- This topic has 21 replies, 6 voices, and was last updated 8 years, 8 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
This forum is like a graveyard. Most of us must still be recuperating from our ‘Zombies and Vampires’ marathon.
Anyway… this is no such moral and deep discussion to call out the masses again, but I was wondering… what do all you other crazy word-wielders out there think of description? According to Robert L. Stevenson, ‘there is nothing so noble in a tale as baldness’. With due respect, Mr. Stevenson, I disagree. Strongly. Without going into my reasons for aforementioned opinion here (and subsequently exhausting all my arguments before they are even disputed— haha) I want to know what you think. Should there be a lot of description in a story? Or should you keep description to a minimum? It undoubtedly slows the story, but in my opinion the sacrifice is well, well worth it.
And in the unlikely event that we all agree on this—that description is essential to any story— I ask the question, How should we go about it? Say we are introducing a new character. We walk into the room, and we either freeze the scene for a moment and take a few sentences to describe our new character, or we go on with the scene and load the next few sentences with adjectives and adverbs to tell our reader what the character looks like as he is moving around, or speaking, or whatever. Get me? So what do you think?Generally, I’d say only when it’s important to the story or you’re establishing a setting. You’ll be seeing the story through the characters’ eyes, so as far as nature and surroundings descriptions, only observe when your character is observing.
However, descriptions of emotions and the characters themselves is another topic altogether…. I’ll have to let my thoughts on that percolate for a bit before posting anything. 😉I like to have basic descriptions of the setting, but I don’t like reading paragraph long descriptions. I try to weave in the surroundings with action of some kind and keep the descriptions fairly brief unless the object or place is important.
INTJ - Inhumane. No-feelings. Terrible. Judgment and doom on everyone.
Yeah, I don’t like reading paragraphs of nothing but description either. Or rather I like it myself, but not many people do, and I am not writing my books so only I can read them. If only!
But sometimes I have such a strong image in my mind that it calls for a whole paragraph, and though I try to avoid those scenarios, one way to spice them up if you absolutely have to have them is to have a running commentary by the character through whose eyes we are seeing whatever it is that is being described. The emotions, the thoughts, the associations that are running through the character’s mind. That way it is incorporated into the story— it’s not you as the author telling the reader what they are supposed to be seeing, it’s the reader experiencing things through the character’s eyes.When the reader can taste the bread, and the bread tastes bad, you have gone too far. Ok, maybe it is a bit more complicated than that. For myself, I enjoy vivid descriptions, but let’s face it, you can go overboard. What is overboard? Ah, that depends. I think it can actually be good to spend a paragraph or even two in description, as long as the descriptions are not just to help the reader understand the scenery or the feel. Use descriptions that develop character or plot. Using too much detail in an intense scene can be detrimental. Only use descriptions in such cases as develop the one emotion your are focusing on. And if your reader can taste the bread, and the bread tastes good, you have done well.
🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢
‘And if your reader can taste the bread, and the bread tastes good, you have done well.‘
Ahhh… poetry.
I LOVE poetic descriptions. Beautiful word-weaving that, in describing the physical or external, gives you a feeling, a style, a character, a rich inner world. They are tasteful in what they say, and I willingly gobble it up because I feel like it actually matters.
On the other hand, I quite hate info dump style descriptions, because honestly, I couldn’t care less about that stuff. (Letting the reader know what’s going on is different. Catch my drift? Know what I mean?) It takes up space without providing point to the plot, characters, or atmosphere. I’d just end up skimming it and creating my own mental picture. If you aren’t going to write descriptions with a quirky voice, a poetic take, something that MAKES ME CARE, I probably won’t.
But yes. If descriptions are done well, tastefully, spread out, like little gorgeous, rich tid-bits here and there, I love them very much. If not, it becomes an info dump that isn’t only unpleasant, but unneeded.
Oh yes. The poetic description. LOVE IT.
One thing I have found that helps with poeticness (not a word… hm… poesy?) is characterization. No— not having to do with actual characters! >D But take the thing you are describing and give it a personality. ‘The leaves blew and swirled across the courtyard, filling the cool air with a soft, dry rustle’, is not bad, but contrast it to this: ‘The leaves danced and cartwheeled over the paving stones, directed in their patternless ritual by the wind, and the air was full of their soft, dry, rustling laughter’.
A range of mountains can always be likened to something less common— the spikes on a sleeping dragon’s back, or a giant’s gaping, jagged teeth. Step back and look at old things new ways. You never know what you’ll discover.Interesting point to consider, brought about by someone’s mentioning something about having their own very clear image of what something is like:
In my experience, description is actually pretty killer to setting. A sad but true thing, at least, from what I’ve gathered listening to people, and in my own reading experience.
For the writer (even possibly when reading other people’s work), this is different. The writer has a far more clear understanding of what actually is, and is generally better able to read into words, and (as a general rule I have found), reads the story not just for the story, but because of the writing.
The non-author on the other hand (again, blanket statement) is in it to be entertained. To be engaged. To see what’s happening, and where, and why. They need to have a clear understanding of /where/ so that certain things make sense, but they’re not overly interested in anything specific.
It’s like this: Say two people are having a conversation, at the opening of the book. It might go something like this:
‘Jacob pushed away the dangling vine. “Y’know, for a six month expedition, they might have sent us out with better equipment.”
Darrel shrugged, prodding the ashes of the fire pit with a stick. “I suppose. Heh. I’d just be happy with a nice shower.”
“A shower? Not for me, this humidity is enough water for a lifetime.” He leaned against the towering trunk, staring up into the jungle canopy.’
My question is, how detailed of a surrounding have you worked out in your minds? I would hazard (and of course, people are people, we all think differently), that you have a pretty solid idea of a slip-shod camp in a jungle, with two dirty explorers or something.
I /could/ have added a whole paragraph in there about how dense the foliage is, how the sweat dripped down their necks, how noises rustled in the bushes…and I wouldn’t say that’s bad. I can certainly help put the reader there. And it doesn’t necessarily have to not be engaging either. The reader just might gladly read that.
The problem is, it’s not necessary, and it can leave someone feeling unsatisfied. Why? Well think about it. From reading that, you had the necessary info. You had something solid worked out in your mind. That’s what you needed.
What I’m saying is, even excellent description often tears the readers mind away from preformed conceptions. That’s very bad.
It’s like in movie adaptations of books. When you see what the producer made certain things look like, you go, “NO! IT LOOKS SO MUCH BETTER IN MY MIND!!!”
That’s what overt description does. It tries to wrestle the imagination from the reader, and present them with what the author wants them to be imagining.
Hm. Good points. I can definitely see where you are coming from. I agree, just because I (it was me who said that haha) as the writer have an incredibly detailed image does not mean that the reader will necessarily be interested. You’re right. We need to keep that in mind.
That being said…
The image I’m getting from reading your little mini-scene is of a vast, glaringly white auditorium with a tree, a cold campfire, and two campers who like to complain for no apparent reason standing in the middle of it somewhere. I am naturally hesitant to enter into such a strange and empty world. I feel like I’m being held off at arm’s length, unable to slip into the scene and become a part of it. Now, I can very easily imagine the surroundings, but it is a nuisance to have to leave off in the middle of reading and fill in something you were expecting to be there already. Permit me to take your perfectly beautiful example and ruin it.‘Jacob pushed away the dangling vine, blinking a trickling line of sweat out of his eyes. Great. Not even an hour into the day, and already he felt as though he had been stuck in a colander and steamed— like broccoli or something. “Y’know, for a six month expedition, they might have sent us out with better equipment,” he said, turning from the dense, vibrant green thickets beyond the circle of their little camp and glancing over his shoulder at his companion.
Darrel shrugged, prodding the ashes of the fire pit with a stick and shaking his shaggy dark hair out of his face with a quick toss of his head. “I suppose. Heh. I’d just be happy with a nice shower.”
Jacob laughed, turning fully around and tipping his head back against the towering trunk of the tree behind him. It was so beautiful up there in the jungle canopy, where the wind and the sun actually reached. He had seen precious little of either for… well, for a long time. “A shower?” he repeated, half absently. Reaching up with one hand to rub the back of his grimy neck, he grimaced ruefully and stooped forward to take up his pack. “Not for me, this humidity is enough water for a lifetime.”’Do you see what I mean? If you don’t, don’t hesitate to smash me. I can take it. Believe me. I’ve had a lot of practice. 😛
That’s strange. I received the impression of two explorers in a tropical jungle, nothing even close to a white auditorium with some pessimistic campers. That being said, is the description Ezra gave enough? It might be, but probably not. The reason I can’t give a definite answer is because I have no context. The reader (apparently with some exceptions) will naturally imagine a dense oppressive jungle scenario, but isn’t there more to the scenery than that? What about the dangerous animals or peoples? Exactly how under-equiped are the explorers? Is the jungle beautiful? Does it contain any exotic plants, animals, or natural features that might be interesting to the reader? Is there a feeling of dark oppression in the jungle, or unbounded freedom? Is it more or less dangerous? What are the sounds, the smells, the imageries? Readers like poetic expression. Even descriptions that are not very important to the story can be worth including if there is something so inherently artistic in them that they are attractive in and of themselves.
🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢
I’ll answer Daeus first, because I scoff at order. Justa little rebel.
All those are most important things. I would be the last to think that they shouldn’t be brought about. The reader most assuredly needs to know them. But when?
I dunno if you guys, like me, tend to skim posts (from time to time *cough*), but if you did (I really do try to make them entertaining to read)…I forgot where I was going with this. Anyway, the example I gave was supposedly like, chapter one of a book. First few sentences. Badaboomba!
When I pick up a book, I don’t want to hear about a forest. (I am an author, I like my indoors, the sun is a mythical glowing orb that does not exist, and air conditioning is beautiful.) I’m interested in the story. I want /reason/ to hear about the lovely (or not so much) jungle that these dudes are in. Why should I care?
But even if it weren’t the beginning, the same basic principle remains: What does the reader /want/ to know, at any given point. Daeus, you had an image of where they were. It was probably satisfying enough for you not to be confused about setting, and to focus on Darrel and the other whatsisname. That’s what you needed to do at the time.
Let’s say, once the conversation is done, they lapse into silence. Suddenly, a wield shriek shatters the stillness. Both lunge for weapons, and stare furtively around, looking for any sign of the vicious Bomasta Beast that had just sounded it’s territorial cry of something.
Now what? Description comes it, but as it’s needed. At the beginning, we needed to know what it was about this story that was good. Presumably, the conversation answered that, and made some questions of it’s own that made the reader want to keep reading. While the reader looks for answers to these questions, they suddenly get action. Adventure! Subliminal description of the fact that these people are probably on an alien planet, and that there are ferocious beasts in the jungle around them.
What I’m saying is, keep the reader on a need to know basis. Sometimes, it is actually necessary to have a big long paragraph explaining a bunch of stuff. Like when outlining a battle plan (bad example, those are hard to not make cliche…y’know what I mean.) Sometimes the character is tiptoeing on rocks across quicksand. In which case, many details about his surroundings and how they distract him would be good. That’s it for me. At least for that thingy. And now…Kate. Good ol’ Kate. Hi Kate.
The image I’m getting from reading your little mini-scene is of a vast, glaringly white auditorium with a tree, a cold campfire, and two campers who like to complain for no apparent reason standing in the middle of it somewhere. I am naturally hesitant to enter into such a strange and empty world. I feel like I’m being held off at arm’s length, unable to slip into the scene and become a part of it.
Wow. I feel for your experiences with books. 😛 But hey, that means you’d actually like my novel, because genius that I am, I’m a hypocrite. I spend a lot of time describing everything in there. 😛
That is a better example than mine, I shall grant you that. Sadly, most of that just comes from more inner voice, not the actual description.
Perhaps it is a person to person thing (the most beautiful thing about writing I suppose), but I did read through that three times, and not once did I get through without skipping over all the description, and forcing myself to go back and read it. *Shrug* I personally can’t stay engaged unless stuff happens.
I do have a notoriously short attention span…
Oh, your arguing for spread out description. Yes, I would agree. A little bit here and there is more likely to add to the mood than take away from it. Still I think there are times when great detail is necessary and these times aren’t always when you need to build an intense scenario sometimes a detailed description of some random village your character happens to be passing through can actually be nice. I despair of setting down absolute rules for the length of description. So much depends. At least we can come to general truths though. I will set down at least one rule. “Do what seems right, and then when 90% of your proofreaders don’t like it, do what seems better. Repeat.”
🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢
That is a good and right rule, and like, the only rule I really follow in writing. (Aside from basic stuff that’s just the norm for reader engagement.)
I really couldn’t tell that you made any effort whatsoever to make your posts entertaining, Ezra… so I don’t know why the grin starts into my eyes the moment I see your profile picture on a new thread. It must just be some weird psychological gimmick.
Hmmm… hypocrisy. I’m probably guilty of the same thing in some respects! It’s so much easier to say what ought to be done than to actually follow your own advice, isn’t it? 😛 We’ll just be hypocrites together.
But I see what you mean about description. I think in this case it is simply a matter of taste. This is me talking— Katherine O. Flournoy. The girl who devoured a whole long chapter entitled ‘A Description of the Island of Numenor’ in one sitting, then closed the book and leaned her head back against her chair, shutting her eyes in a torment of ecstasy and wishing she had time to go over it again. So yeah. It’s probably just a matter of taste. The thing is, not every reader will like the same thing. And as sad as it is, you will never be able to please everyone. So stick with what you do best. Don’t think about what other people will think. Don’t try to please everybody. And your book will find its own market amongst the readers who like your style best. Because you will never truly be able to please everyone.Yikes… that’s a scary thought.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
