What to Describe

Writing advise abounds on how to appropriately describe a character, object, or setting, so how do I go about it?

1) Describe first what the character would notice first. For example, gender, skin color, hair color, and physical build comes before the faint scar over the eye or the eye color (which the character might never be close enough or have any reason to notice). Also, a foreigner might first notice skin color while a native might never consciously notice it.

A long physical description can slow down the story, however, and a police-report description is usually not needed. So, how do I choose what description to include?

2) Base the description length on how important the person, object, or setting is.

3) Describe what is unique.

For example, if I'm describing a spear, I really don't have to say much. Most readers already know what a spear is and can imagine it based purely on the word "spear." If the spear is important, though, I might describe something unique about it: a scrap of blue cloth tied just below the iron head.

Don't just give information but use the description to tell the reader something about the character. Which sentence gives a more unique and interesting description of this minor character?

The sight of a short, plump woman wearing a dress and a hat distracted Randy from what his friend was saying.

or

The sight of a short woman wearing a tall hat topped with an ostrich plume distracted Randy from what his friend was saying.

I'm guessing you agree the second description is more interesting.

4) Be specific.

Instead of saying "the woman handed him a drink" be specific and say, "The waitress handed him a tall glass of water." Using specific nouns instead of general ones allows the reader create a vivid image in his head and reveals more about the characters.

So my advice is to keep focused on what your description is supposed to accomplish rather than coming up with long police-report descriptions.

A Deeper Problem

The other day, someone in my writer's workshop made the comment that he liked to write his short stories in present tense because they gave the story a sense of urgency the story lacked in past tense.

(For those who do know, this means he wrote the story like "He runs to the car door and yanks it open. 'Get out," he shouts at the driver" instead of the more traditional "He ran to the car door and yanked it open. "Get out," he shouted at the driver.")

Except, his story still lacked tension (which he obviously sensed) and changing to present tense didn't fix that. What he really needed to do was fix the story by adding tension, not try to artificially increase tension by telling the story in present tense.

I've heard a lot of writers say that they write in first person (i.e. "I went to the store") rather than third person (i.e. "She went to the store") because it allows the reader to get inside the character's head in a way that third person doesn't allow. Except, that's not true. Both styles can allow the reader deeply into the character's viewpoint.

For example:

Mandy was going to be late for the party, and Shelly would never forgive her. She looked down the dark, creepy alley knowing that it was the only route that would get her there in time. She hesitantly stepped into the alley. Something rattled further in. She jumped backward and smacked into something tall and firm.

versus

I was going to be late for the party, and Shelly would never forgive me. I looked down the dark, creepy alley knowing that it was the only route that would get me there in time. I hesitantly stepped into the alley. Something rattled further in. I jumped backward and smacked into something tall and firm.


If you just like writing in present tense or first person, that's fine. However, if you write that way in hopes of fixing a problem with your manuscript, let me warn you that the problem probably still exists. Look deeper and fix the problem instead of just trying to hide it.

Motivation

I am reading a book where the author doesn't take full advantage of showing what's going on in the main character's head and so some of his actions seem abrupt and out-of-character. Here's an example of what I'm talking about:

Sarah stomped up to Rebekah, who was smiling and holding another book clutched against her chest. Sarah scowled and threw the current book Rebekah had loaned her to the ground. "This book was horrible. I swear, I'll never read another book by that author. In fact, you couldn't pay me enough to read another one!"

Rebekah said hesitantly, "Oh, I'm sorry. I brought the next book in the series with me, but I guess you don't want it."

Sarah felt a surge of anger. "Of course I want it. The book's right here, so of course I'll read it."

You're left wondering why Sarah suddenly changed her mind and why she's reacting so strongly. Or, if you're like me, you're feeling a little wary of Sarah and wondering if she's insane. ;)

I expect the author knows a perfectly sensible reason why her main character acted the way she did but forgot to let the readers into his head so we also know. Here's an example of how adding motivation can help make an about-face scene like this make sense:

Sarah stomped up to Rebekah, who was smiling and holding another book clutched against her chest. Sarah scowled. She'd rather liked the book Rebekah had just loaned her, but she didn't like how her friend was getting into the habit of forcing books on her and she wasn't going to allow it to happen again.

She threw her book to the ground. "This book was horrible. I swear, I'll never read another book by that author. In fact, you couldn't pay me enough to read another one!"

Rebekah said hesitantly, "Oh, I'm sorry. I brought the next book in the series with me, but I guess you don't want it."

Sarah felt a surge of anger at Rebekah for picking this moment to finally bring a book she did want to read. "Of course I want it. The book's right here, so of course I'll read it."

Sarah's still not a very nice character, but at least we understand why she's acting the way she is. So, authors, be careful not to throw an unexpected emotional reaction at the reader. Make sure to get into the character's head and explain why they felt that way so the emotional reaction makes sense.

Think of the Reader

In The Writer magazine, August 1989 issue, Piers Anthony wrote:

The writer must know his readers...their hearts and dreams.

Debbie's thoughts:
By tapping into those desires and dreams, the writer can capture the reader's interest: his desire to see justice done, his longing to feel he can control of life in some small way even when it seems out of control, etc. The more the characters struggle with problems that everyone struggles with, the more the reader can relate to the problems and will read on to see how the hero deals with them.

Likewise, the most effective horror stories tap into the things we all fear: the unknown, loss of control, etc.

Avoiding "as you know" Explanations

In The Writer magazine, December 1989 issue, Jeffrey Sweet wrote an article on "An Object Lesson for Playwrights." In it, he writes:

You can often dramatize what is going on between your characters through the way they negotiate over an object.

He gives an example of a man stopping a boy as he goes out the door. The man demands to know what the boy has in his hand, finds out it's a key, wants to know where the boy is going, and then demands the boy give him the key or he'll ground him for another week. From the example, it's obvious the man is the boy's strict father, the key is to the family car, and the boy is currently grounded and is resentful about it. All of this was conveyed by how the two characters interacted around the key instead of by the author explaining the situation to the reader.

Keeping the Reader

In The Writer magazine, December 1989 issue, Phyllis A. Whitney wrote an article on "Let's Do It Over." In it, she writes:

If your characters feel nothing strongly, neither will your reader....The more your characters stand to lose or gain, and the more they care, the more powerful the effect on the reader.

She suggests starting the story with the heroine in a conflict that she cares deeply about and that she must take some action in or do something about. And make the conflict something the reader can care about.

Next, check your suspense level. She asks, "Is everything too out-in-the-open, too obvious or predictable?" If so, then the reader is less likely to continue reading. Add some mystery to the story.

Ending the Story

In The Writer magazine, October 1990 issue, Karleen Bradford wrote an article on "Do You Want to Write for Children?" In it, she writes about wrapping up the story.

The main character's problem is solved (and always by the character himself--no intervening hand of fate, no helpful adult stepping in, no discovery that it was all a dream).

[I would add that the main character doesn't always have to be the main person to solve the problem but he does have to add the critical element to the solution. For example, a child doesn't have to personally drive the sword through the evil warlord's heart as long as he somehow plays the critical part in making that action possible.]

She goes on to say that perhaps the main character only learns how to cope with the problem.

In any case...your reader must feel, "Yes, of course, that's the only way it could possibly have ended" and even if it came as a total surprise, your reader must be satisfied [and feel positive about the ending even if it isn't a happy one].