I never describe my characters physical appearance unless it has some critical impact on the story. I don't like authors imposing their image of a character on the reader, so I avoid doing that. I probably never will write about characters who face racism, bigotry, or physical disability since I've never experienced that and I believe other literature has covered those topics well. If someone wants to think my cast is all white because I never explicitly stated otherwise that is their choice. I just avoid discussions about race in my stories because that's a powder keg I'd prefer to leave alone.
I think you both might be misunderstanding me, which is probably my fault for not being clear. Here is my point as clear as I can make it: Know it, don't necessarily include it. "Defective" is one way to put it. I think a better term is "mutation." Yes, blue eyes and white skin are mutations. There are also mutations that create stronger bones, prevent HIV, prevent malaria, etc. We wouldn't be the big-brained, thumb-wielding, top-of-the-food-chain humans we are today. Mutations are fundamental to evolution, and evolution is fundamental to who we are. Mutations count for something. Do we need to talk about evolution in every book? No. You're right in that there used to be eye-color racism during WWII, so that's not the best example. I have brown hair, small feet, thick eye brows, a beard that is so course that I have to soak it in hot water before I shave it, and I don't tan, I burn. These are all due to genetic mutations. They are not important to the plot, but you would still include some of them. And if you wanted to write a character based off of me, you would probably want to know how these have affected me, because they've been a part of how I see myself and how others see me. A good writer would be aware of things like these, but they don't need to include them. By "celebrated" I don't mean it should be a part of the plot. But you as a writer should understand what it means to the character so that you know how it has affected them throughout life. Do you think being black has not affected the way you see the world? I absolutely think me being white has affected how I see the world, but people rarely make white MC's skin color a part of the plot. It wasn't a physical characteristic, but Dumbledore was gay. We never needed to know that in the story, but it very much had affected who he was as a person. I agree with you, it doesn't need to be a big deal. It doesn't even need to be visible to the readers. All I'm saying is that writer's shouldn't ignore it. When you write a character, you need to know everything about that character and how it has affected who they are. Physical characteristics, their relationships with their parents, events from their history, everything. Do you include this all in a story? Absolutely not - that would bore the reader to tears and would guarantee you never get an agent. But you should at least be aware of it. Here's a relevant quote from Gene Roddenberry, Star Trek creator:
The characters in my novel have a little description to them as far as physical appearances but not a lot. I left it up to the reader to envision them which helps stimulate their imagination and thus get more into the story. I will say that this character is old or young or heavy set or thin, some have more description than others but not so much that if you close your eyes that you would see them as I see them. One of my characters is deaf and thus have to communicate via sign-language. Another is a war veteran with some scarring on their bodies. Both have relevance to the story that I'm trying to tell. My main character has virtually no description (except male and in his mid thirties and reasonably fit) as he is the main narrator of the story (told in first person). I did that so the reader can place themselves in his shoes and actually (as some reviews I've gotten) became that character... at least for the male readers. My deaf character is a young boy of about 12 and I am constantly having to remember that the others have to speak to him in signs. His mother (the war veteran) is highly skilled in sign-language which gives me an "easy out" in overcoming that hurdle. The main character/narrator doesn't know any (but learns as the story progresses) signs and is watching the interaction between mother and (deaf) son from the viewpoint of someone ignorant of the language. By the way I am fluent in American Sign-Language so at least when I describe the signs being made they're accurate. As far as "color" in-so-far three characters are black (or African American to be more PC about it). But they're still treated equally across the board as far as I'm concerned. As to why I chose them to be black instead of white is more likely because of where they lived at the time and the odds were more in favor of them being one race than the other, not that it mattered to the other characters anyway... as I wrote them.
Meep? A black woman isn't so unusual and exotic that her presence would challenge the reader's suspension of disbelief.
Robert Barnard's Charlie Peace novels. Race comes up, but it doesn't drive, or in most cases influence, the plot.
Also, just as a thought, often when I read books where characters are described all the time as having fiery red hair or pierceing green eyes in contrast to his/her pale skin and so forth, which is easy for many to read over, but doesn't make it invisible. I think that is an example of making race not a choice for the reader to decide, I don't necessarily think this is a bad thing though. The fact also that many book covers reflect main characters in their books, I also see that readers do in fact relate to the appearance of MC in a book. Sadly readers almost always expect them to be white, period no matter how dark the author skillfully hinted the character to be. It's a bit over simplistic to just assume that everyone doesn't care about the ethnicity of characters in their book, an example coming to mind is the Hunger Game book, where a character is of dark skin color( who knows perhaps she was black).When a black (light skinned mind you) girl was cast to play as her, there were so many sad and mean spirited comments on the ethnicity of the girl. These comments were so prolific that it's almost as if these fans, never really read the book at all. When I read fantasy for example, I know it isn't real. I just want to see more main characters that are of some ethnic backround rather than a "by default" character. I will just say this, I am a black person, and I am currently working on a book. I told my 13 year old sister that I would make my main character a female warrior black and a supporting character a white male. She preceded to TELL me no I couldn't because black people don't play heros! I almost thought she was joking, I had to then tell her it's my story and I could write about whatever it was that I felt like (felt like a down right child, I'm 25). I grew up not knowing about race this race that, I knew we were different but not inferior to the other. It breaks my heart to hear things like what my sister said, and I know there are plenty out there that thinks it. I want to be apart of the change to a better future, I choose not to dwell on hateful things, so I will say that I am going to continue to paint a colorful cast with my words, because it's what I grew up knowing. Big rant, steppin of soap box
Isn't all of this just an instance of Chekov's gun? If you make a character conspicuously different in act 1, those difference need to have some bearing on the story in act 2+. If not, the parts of the text that made them conspicuously different should be edited out so as not to draw the readers eye. Your character can be the oddest combination of factors you can imagine, but if it has no impact on the story and we aren't going to explore the impact it had on the character growing up that way then why are you really telling the reader? It doesn't seem to be for their benefit. It seems to come down to what is considered a neutral fact. For some anything other than a fit white male between the ages of 20 to 40 (depending on culture and setting) needs to be explained. For others nothing needs to be explained. Most fall somewhere in the middle. When someone asks why is the character X, they are saying X doesn't seem like a neutral fact to them and the fact that X is never pulled off the wall and used violates there intuitive sense of the shorthand/foreshadowing they thought you were implying when you made character X. How you as the author react to that criticism is up to you. You may judge the reviewer too narrow in their perception of neutral facts or you may judge that you dedicated too many words to a something that has no impact on the story.
After reading about Chekov's gun, I quite agree. The idea being writing is to show the reader and not tell them, but too often it seems acceptable in todays writing to tell the reader, in regards to the main character. These characters are often spelled out, and I disagree with a default male character, which may only be the case when talking about a male character, but there are other default characters when talking about, say a child, a women, a creature, etc. Writing is not a man's world anymore and it is pointless to assume that by default it is man unless stated otherwise. With that understanding, I believe the Chekov's gun rule is already broken. Why is it a male, is there some importance in being a male to said story, if so show me... That's the problem, I am being told that our female is caucasion in a story by someone describing her hair color that and how said hair behaved that has no bearing on the story. This doesn't give me a reader the opportunity to see the character becasue I am being told. So, the question is when is it tactful to bring in a character's phenotype into a story irrespective of the reader's desire of wanting a default character? Also, when the character's race is not apart of the story, just an embellishment, a colorful difference.
Chekhov's gun is not a rule, first of all. And even if it was, the "rules" of writing are not meant to be so stringently applied. This is particularly the case when we talk about character development. A passing mention of a character's race is not going to draw reader's attention away from the story as much as it will help the reader to form a mental image of the character being described. I was listening to a book on tape the other day and there was a brief scene where the main character prayed and the omniscient narrator spoke of the MC's conversion to Islam some years earlier. The character's Islamic faith did not come up until nearly the very end of the book when it caused him to take mercy on someone he was preparing to kill (in a military situation). The author wrote a check (i.e. told us the character converted to Islam) and then later cashed it (i.e. had that religious conversion play into a major decision). That's the spirit of Chekhov's gun. The gun doesn't literally need to go off. But it should have some relevance. If you mention that a character is black/asian/hispanic, you should bring it full circle later in the book. That could be as simple as having it color in an interaction with a family member, having that background influence how they handle a situation or maybe it ties into a larger conflict. Maybe the "gun going off" is even less obvious. Right now, I've recently started reading Fool's War, a rare foray into Sci-fi for me. The MC is a devout Muslim woman and also a captain of a space ship. All of this is laid out in the first chapter. Throughout the book, you see very subtle instances where her religion and position seem to conflict (i.e. she cannot be alone in the same room as her first officer, so she legally adopts him so they can confer in private). The point is that race and religion can tie into a story in subtle ways. You can use either as a means to evoke a memory or a particular response to a stimulus. So before we try to hide behind Dr. Chekhov and his fabled gun, let's try to apply it in a way that makes sense. In Fool's War, the fact that the MC wears a hijab does not directly affect the story, but it develops the character and gives us a broader understanding of her motivations. Were the author to comment that she was wearing a green hijab, that would be a detail that, in my opinion, would need to somehow be tied to the story. Otherwise, it is a detail that could be omitted. So to Chekhov's gun rule, I hereby create Jimmy Olive's Burrito Rule: If your character eats a burrito in Chapter One, they do not necessarily have to break wind before Chapter Two. It can also stain their shirt, be the topic of conversation with another character or be the thing that delays the MC for just a moment, preventing them from certain death. And sometimes you can just eat a burrito.
I never called Checkov's gun a rule. I called the matters being discussed an instance of it. Checkov's gun is a commentary on foreshadowing and conservation of detail. Just as show don't tell isn't a rule but a commentary on how to draw a reader in. And the gun going off can be incredibly subtle. I failed to acknowledge the possibility that the reader didn't notice the 'check being cashed' as you put it, which is very possible and valuable feedback. If an author wrote a check, to use your example, if they had a character in a hijab and spent time watching them pray and talking about their conversion, but never cashed the check then that would stand out. By not cashing the check I mean it had no effect on the character's values, decisions or thinking, nor the situation or how others treated or think about the character. Basically if you removed that writing of the check and decided the character is actually agnostic you would have to change nothing else then the author has written a check but never cashed and a reader can legitimately wonder why the check was written. Not a rule, but legitimate criticism from a reader.
All characters are different the way they are. You can explain why they are like that by revealing their origin. However, there can be no reason why your characters have their own traits. My characters in my novel are all humanoid animals because their earth animal ancestors were genetically alternated by human scientists. This explains why they exist on the alien planet.
I wasn't speaking to just you, so I hope you didn't take offense. Sometimes people latch onto these little tidbits and formulate a writer's code that can never be broken. It is the sort of legalism that gets under my skin at times. I'm a patient reader. So if you include a small detail in Chapter 1 that later comes into play in Chapter 21, I will probably appreciate it. Chekhov's gun is a profound and simple way to say "Keep it simple stupid" in a way. But it is also worth noting that Chekhov is mainly known for his short stories. The man crafted short stories so well that he ranks in the top three influential authors who inspired me to write. But, writing for a short story is different than writing a novel. My point with all of this is that it is unlikely (in my opinion) that you will mention a character's race on page one and then not have it somehow affect the storyline later in the work. If you manage to do just that, then yes, the race was irrelevant to the story. But the possibility of dealing with a grandmother from the "old country," a situation that conflicts with your character's cultural/religious values or even just the playful banter of two friends from seemingly conflicting backgrounds is such a fertile field in which to grow your story that I cannot imagine an author willfully avoiding these many possibilities while still taking the time to mention race.
Sometimes you need to, especially when something changes. Kate starts as a late teenage girl who's five foot ten and has blonde hair with red stripes. However, after the events that require her mind to be placed in a cybernetic body, everything changed. Her facial and physical appearance did, and her hair went the black with blue streaks and highlights. If it both hadn't been described, then the reader would've been tee-totally confused as to what happened. Sometimes, if the character is a bit player, you can do that. However, if they're your main character then some description is going to be necessary. I used to feel the same way, but learning things the hard way broke that habit.
This conversation made me wonder, if race isn't mentioned, do readers picture the characters as their own race?
For every "Why is your character this way," there is a "why should they be any other way?" If I have a character in a wheelchair, why should they not be in a wheelchair? If people are nitpicking every potential "why" in your story, then maybe the best thing to do is simply throw the converse question back at them. Not that you shouldn't know as much as possible about your characters, but sometimes I've found that some writing classes tend to focus on answers for the wrong things.
I can't speak for the masses. When I read a book I form an image of a character. That image isn't always Caucasian. I don't know why.
I try to write in as many different characters as I can, to hone my abilities. Female is tough for me. One time I tried to write a story about a robot and I purposefully tried to make the robot gender-nuetral in the dialogue and actions. It was more difficult than I thought, but fun nonetheless!
Exactly. I don't want all of my characters to be me. I am me, have been me for 23 years. That student who asked me why my character was in a wheelchair, I think she wanted me to come up with a perfectly logical explanation as to why I had a character in a wheelchair. She wanted me to study that choice I made closely. I thought, 'Do I really need to have an explanation as to why I've got characters who aren't exact carbon copies of myself?'
So, you write a story of something uncommon, a person in a wheel chair as apposed to not, and there is no real reason for this fact. Unlikely story, pun intended. So, when being challenged, instead of having a real argument, you create more questions, and by the way you question is easily answered. You character should not be in a wheel chair if they can walk. In other words, why can't they walk? Is the wheel chair temporary? As a writer, you would have to explain this. By not explaining this, it is the same as having some person that is of some race, which needs not be divulged, and yet the author does so explicitly. By the way, I mean only to have a friendly conversation between writers, you are entitled to write any which way you please. I just was curious as to you approach at the conversation. You are a very rare bread. I mean that in as nice a way as possible, some people will even read that a race is of some heritage and somehow gloss over the facts when it comes to it. They can't look paste themselves and unfortunately being well read, does not cure such a problem. I take a race by face value, I create images in my head based on what the author shows me, simple. Although, we are all free so as our mind allow us to.
I read a book not too long ago, and throughout the whole thing I was 'seeing' the MC as a black male. It wasn't until nearly the end of the story that a family scene took place which clearly showed the MC was not black. I was so surprised, I actually went back and reread the book to see where I 'went wrong'. Couldn't find it - but I was still saw the guy as black, and I'm quite sure I will the next time I read that book.
