How do you feel about not giving characters physical descriptions

I do descriptions but I try to add meaning to it and make them shortish.
Here's an example: "Major General Alexander Scott West moved into the corridor with a great deal of hesitation. He gripped the top of his bamboo cane firmly. In his late forties, West was getting a bit old, especially for this shit. He had grey hairs now; he didn’t need stress. He was a shortish man, with short black hair and a strong-featured face like a boxer. West wasn’t eager to be wearing his old military uniform again. it felt like wearing a collar and chain."

 

I sprinkle small physical traits throughout the story if it is relevant.

Often I don't even name my POV character until his/her name is mentioned by another character, or they interact with more than just one other person.

 

I do this as well. A character anxiously fiddling at a beard or rubbing a hand over a raspy chin during conversation. Or having other characters mention some of their looks. I think a plain description of all of a characters looks leaves out a lot for the readers to fill in themselves. I know I always like to think of my own way how a character looks like, but I am aware that not all people are like that. In writing, I definitely prefer the more subtle showing method you described here. It respects the imagination of readers while at the same time leaves room for many interesting additions for me to mix in with the story as I write it, which make it more lively.

 

I think it is a bit important, as humans are visual creatures and a lot of readers lack the capability to really come up with a defined image of the character.

Though personally I tend to keep it to a minimal, and try to passively weave the descriptions in. Might give a basic set of things like nationality, stature, and hair color but leave a lot of it up to the reader to interpret.

Though you also, don't have to go to any special effort because even saying something like a "Large Brown eyed man," paints a brilliant picture for most.

 

Apologies if I'm overgeneralising, but there seem to be often two kinds of readers:
1) Reader-X imagines most of the character themselves (often your dialogue will influence this).
And 2) Reader-Y follows your direction to a T; they envision your cast almost identically to how you did, whilst you were first writing them.

I'm part of the former group, so in my mind, the latter has more to lose; I selectively take bits of the descriptions, then visualise something slightly distinct from it, but I do that in-SPITE of the descriptions. Group 2 has more to lose, if you laze out on descriptions (of course, I'm generalising, and will retract if proven wrong).

 

This is a nice article with some examples and tips I've found useful.
http://mythcreants.com/blog/how-do-you-describe-a-character/

 

I thought of this thread today when I was talking to a beta reader.

There's a character in my book without a single word of description. That was an oversight on my part - in an earlier draft I had described her usual outfit (a floury apron, I think it was) and when I cut that scene, I forgot to put any description in the next scene , which is now her introduction. So literally, not one single word about how she looks, sounds, or what she wears. But my beta reader today described her EXACTLY how I have always pictured her - a large, homely-looking black woman. That came across just in her actions, mannerisms, and the way my POV character - her foster daughter - thought about her.

It was an important lesson for me, and reaffirmed my decision to include very little physical description of any characters, unless it's important to the plot.

 

Out of interest, how did you infer she was black without a single physical description? Her accent/dialogue? I'm very curious.

 

The beta reader inferred it from her foster daughter calling her Mama instead of Mum, and the fact that she makes ginger tea to comfort her foster daughter when she's sad. I think she also mentioned her name, Constance, but on its own I don't think that's a clue as to race.

It wasn't a dialect thing, since she speaks like everyone else from south London, where the beta reader and I grew up.

 

I like how it focuses on PoV of the character, and not just PoV.
I think the article enforces the idea to describe/narrate as your character would which is something I find is often missed when it comes to description (physical or otherwise) in newer writers.

 

A great physical description can make a character really vivid in the reader's memory. I remember till date how Holden Caulfield has half white hair and that image has stuck with me.

 

I'm verymuch the same way, though I will name my protagonist off the bat and name new characters via dialogue. I'm pretty scarce with descriptions, and only give details when the object or person in question is directly mentioned — for example if someone touches someone else's hair, that's when I describe how it feels or looks. It doesn't work in my writing style if I were to mention it before that point.

 

I honestly see no point in giving a character's physical description unless it's necessary for the story. When I read, I like to imagine characters and settings my own way.

 

I agree with this.

I think it's necessary to give main characters at least broad strokes (tall/short, fat/thin, long/short hair, blonde/brunette - the stuff that you'd obviously immediately notice when you saw them) when we meet them but beyond that I think everything needs to earn it's keep. If someone has a scar it's because how they got it informs their character later on. Certainly you can add more details as you go; have a character notice something specific they find attractive for example, as it becomes relevant to what's happening but I'm firmly in favor of discarding pointless details which most little descriptions really are. If someone has three inch roots in their bleached blonde hair then that's something that can help us inform their character even if we don't explore it at the time. If someone has had a nose-job to change something the didn't like about themselves, that hints at something more, but if they just happen to have a nice nose it's not something worth caring about.

 

I personally love writing detailed characters and surroundings, of course I try to stick to Sci-Fi or Horror stories where there would be almost always something out of the ordinary to tell about whether somebody is a daemon or if somebody is rocking awesome power armour.

 

Welcome new person.

 

I recently read a short story that was pretty good, except the author gave NO description whatsoever of the MC. I was several pages into the story before I realized that my vision of a 20-something girl was actually a pre-pubescent child. I became very upset at the author for allowing this to happen and it ruined the rest of the story. Never ASSume the reader will figure it out just because you know it. A rudimentary description (age, sex if not apparent in the name, basic physical attribute that adds interest) should be required. After that I tend to allow the reader to fill in the blanks. If you read one of my books you will only be told:

Her name is Brianna. She is 23 and has hair dyed black (to make her look 'edgy'), has brown eyes (the point of this is for her to be 'common' and relatable), is of short stature and has her navel pierced.

That's all my reader gets. They can add or subtract freckles, eyebrows, dimples, birthmarks or whatever else floats their boat.

 

I'm about 50% in agreement with you. However, if you describe what other stuff looks like and avoid describing people, I'm not sure why. They are part of your story, and need to be visualised by the reader. Nothing wrong with a bit of help there.

The difficulty about forcing a reader to see a character differently from what they've pictured is easily solved. Make sure the descriptions get in there right at the start, so the reader won't have had time to picture them otherwise. However, the description has to be meaningful in order to seamlessly integrate into the story.

Concentrating on hair and eye colour, height, weight, etc to the detriment of other physical characteristics ...how the person moves, mannerisms, their general impact on other characters, etc ...can become dull and sometimes silly. If another character mentions or particularly notes a character's hair or eye colour, fair enough. But if not, maybe best leave it out.

 

Precisely. I describe what's being noted on scene. If my character walks into a room and notices the Tiffany lamp on the end table, that gets described, but if the character doesn't notice the wood floors or the carpeting enough to think about it, that doesn't get described. If the room is lavish, then his/her eye crosses over everything and everything gets a mention. If it's a typical, boring, Rooms-To-Go suburban bedroom, I'm likely to describe just like that.

The same with people. For me. If there's a reason for someone to take note, note is taken. If there's not, then no.

 

Yup, gotta agree with that.

Not that I do it, unless...

Gotta agree with that, too.

 

I think less is more. A couple of thoughts:

1- I don't consciously add them in a way that feels forced. I think some writers do like a 'details dump' in the middle of a page sometimes which comes off boring to me. I think it's cool to scatter details throughout like sparse crumbs.

2- I always glaze over those detail dumps when I read fiction, if it runs on too long or comes off awkward. Again, I for me it's gotta feel right, which is something that can't be measured. This is why I like the phrase Less Is More.

 

I hate to get bogged down with excessive details when I'm reading (I skip right over them!) so I don't do it when I'm writing. I usually introduce a character with a quick description. A few words, a sentence. If they are very important, possibly more than that. What stands out the most - are they tall, muscular, crooked nose, fluffy hair, meaty hands, dressed well, wicked tattoos...

 

I don't have a very artistic mind, so I don't normally care much about physical descriptions. A picture on the cover does a lot more--and usually if there's both, the description in the book is different from the picture and that just confuses me!