How Much is NOT Enough Detail

[ottabelle]

I don't think I have ever described what my characters look like to the reader, except in general forms.

"She's mousy." is actually a vague piece of the only one coming to mind.

How detailed is too detailed when it comes to describing how the characters look, or is it fine to leave it alone and let the reader imagine how they look?

What do you do, yourself? What is your favorite way to see it done in a book?

[loupy]

I think its good to give a general description of your character. It's interesting to read a book, and get a character in your head and then see who they use and how they dress actors to portray that character. Is that because the character was written that way? It probably just depends on the book. but anywho back to your question I like to have a good bit of detail, but then again I'm a big fan of Stephen King and he could spend 500 pages describing the color of a car probably.

[ottabelle]

Hahaha! I haven't read him, so I'll take your word on that!

And I'll add in some better description of how they look, I think. Thank you!

[limebirdwriters]

Yeah, I like to know what the character looks like. Again, this is completely personal preference, but I like enough detail so you can picture them, but not TOO much, so you don't have freedom to add your own details.

Does this make any sense?!

[4amWriter]

Me too. I like detail, but not detail that sounds like a wanted poster: brown hair that's going grey, blue eyes, tall and thin. I like description tied in with action, such as "She pulled back her long hair and braided it over her bum shoulder." Or something like that.

[dennismlane]

I agree with all of the above! <B>some</b> description is OK so that we know that they are young/old, big/small etc. but I wouldn't over-do it. The same with clothes; unless the clothes are central to the character (Robert Vaughn's character in 'The Magnificent Seven' could wear nothing else in my mind, what about Sex In The City and shoes?).

[ottabelle]

I think I see what you mean

[mlfbarclay]

How much is not enough detail?
It's probably when you give it to a friend to read and they can't make sense of it. (Or worse when you go back and read it some time later and you can't follow it).
Been there, done that (Both of them).
Personally I like to keep description brief. I suspect a lot of readers skip over our beloved prose poems because they just want to get on with the action.
Having said that, some authors really know how to make description work for them. Charles Dickens is an obvious example. He uses his descriptions to draw cartoons that show you, not only what a character looks like, but also what they're like.
Similarly, Ian Fleming, and George V Higgins tend to tell you a lot about their characters by what they wear or what they own.
Like so many aspects of writing, it's really all so personal, isn't it.

[ottabelle]

Thank you for your input Mlf I think I need to go back through and show something though. I don't think there are ever ANY references to what a character looks like. None that I can remember. specifically. However, this isn't as important to me as plot in my reading so I likely wouldn't remember much of that either.

They do need some sort of image though, I think.

I'm contemplating drawing them, and going from there.

[munsi]

Jan 25, 2012 3:43:42 GMT ottabelle said:

Hahaha! I haven't read him, so I'll take your word on that!

And I'll add in some better description of how they look, I think. Thank you!

...wait, you've never read Steven King? For reals? That's it, starting December first, you're reading The Stand, at the very least to understand the jokes I put on Twitter every time I have a cold. Also: It's awesome. I insist on this.

The loose rule I try to use for character description is "Two or three interesting details when a character's introduced, more details as they're subsequently mentioned." This way the character's not infodumped in a way that puts people off, but you still learn more about them the more you read them. Important characters get more detail, less important ones stick to the initial two or three details, and you can get on with the actual stories. I'm not a giant fan of initial description in general, because it's not how people talk in the world.

"He's the tall one with the dark hair, and he wears that weird trenchcoat" is enough that you'd recognize me at a convention, and thus it's the most description people would give me. More details as they're relevant to the story. But that's just my take...

[ottabelle]

Nov 20, 2012 10:28:00 GMT munsi said:

Jan 25, 2012 3:43:42 GMT ottabelle said:

Hahaha! I haven't read him, so I'll take your word on that!

And I'll add in some better description of how they look, I think. Thank you!

...wait, you've never read Steven King? For reals? That's it, starting December first, you're reading The Stand, at the very least to understand the jokes I put on Twitter every time I have a cold. Also: It's awesome. I insist on this.

The loose rule I try to use for character description is "Two or three interesting details when a character's introduced, more details as they're subsequently mentioned." This way the character's not infodumped in a way that puts people off, but you still learn more about them the more you read them. Important characters get more detail, less important ones stick to the initial two or three details, and you can get on with the actual stories. I'm not a giant fan of initial description in general, because it's not how people talk in the world.

"He's the tall one with the dark hair, and he wears that weird trenchcoat" is enough that you'd recognize me at a convention, and thus it's the most description people would give me. More details as they're relevant to the story. But that's just my take...

Haha! Yes sir. Mail me your copy.

I like your tip, probably something I can run with.

[munsi]

Nov 29, 2012 4:57:37 GMT ottabelle said:

Haha! Yes sir. Mail me your copy.

Okay, It's on. Turn up at the same convention I'm at and IOU one copy of The Stand ;D