It is a subject most intricate so what is beauty in words to you as a writer? Take a character. How do you flesh it out ? In few words please do take it away.....
I can't think of a situation where I'd want to describe "beauty" out of context. Describe something that's beautiful? Sure. But "beauty", as, like, a concept? Why?
"Her heart sips passion through a straw without desperation or greed. She does not ask for the stage, but when she comes in, sure enough... there they all are."
Initially my thoughts were to describe the affects they elicit from others, so show the beauty in how they respond to seeing it. "...she was a vision like no other, in her wake followed butterflies to land in the stomachs of those who gazed upon her and a cool breeze that took their breath away. All that caught a glimpse felt the flush of blood to their bodies as they unwittingly drank in the Beauty before them."
Breathtakingly amasing. I like. So what you are suggesting is seeing beauty from the eyes of the reader?
Yep, it's pretty much the old trope 'Show, don't tell'. Which I think in this case is appropriate because Beauty is very subjective. Everyone will definitely have their own opinion of what beauty is, whereas if you were to describe a werewolf or a vampire there are certain things which people would expect to see in that description. It is likely however, that most readers would have experienced the reaction to beauty, the feeling that it can instil in you, whether it be from a person or object, that has taken their breath away, made their heart flutter etc
Beauty is: Not me scratching my beard as I ponder this, a black horse, aligned and grows linearly with alcohol intake, a cocktail of poise, debonair, elan, quirk, flaw (asymmetry) and flawlessness (symmetry) projected over bitter pills, in daydreamed 'what ifs' or beauty's just...the right shaped booty
This is like asking me how I make rice. I'm Puerto Rican. That's a really big question. What is making the character beautiful? Have you seen Crouching Tiger Hidden Dragon? Jen Yu is certainly prettier than Yu Shu Lien or Li Mu Bi, but she's not more beautiful than either of them. The beauty of the older characters is sourced from something other than mere prettiness, the unearned gift of youth. Their beauty is in their presence, their poise, their unending sense of discipline. I'm always riveted by the elegance of Yu Shu Lien, because unlike young and pretty Jen Yu, it's not performative, it's not self conscious, it's not an act. It's understated and as silent as a crane at the edge of a pond. It's become ingrained in her bones even as the flesh that encases those bones has weathered. That's her beauty, and it is stunning. There's a moment in the film Lady in the Water, where Paul Giamatti - a man few would ever regard as "pretty" or "handsome" in an off-the-shelf sort of way - becomes sublimely beautiful because he gets me to completely tune out my real world and invest in his investment of the character he is portraying. He is not pretty, but he's beautiful in that moment. He could have me for a song and all your wrinkled noses are of no importance to me in the slightest. Have you seen the Kung Fu Panda films? Yeah, they're goofy kids' films, but... in each of them Po (the panda) has to find something to defeat the new baddie that has shown up. But in the end the baddie is never the real thing that needs to be defeated. It's his self doubts, his insecurity, and his losses from the past - those are the real enemy, and when Po defeats them, you know it because the goofiness stops and this chubby, clumsy panda becomes so beautiful in that moment that it literally chokes me up every time I see it. He becomes beautiful because he owns his self-worth, his true value. And how I would describe those things would be totally different each time because the source is different, the reason. I can tell you more easily what I would not do: I would not laundry-list features. "She had long flowing hair and almond shaped eyes that tipped up at the edges. Her nose was small and her lips were...." No. That's a dead, soulless, literalist description, to me.
I'm not sure that you can describe beauty of character as much as show beauty of character. You're not going to convince me that your character is noble by telling me he's noble. You're not gonna convince me this person is kind until I see how kind he is. And this requires accumulative action - it requires the build up of character over the course of the entire story, up to the climactic moment when you crystalise that idea of the character for me. Take Katniss from Hunger Games - she wasn't brave until the moment she volunteered to go in her sister's place, and the volunteering to go would mean nothing in itself if we hadn't known the world, the stakes, what the Games were, what the losses were. Or Samwise from LOTR - I didn't read the books but in the film, that moment when he picks up Frodo and takes him up Mount Doom. That there is a beautiful moment because it shows his sheer loyalty to Frodo, even when Frodo honestly didn't deserve his friendship or faithfulness anymore - still he sticks by his side and he walks the journey for him. But what would that action have meant alone, without everything that came before? Without seeing Frodo struggle, without seeing the evil of the ring, without seeing his losses, his grief, without seeing how the ring twisted every single good character who ever came to touch it. Without all of this, Samwise's action would show nothing, and mean nothing, and thus there would have been no beauty in it. Two other film endings that were beautiful - that shows the full beauty of their characters - are Laputa (Castle in the Sky) and Naussica: Valley of the Wind, both of them by Hayao Miyazaki. What makes these films beautiful is more complex than simply describing a single action - if you haven't seen the films. Watch them. That moment in Castle in the Sky, the build up, the dialogue, the simple gesture of clasping hands and saying a single word - that's magic right there. And it's because of everything that's gone on before that point. That's why it's important. That's why it's beautiful. Because it's the moment when something beautiful has been crystalised for the viewer to see - that is, their sacrifice, the power and strong foundation of their friendship, even the very value of their lives, their love for each other and what strength that lends them both, their bravery. I can't describe it. It's not something you do in a paragraph. In short, it's not really something you describe. It's something you tell. That's the story in the end, isn't it? The characters, and who they truly are. Whether they're beautiful or not is up to the reader to decide.
Excellent example. There are few friendships I've read (or watched) more beautiful than that of Frodo & Sam. I know you've seen me talk before about how their love is a kind of "being in love" that's seperate from romantic love, a different thing, which, sadly, English fails to have a word for. And you're so right that the beauty is a conclusion that has to be reached, operative word: reached. You can't just say "Sam's love and faith in Frodo was unerring" and expect that to create and evoke that moment in the theater when every dorky dude like me was all "I'm not crying, you're crying! Shut up!"
I agree. Since beauty is in the eye of the beholder, not the beheld, the emphasis should be on the reaction to beauty. One can describe her hair color, her form, and her smile, and let the reader infer what those images might conjure up. But it might be better to write "He couldn't place what it was about her that struck him so forcefully, but he simply couldn't take his eyes off her."
Mind you, I have always thought that line the script writers gave Samwise to be a horrible one. "I can't carry it for you, but I can carry you!" I find it hard not to giggle a little... The moment in itself is so powerful I choose to overlook it, but still. Anyone else feel the same?
