this post was submitted on 25 Jun 2024
36 points (100.0% liked)

chat

8422 readers
37 users here now

Chat is a text only community for casual conversation, please keep shitposting to the absolute minimum. This is intended to be a separate space from c/chapotraphouse or the daily megathread. Chat does this by being a long-form community where topics will remain from day to day unlike the megathread, and it is distinct from c/chapotraphouse in that we ask you to engage in this community in a genuine way. Please keep shitposting, bits, and irony to a minimum.

As with all communities posts need to abide by the code of conduct, additionally moderators will remove any posts or comments deemed to be inappropriate.

Thank you and happy chatting!

founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Bonus points if the author first mentions a specific trait, physical build, or whatever else halfway through the novel and totally fucks up my mental image.

I don't expect a biology model description for each character, but write me something brief and evocative of how they should look, you fucking dork author. I don't even know how tall she should be, her hair colour, anything. Why are you like this, author?

all 33 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 19 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Because it's awkward and easily done in ways that can come off problematic. If you're describing an attractive character you end up coming off horny, if you describe an unattractive character you come off mean. If you're describing an attractive character of another race then you come off horny and fetishistic. So I guess a lot of author just opt for being vague on details.

[–] [email protected] 13 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Sorta sounds like a skill issue to me? I'm not asking for stats on the roundness of pert buttcheeks either though...

[–] [email protected] 18 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Whaaaaaat? You don't want a sci fi author to be like "this is Eric; he has black hair and is tall, this is his buddy Paul, he's muscular but of average height, this is Alice, she is also tall with almond eyes and has gigantic gazongas"

[–] [email protected] 12 points 1 year ago (1 children)

This has always bothered me.

Bonus points if the author first mentions a specific trait, physical build, or whatever else halfway through the novel and totally fucks up my mental image.

This really gets my goat

[–] [email protected] 10 points 1 year ago

I think a rule should be, if you are gonna describe, do it early ffs.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 1 year ago

because it usually isn't necessary for the story

Death to America

[–] [email protected] 9 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I'm pretty sure older works were very heavy on physical descriptions. And then moving pictures came around, and readers didn't care as much about visual characteristics as they did the plot.

If you read Victorian era stuff, FFS they don't stop describing how things look.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

and readers didn't care as much about visual characteristics as they did the plot.

Por que no los dos?

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Older text was more visually descriptive. Dunno what else you'd like, comrade.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

"What I'd like" is probably not good and kinda scary =)

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 year ago

I believe character descriptions became a big thing in the time of physiognomy – when Balzac narrates someone's physical appearance, he wants you to extrapolate the character's personality from that. Physiognomy fell out of fashion and if there is no other motivation to provide a description, like signalling someone's class position or injecting a bit of lyricism, it's simply economical to leave it out. To provide a counter-example, Mary Gaitskill always writes exactly one paragraph of description in her short stories which you can just skip because it's not properly integrated into the story as a whole.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 year ago

Read Raymond Chandler's novels and you'll get vivid descriptions of everything except what the fuck is going on

[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Idk, I read a lot and this is never an issue for me. Is it really such a hassle to reconstruct your mental image of something? I'm constantly considering and imagining characters as different builds, dressed differently, sounding differently, depending on how the context of the scene paints them. And by the end of the book I have a pretty firm mental image of what the character is like, born of a thousand iterations which finally and slowly merged into a cohesive whole.

You can just tell me what a character looks like down to the specific material of the buttons on their shirt, but that loses out on a certain amount of speculation and imagination. If a character who has so far had no reason to perform extraordinary physical feats suddenly finds it necessary--and possible--to lift an immense object, for example, my mental image is like "oh wait so he's jacked" which introduces a kind of 'twist' entirely in omission.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago

It's not a massive hassle I guess, but I would rather have something firm to construct the mental image in my brain around, I guess. Plus sometimes context of the scene can paint characters in ways that contradict how I read them, subjectivity.

Again I'm not asking for detailed biology class models or tailor's receipts, just more than literally nothing. I like when I can glean details from the narrative like the strength example you give, but lots of novels don't even have that, y'know?

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 year ago

Usually I’m not interested in what made-up people make-believe look like unless it somehow drives the plot or develops the characters’ relationships.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Glad I'm not the only one who thinks this way. It seems to be so common to not have physical descriptions, that I was wondering if this was normal and I was the weird one for being so visual. There are some people with aphantasia, after all. I can see if they want you to use your imagination, but then you can't just suddenly mention something half way through the book that totally messes up my mental image! Ugh. Books are basically mental movies playing in my brain while I read. It's jarring to have to recast suddenly in the middle of the movie.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 year ago

Yeah exactly!!!! To me "using your imagination" is not "I'm giving you nothing so freestyle it until I contradict your mental image", seriously.

I think it varies by genre, but I see the problem in lots of places & I hate it.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Writing physical descriptions is kinda it's own skill. I can't do it until I've actually drawn/seen a picture of a character, otherwise I really struggle to visualize them concretely enough to verbalize. Tbh even with people I know irl, I'd have trouble describing them without a picture in front of me.

Modern styles tend to be more action/plot oriented with less time devoted to florid descriptions of random stuff, so some authors may feel like if they write a physical description they have to justify the attention to it. And it's easy for things to get cringey. Like, if you give characters appearances that "match" their personality traits, that has potential to be problematic, then you've got the horny/objectifying types, and then there's, like, weird/uncomfortable analogies. For example, I remember reading some Philip K Dick and seeing the absolutely horrible, objectifying descriptions of female characters, while his male characters are barely described at all. Physical descriptions not being in style could be a reaction to various forms of cringe

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Is that a sort of aphantasia too?

I am getting the sense that there's a big fear of cringe in this description thing, though. Kinda sounds like a skill issue...

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago

I don't think it's aphantasia in my case. I can picture things in my mind, it's just that it's hard to come up with descriptions without it in front of me. It's the same way you might take another bite or drink of something while trying to describe how it tastes. I can remember generally how a wine tastes the next day but it's a lot less vivid than when it's on my tongue, and it's kinda the same way with visual images of people.

I think it is a skill issue, but like I said it's kind of it's own skill. I think it's possible to be a good writer while being complete ass at describing people. I do think it's a skill that's possible to learn tho, so there's not really a good excuse for it.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I vaguely remember avoiding detailed descriptions of my characters writing fanfic because I didn't want people to think I was horny for my characters. So I went pretty far in the other direction.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

>writing fanfic

>not horny

In seriousness though, would describing your characters inherently imply awooga on your part??

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago

People could claim that and I was very cagey. Still am, but in different ways