scene.

Put the stuff about the fact that he's short and with thick glasses in chapter five, when the heroine tells the character she would never, ever sleep with him. It doesn't matter here.

In my opinion, of course.
 

Luc
 

Upon re-read/edit or with a good editor, you'll catch when it's a let down or not, I should think. Of course "timing and pacing" is like saying "you'll know it when you see it", but in most instances it's probably that simple. Still begs the question of how to do it and make it work, which is about experimenting (cenematic, action, chunks of description) and realizing that different techniques will work in different instances throughout the same story.

JP
 

The same thing goes for key settings, especially recurring ones. If the descriptions of a Superhero's lair, Starship's bridge, or Mad Scientist's laboratory will be important to the story, you need to start describing it soon after introducing it. You might delay some of it based on point of view, since it is awkward to describe something that your POV character cannot see. That is, after all, the original reason for this thread.

I can think of a potential exception, in the case of ongoing characters and settings that survive a series of stories or books. You can probably get away with adding new details when you first introduce an old character or setting in a new story. For example, it took four books before I knew that my favorite Private Investigator's office had a refrigerator.

[This message has been edited by Doc Brown (edited November 01, 2001).]
 

Good point. That suggests to me that ideally you are finding ways to reveal any physical characteristics you want to give the reader in the midst of the story going forward, toward the beginning -- or else you have decided that it's not important to give physical characteristics.

So, trying to integrate these ideas for myself: If you stop to just describe the character (especially early on) you risk losing your reader's attention. If you describe the character too late in the game, you risk really teeing your reader off because you're violating an image that they built up around your story.

Luc
 

If you give them the foundation, you can fill in additional rooms later on without disrupting the narrative. Thus, the additional detail just fleshes out what you've already provided.