by Anne R. Allen
A blog reader asked me recently to address the question of description in fiction. How much is too much? How much is enough? And why are contemporary novels so devoid of physical character description? Is this a new rule — or is it lazy writing?
The answer to all of these questions is, “it depends.”
Beginning writers are often tempted to write too much description. They have characters in their heads and they want the reader to see them exactly as they do. The same is true of setting and the tastes, sounds, smells, and textures involved. After all, didn’t your high school creative writing teacher tell you to include all five senses in your descriptions?
But we need to learn to trust our readers’ imaginations. They can fill in a lot of detail if you give them some relevant cues. Everybody who has read Pride and Prejudice has a picture of Elizabeth Bennett in their minds, but all Jane Austen told us was that Elizabeth had “fine eyes.”
However, it is important to us, as writers, to get that description on the page even if we don’t use it all, because when we write it, we are telling ourselves what our world and characters are like. Later, some will need to be cut, but it’s still useful to write it down. So don’t let the “rules” stifle your first draft.
If you tend to wax poetic in your description, a lot will have to disappear in your final edit. However, you don’t want to throw anything away permanently. That gorgeous paragraph about the “flash of green” at sunset can go in another book. Or maybe it’s a stand-alone poem.
Different Genres Have Different Description Requirements
Literary fiction gives you more leeway in length of descriptions. Some literary fiction reads like poetry, and a lot of the pleasure we get from reading it is the creative prose. So if you’re writing literary fiction, describe away! Just make sure the prose doesn’t turn purple (see the “solitary oesophagus” below.)
Romance readers also like more description than readers of thrillers or mysteries. Especially when it involves the appearance of the main characters.
Chick Lit is often full of descriptions of shoes and clothing.
Women’s fiction can use more description as well, as long as it adds to the emotional journey of the protagonist.
Historical fiction needs more description than contemporary, because we’re not as familiar with the settings and styles of the period. Most readers know what a “Chanel handbag” looks like. A “reticule with passementerie braid,” not so much.
Fantasy and SciFi require quite a bit of description because it’s all new to the reader. We really need to know that the natives of the planet Zog have green skin and hairy elbows. And that the dragons of the Far North Country have purple scales and furry wings.
Mysteries only need descriptions that are relevant to solving the puzzle at hand. Readers pay attention to descriptions because they expect them to contain clues. If they don’t hold any clues, cut them. (See “Chekhov’s Gun” below.)
Thriller readers want the least description of all. The whole point is to keep that pace pounding. So don’t take the time to describe the glinting sunlight on the lake as the hero battles the 10-foot man-eating catfish and three Albanian assassins on jet skis.
Setting Description
Generally, we need to be most careful of our setting descriptions. This is where writers often like to go into purple “Dark and Stormy Night” territory.
Readers do want to know where they are. They want to know about the pink sky on the planet Zog, and how cold it is in the castle of the queen of the Far North Country. But readers want a few evocative sentences, not multiple paragraphs of descriptive prose that stops the story dead.
Character Appearance
Writers should avoid the “police report” description of characters: hair and eye color, height and weight, what they’re wearing. That’s boring, and often feels like reader feeder. (Especially when the heroine ticks off those boxes as she looks in the mirror.)
But the reader needs at least enough description to get a handle on each character. In a Romance, the reader also wants to know enough to be a able to picture each character as an attractive part of a love story. In a mystery, we need to be able to tell the suspects apart and remember them when they show up aiming a gun at the protagonist five chapters later.
What a writer wants to aim for is a one or two sentence description that will make the character memorable. Include some emotion — tell the reader how a character makes the other characters feel.
Here’s how I introduce Alistair Welbourne, the anti-hero in The Gatsby Game:
He wasn’t handsome, exactly, with features a little too small for his round face and pale hair that was already beginning to thin, but I couldn’t take my eyes off him. It wasn’t just his daringly inappropriate Savile Row suit, but his grown-up self-confidence and the dramatic, offhand way he spoke, like a character in a novel.
I haven’t said anything about the color of his eyes, or his build, height or weight, but I’ve made him vivid enough that the reader can fill in the blanks and recognize him the next time he appears.
Chekhov’s Gun
Be careful you don’t describe things irrelevant to the story. This is the principle known as “Chekhov’s Gun.” Chekhov told his students:
“If in the first act you have hung a pistol on the wall, then in the following one it should be fired. Otherwise, don’t put it there.”
So no matter your genre, be careful of what you choose to describe. If you describe your heroine’s living room, decorated with a bunch of trophies for archery, which she displays prominently alongside her handmade Mongolian horse longbow, describe away. But she’d better darn well shoot an arrow before the story is done.
Avoid the “Solitary Oesophagus”
Beginning writers often use description as a way to show off their writing chops and trot out their biggest vocabulary words. Always a bad idea. I was cured of this by a clever high school English teacher who had us read the following passage by Mark Twain.
It was a crisp and spicy morning in early October. The lilacs and laburnums, lit with the glory-fires of autumn, hung burning and flashing in the upper air, a fairy bridge provided by kind nature for the wingless wild things that have their home in the tree-tops and would visit together; the larch and the pomegranate flung their purple and yellow flames in brilliant broad splashes along the slanting sweep of woodland, the sensuous fragrance of innumerable deciduous flowers rose upon the swooning atmosphere, far in the empty sky a solitary oesophagus slept upon motionless wing; everywhere brooded stillness, serenity, and the peace of God.
– Mark Twain “A Double Barrelled Detective Story”
The over-the-top description gets more and more purple until we come to the “solitary oesophagus” which has stayed in my mind all these years.
The teacher asked us each to define “oesophagus.” which of course we couldn’t. It’s a fancy word for a windpipe. As he wrote later in a letter to the Springfield Republican —
“I published a short story lately & it was in that that I put the oesophagus. I will say privately that I expected it to bother some people–in fact, that was the intention–but the harvest has been larger than I was calculating upon…”
Elmore Leonard, writing nearly a century later, said it more succinctly, “Leave out the parts the reader tends to skip.”
Contemporary Minimalism in Storytelling
The trend to keep description to a minimum has been going since Twain’s day — although a lot of writers kept up the Victorian tradition of lush prose well into the 20th century. But contemporary writing may err on the side of omission. The writer who contacted me felt the lack of description was taking enjoyment out of her reading.
So go for balance and keep your readers in mind. Elmore Leonard wrote taut thrillers and crime fiction, so his rules may not apply to your genre. Read the most popular books in your genre to see what’s working now.
by Anne R. Allen (@annerallen) April 2, 2023
What about you, scriveners? Do you feel contemporary novels need more description? Or less? How much description do you like to put in your own work?
BOOK OF THE WEEK
THE GATSBY GAME
What happens when a writer starts believing he’s living in a Fitzgerald novel?
Based on a real-life corpse found on the set of a Burt Reynolds movie — who happened to be a college boyfriend of the author.
(Click here for more about the tabloid accusations that Burt Reynolds murdered David Whiting,
When Fitzgerald-quoting con man Alistair Milbourne is found dead a movie star’s motel room — igniting a world-wide scandal — the small-town police can’t decide if it’s an accident, suicide, or foul play. As evidence of murder emerges, Nicky Conway, the smart-mouth nanny, becomes the prime suspect.
She’s the only one who knows what happened. But she also knows nobody will ever believe her. The story is based on the real mystery surrounding the death of David Whiting, actress Sarah Miles’ business manager, during the filming of the 1973 Burt Reynolds movie The Man Who Loved Cat Dancing.
Only $3.99 for the ebook from:
Amazon , Kobo, Barnes & Noble , iBooks
Available in paper from:
featured image: photo by Ben White for Unsplash.
Hi, Anne
I have to disagree with pretty much all of this. Description is poorly taught in most writing circles. It’s taught as if it’s an exercise, and separate of anything else in the story. That’s also how you end up with people doing mug shot descriptions of characters and full descriptions of setting.
However, once you add the character’s opinion into the description, it adds a rich depth of characterization. Even certain word choices can convey volumes of information, like Michael Connelly’s description of a police building as a “tombstone,” or Nora Roberts’ “bruised clouds.” But if you want stellar examples, head on over to the J.D. Robb series (she’s Nora Roberts). The descriptions of New York are amazing because they are so much Eve Dallas’s opinions.
People descriptions are also opportunities for character opinions, and sometimes not always flattering. Again J.D. Robb does really good descriptions of the characters, including tags to help identify the characters, like Peabody’s pink cowboy boot and familiar clump. Tags are shortcuts, both in setting and characters, that help the reader remember. Remember the complaints about Tom Cruise playing Jack Reacher? That was because of a descriptive tag, mentioned over and over in all the series.
I usually hit three items in my descriptions, then circle back and add others as the scene progresses. So you get the immediate, top level view of the setting or the character, and then you get a sentence here and there.
Minimalist undercuts the characterization. Never more did I realize that when I took a class on character emotions. A lot of it emotions come through the character’s opinions of the descriptions.
Linda–How very odd you say you disagree with this post when I say exactly what you’re saying.
“What a writer wants to aim for is a one or two sentence description that will make the character memorable. Include some emotion — tell the reader how a character makes the other characters feel.
Here’s how I introduce Alistair Welbourne, the anti-hero in The Gatsby Game:
He wasn’t handsome, exactly, with features a little too small for his round face and pale hair that was already beginning to thin, but I couldn’t take my eyes off him. It wasn’t just his daringly inappropriate Savile Row suit, but his grown-up self-confidence and the dramatic, offhand way he spoke, like a character in a novel.”
This is the problem with skimming articles, which I realize nearly everybody does online.
Anne — A few words can convey volumes. A hotel security chief on the island of Jamaica: “really tall, really dark, really handsome” in DIAMONDS ARE FOR NOW.
Ruth–That’s the key to pleasing today’s readers: tell them as much as possible in as few words as possible.
I have never written a ton of description in my work. (And unfortunately I write in a genre that needs it.) I usually have to go back and add in description. But never paragraphs of it!
Alex–Yes, Sci-Fi of the “space opera” type needs quite a bit of visual help for the reader. Interesting that you add the description later instead of having to eliminate it the way a lot of us do. Sounds as if you’re extremely focused on story, which is a good thing. 🙂
I was criticized by a reader of my book for not including more description of characters, but maybe my genre (paranormal/vampire) needs more of that? It’s hard to strike a balance of giving enough description without overdoing it.
D.D.–I think it depends on whether your paranormal novel leans more toward romance, horror, or thriller. Romance needs more description. Horror needs enough of the icky stuff to scare the reader, but thrillers don’t need as much.
Wholeheartedly agree, Anne. Anything more than a few lines of description and I’m skimming. When it comes to character description, I’m going to have my own picture in my head regardless of how the author describes them. An author may use Brad Pitt’s physical traits to imply a male character is sexy, but I’m still going to imagine John Malkovich (I know, my tastes are unusual, but I guess that’s the point).
Thanks for all you do for writers – have a great week.
Rose–Interesting. I think a lot of readers feel that way. I knew one writer who said all her romantic male leads look like Johnny Depp to her, but she doesn’t want to impose that on her readers, so she just makes her heroes sketchily handsome. When I’m reading, most romantic heroes look like Cary Grant. (Yeah, I’m old school.)
I like the “it depends” route, Anne. I guess it depends on what description is necessary enough to get the job done and then not much more. I took a quick look back at introducing my m/c in my new WIP and this is how I wrote her in a screenplay style: “A stunningly attractive and stylish high-status lady — exceptionally fit — a natural brunette, except for dyed umber highlights, showing dolphin-smooth skin — in her fifties with impeccable brows accenting mesmerizing eyes and classic red wine lipstick.” I dunno – is this too much?
Garry–Speaking as a former stage director, I would have considered that too much description for a play. It hinders creativity in casting and costuming. For a novel, I’m not sure. I might cut a couple of things–maybe the dolphin skin, since I had to stop to think about dolphins and wonder what their skin would be like to touch. 🙂
\Wonderful advice here; thanks so much. Integrating details into the substance and movement of the story—only as many details as necessary, and only the most telling—is the best principle, of course.
I have to disagree, though, about “oesophagus.” Mark Twain did not make up that word, nor does he claim to have done so in his letter to the newspaper. “Oesophagus,” a very old word with roots in ancient Greece, is still in use as the British spelling of the word we on this side of the pond know as “esophagus.” If Twain had used the more colloquial “windpipe,” the effect would have been lost. Smart fellow, Twain. He knew just when to be informal and when to be pompous and stuffy.
Anna–I stand corrected. So must my high school English teacher. I know perfectly well what an esophagus is, but I’d never seen it with the UK spelling. Thanks for letting me know. I’ve corrected the post.
Excellent advice, Anne! I tend toward being minimalist in my mysteries and add descriptive information through an action sequence. For example, in one book my main character is waiting to meet her half-sister and a couple of young girls want to know if the half-sister looks like the mc. The mc plays a game with the girls: “What color are my eyes?” “Brown,” say the children. “But Cece’s eyes are blue,” the mc replies. She continues drawing the contrast through dialog with the children. Does that sound like a good way to solve the problem without resorting to mug shot description?
Kay–Very clever!
I got something different out of the article because of the minimalist comments and the 1 or 2 sentences, which seem in conflict with other parts of the article. I would never count your description as minimalist or 1-2 sentences (it may be; I didn’t count. I don’t notice the length because it is immersive). Because of how description is taught, writers can assume that means they can use something like “John had black hair and was six feet tall,” which is boring. I used to write description just like that. Some did use examples like you gave, and they always confused me because I felt they conflicted with the advice itself. When people started talking about adding emotion to your writing, I couldn’t figure out how to do it. Again, it conflicted in my head with the “keep it to a minimum” advice.
It took a long time to unlearn that. Did I do too much? Yes. But I rebalanced a little (and it wasn’t a big adjustment of removing lots of description. It was more like removing one sentence).
By the way, the level of detail for science fiction is so much higher than another story like a mystery would be a 5K and SF would weigh in at 15K.
Linda–Oh, yes! SciFi and Fantasy require a whole lot more description than a contemporary mystery. Only use details in a mystery that pertain to the plot.
Never mind all this great advice. You’ve been holding out on us!
I need to see the sci-fi novel about the planet Zog AND the fantasy yarn about the North Country. Get cracking lady!
Will–Unfortunately, I had to sign a non-disclosure agreement with the Zogians. And the Queen of the Far North Country claims to have some Kompromat on me. Probably that night we all took ‘shrooms in the sauna and then went out to look at the northern lights and things got a little orgy-ish. 🙂
Great work. I once heard that if one is concerned one’s language might be too flowery, read it aloud & ask, “Would this sound appropriate at the dinner table?” I love the idea of the advice, but in my mind, language can be slightly more flowery than dinner table language.
CS–I’ve never heard of the dinner table test, but I agree it’s pretty strict. I suppose it would depend on the dinner guests. 🙂
Thanks for a informative article on the judicious use of description. Just a side note: oesophagus (or esophagus) is a real word. It is the tube that connects the throat to the stomach.
Reyna–Thanks for the correction. I got one from Anna Chapman as well. My high school English teacher obviously didn’t know about the UK spelling, either. I think Twain must have used the foreign spelling to further bamboozle his Yank audience. I certainly know what an esophagus is, so I’ve fixed the post.
Such a gracious response, Anne.Thanks!
Hello Ann! Great post as always, on the basic ‘non-rules’ of description. Enjoying a first true spring day here and could really go nuts describing it — but will ride on whatever the phrase ‘true spring day’ brings to mind.
You underscore the idea that description is often left behind in teaching writing and reminds me of author clients I’ve worked with (mostly 1st book writers) whose views on description are at extremes and often read like standalone text. Time to describe the room! The character! The vehicle! The smoldering sunset, lips, eyes, gaze…! And cordon it all off from the scene for emphasis!
I ‘interview’ all clients before beginning an edit for a number of reasons, but mostly to get their views on the various writing functions. Descriptions always have a strong reaction, but rarely grasp how important description can be — or why and how to manipulate it.
I love your ‘it depends’ as it couples well with my asking how the client would describe an elder character or perhaps one who is disabled physically or disfigured. I want to know if they are able to see their scene/character/space clearly and introduce that character and the rest in 3D.
Appreciate too, the advice to READ authors whose writing is admired.
Thanks for sharing! :O)
Maria in KC
Maria–I think the problem is one Linda Adams addressed in both her comments. Creative writing teaching tends to teach descriptive writing as separate from storytelling. Writers then carry that into their novels, and think description is a stand-alone thing. It sure doesn’t make for a smooth experience for the reader. The secret is, as you say, to learn from reading as much as from classes. When you put on your reader’s hat the problems are obvious.
Enjoy Spring!
Love this line: “tell the reader how a character makes the other characters feel.” That is a lovely, sophisticated way to write character description. An example I use in class: in one short story, instead of describing that a woman who entered the room was beautiful or sexy, I instead had my protagonist (a man) state that the eyes of every male in the restaurant followed her as she walked across the room. Very nice post, Anne!
Melodie–I just read a book where a woman is described that way and thought “how clever”. I think it might have been written by, um, Melodie Campbell. 🙂 Loved Merry Widow Murders!
Thank you for this post. I’ve never read one about describing characters in our novels. I am a minimalist where this is concerned, leaving most of what people look like to the reader, only giving them a skeletal view of who is who. That’s probably because I can’t stand to read what someone looks like from the top of their head to the tip of their toes. To me, that’s quite boring. So, I skim. Your post is very helpful.
Patricia–As a reader, I feel the same way, especially if the story stops while we get that “police report” description. The story goes “clunk.”
A dolphin’s skin is smooth and rubbery. Could add another angle in the story, eh?
Hmm… seems a bit detached from Garry’s/Anne’s comment above, eh?
Harald–The WordPress elves have had a lot of trouble keeping comments in the right threads for some time now. It will appear to be fixed, then the elves go on some kind of bender again and refuse to do their job. So far we haven’t been able to do much. Hoping for an update from WordPress.
Harald–I didn’t know that. I know shark skin is kind of sandpapery, so I initially pictured that. But I don’t suppose most people have touched sharks or dolphins.
Excellent advice, Anne, as always, and I love your example, a winning character description, so winning in fact that I bought your book – looking forward to the Gatsby game!
Claude–Thank you!! I hope you enjoy Gatsby! Alistair is one of my favorite characters–a charming, but very troubled rogue.
To describe or not to describe is such an important topic. Kudos to you, Anne, for the superb breakdown. I tire of long descriptions. Much prefer a line or two. Guess I’m in the right genre. LOL
Sue–Yes, readers of crime fiction and true crime are there for story not lush prose. I’m reading a crime novel right now that only uses one- or two-word descriptions of characters, but keeps using them as names so we don’t forget. There’s “big nose” and “shiny suit” and “beardy”. We can see them and tell differences in personalities by their dialogue, and the story moves like the wind.
Great blog Anne. Seems to me that less really is more when it comes to describing a character’s physical being. It works best for me to let the character’s image sort of emerge as they are developed within the story.
Bruce–Readers need a few markers when they first meet a character, so they can tell characters apart. But they need a lot less than many writers believe. Readers certainly don’t need to know the eye color of every character in a book. Unless that’s the character’s most prominent feature. If a character is “the man with pale eyes” then, yes, tell us about his eyes. But otherwise, only tell us he’s got a baby face, or that he moves like a dancer. Later the author can fill in more. “Babyface wore a Savile Row suit whenever he met up with a potential mark.” Or “His smooth, dancer’s moves contrasted with his gruff voice and vile table manners.”
Elmore Leonard is a great author to read when you start to O.D. on description and need to rediscover dialogue.
Harry-Elmore Leonard’s advice I’ve quoted here applies to all writers, but his books are not everybody’s cup of tea. Authors of Romance, Women’s fiction, and the other non-thriller genres I’ve written about here need to read the contemporary bestsellers in their own genres to see what balance of description, narrative, and dialog their readers want.