How to make a Personality Description Conjure up a Physical Image?

Something I've noticed in all my favorite books is that they never actually physically describe a character, but their description of backstory/personality is so good that I can still picture the character in my head anyway. I tried my hand at this, but it doesn't really seem to be doing the trick. Does anyone know how I could alter this character description to make a reader be able to see them physically?

He was all tilted grins and glinting eyes, smile like the rougarou. Stetson and cheap cologne, that was how he came to learn about God. Holding his daddy’s hand in the back of the church, mama’s dress swishing round his face, he’d toe the floor and whisper words the preacher told him never to say in God’s house. He grew up with dirty feet and split lips, hiding under the porch with his arms all sprawled behind his back as he stared lazily at a half-empty bottle of his daddy’s Jack Daniel’s. Nine years old and mama was dragging him out of class by the ear for the cigarette she found under his mattress, but he was laughing. He was always laughing, that boy would go to his grave laughing, because the world is a funny place in a fucked up sorta way. (And he was the only one who knew it.)

 

I don't really 'see' your character from that description, but that doesn't mean it's a bad description.

Is it important that your readers have the exact same impression of your character's physical state? If so, I think you'll have to be less subtle and just describe what he looks like. But most of the time, I don't think it's that important. When I read your description, I picture a kid I went to elementary school with, and I can imagine what he was like when he grew up. That's good enough for me as a reader.

For the books you've read that have given you a clear picture of the characters - do you have any reason to believe that the clear picture you drew is the same as the clear picture another reader might draw?

 

It is too heavy-handed for my liking. Can you sprinkle the description over some action. What I got there was a chunk of slightly over-blown and angsty description that turned me off... I was kinda thinking is this character gonna DO anything any time soon?

 

Though the paragraph is well written, I'd agree that you're not getting the desired effect.
Think of it like a paint-by-numbers painting, and you fill half, or less than half of the numbers with color... let the reader paint the rest of it with their imagination.

This is a short expository passage building up one of the characters from my WIP. Since there's a lot of motion and dialogue before and after, it's meant to be quick, and vague, and not break the tempo of the scene.

Though not a fetching beauty, but as the plainest of songbirds will sing the prettiest of songs, so it was with Claire. A sparrow that possessed the wounded melody of a nightingale. As the consummate performer, she seemed destined to find for the fourth time a tragic and gruesome death by these wild beasts; but although she was sure about her performance in the play, she was starting to have doubts about her partners’ ability to convince a jaded audience.

 

So she was a Finch?

 

I was a bit confused, because sparrows are actually prettier (more intricate & varied plumage) than nightingales.

Nightingales are just small, drab light brown birds with nothing to recommend them but their beautiful songs.

Sparrows are common little things, but one could still admire their patterns, as the browns & black & white play off one another nicely. I find sparrows rather cute.

So when you made mention of the plainest of songbirds, I assumed she WAS a nightingale. When sparrow was thrown in, I started to wonder if she actually was rather pretty and how much so in the common way. Was she an average but generally pleasing looking girl? But then the line of "the plainest song birds" would seem out of place?

 

No actually, I was referencing the two birds and their singing prowess. Not appearance. Both the Sparrow and Nightingale are dull looking birds, both are songbirds, but the Nightingale is regarded as the most melodic, and best songbird. Claire is a singer and performer at an opera house, and by dead reckoning not a beautiful woman... but she has the voice of a nightingale. It is her saving grace, and why people come from miles around to watch her perform.
If you were to rewrite the passage, how would you better convey the imagery I'm trying to evoke? It's a tricky little paragraph because I don't want it to last more than a few beats before returning to the action. Anyhow, thanks for commenting on it and giving me something to think about.
https://themysteriousworld.com/10-best-singing-birds-in-the-world/

 

I'm more familiar with the opposite. As I describe the character's physical features, I include adjectives and similes to accentuate the character.

For example, my male lead has a soldier-level sort of self-discipline, it is probably his one constant. I emphasise this with his posture and that he wears his clothes in a tidy manner.

 

I see no problem with just describing appearances. Call me young and inexperienced, but I tend to go with sprinkling little bits in as I go: "she tugged at a lock of dark hair and contemplated the headmistress' words". I thought that the paragraph you provided was good - I could guess at what kind of person this guy was, and it seemed to be showing and not telling. I'm assuming it's the main character, or someone the main character is drawn to look at (those are the occasions where I'd use such a big paragraph anyway) but I agree that for a side character that would be a touch excessive. I think you're doing well, bit I also think that if the image we have isn't the same as the image you have, that isn't a disaster. I've often read physical descriptions and pictured something completely different.