2-4% of people have Aphantasia (No visual imigery)

[NuclearFairy]

I mostly just think in images. When I'm writing or reading I more feel the meaning of the word than actually hear the word in my head, although there's a certain amount of that. And when I read, "The wind blew through the trees," I'll quickly shift from feeling the words, to seeing wind gusting through trees, ratting branches and plucking at leaves.

So when it comes to imagining a scene, I see it play out in my head, and with effort I can even hear the dialog as they're speaking.

And yes, this can lead to problems writing as I try to find the words to describe what's in my head. It can be especially problematic for a dialog heavy scene where I forgot to think of the actual words they're saying. Like I can see and feel it in my head, I can feel the thrust and flow of what they're saying, I know the meaning of every word spilling out of their mouths, but I forgot to think up the actual words. Then I'll have to examine the feel of each word closely and go, "Is that small, tiny, little, minute, or something else?"

 

[AG31]

it just ended up being self-referential, "meaning is when you... well.. when something means..."

Yup. And for us a chair is just... well.. a chair.

 

[AG31]

@Off_base, did you ever try the steps I recommend in reply #22?

 

[OddLove]

So, those of you who can't visualize things, what are your memories like?
Do you only recall words, not faces or people? How do you remember things you've seen?

I don't think I'd read at all, if I couldn't imagine what anything or anyone looked like. That would just be passing my eyes over words.

My memories are kinda like a word document full of facts. Like the when, where, and why. Who was there, how it made me feel, how other people seemed to feel, etc. Maybe other small facts like 'it was rainy' or 'I was anxious' but mostly just a recalling of events read spoken internally with words. No visuals at all.

 

[Off_base]

@Off_base, did you ever try the steps I recommend in reply #22?

I did read through them, and I was able to imagine a visual reference for each one. My mind automatically goes there.

 

[PennyThompson]

I'm curious what it would look like if we plotted a bunch of erotica writers on the visualization vibrancy spectrum. My intuition is that an unusually high number would fall on both ends of the spectrum, and statistically fewer than the average population would fall in the middle. It seems like both aphantasia and hyperphantasia could be seen as strengths when it comes to writing!

 

[AG31]

I did read through them, and I was able to imagine a visual reference for each one. My mind automatically goes there.

Fascinating! Was there a small stretch of time when you were casting about before you were "able to imagine?" Or was the image the very first thing? Can you describe what you saw for each one?

 

[iwatchus]

I mostly just think in images. When I'm writing or reading I more feel the meaning of the word than actually hear the word in my head, although there's a certain amount of that. And when I read, "The wind blew through the trees," I'll quickly shift from feeling the words, to seeing wind gusting through trees, ratting branches and plucking at leaves.

So when it comes to imagining a scene, I see it play out in my head, and with effort I can even hear the dialog as they're speaking.

And yes, this can lead to problems writing as I try to find the words to describe what's in my head. It can be especially problematic for a dialog heavy scene where I forgot to think of the actual words they're saying. Like I can see and feel it in my head, I can feel the thrust and flow of what they're saying, I know the meaning of every word spilling out of their mouths, but I forgot to think up the actual words. Then I'll have to examine the feel of each word closely and go, "Is that small, tiny, little, minute, or something else?"

More than anything else, I think in dialog. I can hear the dialog in my head. If you look at one of my short outlines, half of it is snippets of dialog. I have some sense of the visuals, but it's not sharp at all. I experience all the senses other than dialog like that.

When a scene is not dialog driven, I struggle to describe the scene, much like Fairy describes.

 

[AG31]

I'm curious what it would look like if we plotted a bunch of erotica writers on the visualization vibrancy spectrum. My intuition is that an unusually high number would fall on both ends of the spectrum, and statistically fewer than the average population would fall in the middle. It seems like both aphantasia and hyperphantasia could be seen as strengths when it comes to writing!

I figured out late in the game that, along with "conceptual," my processing is heavily "somatic." When I remember my children as babies I remember how they felt in my arms, how it felt to blow between the soles of their feet. Likewise what I want (and hopefully provide) is for the reader to sense what the MC is sensing. Erotica is the perfect genre for a somaticist (not a therapist... just a kind of mental processor).

 

[AG31]

More than anything else, I think in dialog. I can hear the dialog in my head. If you look at one of my short outlines, half of it is snippets of dialog.

I do too. At 3 in the morning I'm composing e-mails and Lit posts. But if you think about it, not ALL of your thinking is verbal. Words just don't go fast enough to handle all the thoughts you have in a day. That's where purely conceptual thinking comes in. Whole globs of meaning, but not audial or visual.

 

[iwatchus]

I can force myself to think in almost any sense. I have no problem with the "imagine a blue cube, now put a triangular hole through it and put an apple in the slot" kinds of visualizations tests. It's just not the way I first imagine things. I guess I think in emotions, then words, then senses.

I also don't have clear images of most of my characters, which was encouraged early on by advice some here give to not provide detailed descriptions of your characters.

 

[Off_base]

Fascinating! Was there a small stretch of time when you were casting about before you were "able to imagine?" Or was the image the very first thing? Can you describe what you saw for each one?

ambiguity
conundrum
harmony
integrity
ambiguity
Possibility
Identity
Meaning
Continuity
Paradox

Ambiguity- the "ambiguously gay duo" cartoon skit from SNL.

Conundrum- I'm locked out of the house and need to pee.

Harmony- Rascal Flatts performing a song.

Integrity- people feeding the homeless on Christmas.

Possibility- my cute neighbor.

Identity- my cousin.

Meaning- a person on their knees in a church.

Continuity- traffic in my city.

Paradox- an approaching thunderstorm that was visually mesmerizing.

These came to mind, without any extra thought. I'm not sure my mind can work any other way. It's on autopilot.

 

[SimonDoom]

So now I'm wondering, how do people even write if they're thinking in pictures? How do you think of something visually then write it down if you don't think with words?

It's not either/or. I can visualize things and also think of them with words.

 

[stickygirl]

There's a well validated self-test called the Vividness of Visual Imagery Questionnaire, and you can take a version of it online!

I scored 75 out of 80, which apparently puts me pretty far on the opposite end of the spectrum from Aphantasia, in Hyperphantasia territory.

View attachment 2582854
I find this topic fascinating though, because it's difficult for me to imagine what other experiences on the VVIQ spectrum would even feel like. I can understand it intellectually, but I can't make myself feel the feeling.

If nothing else I confirmed my autistic tendencies: I managed to answer question 1 ( visualise a friend ) but in subsequent questions I was asking 'Whose characteristic poses?' 'Whose precise carriage, step?'... do they mean the person chosen in #1 or are we thinking of people in general? Never mind visualising anything - ask me meaningful questions dammit!

See my post #22.

I am visualising a post - it has pig netting nailed to it and brambles encroaching

 

[stickygirl]

I appreciate some folks are aphantasic but for others I suspect it's difficult to assess how reliant ones brain is in needing visual images to make sense of our surroundings and function in the world. Our brains do an extraordinary job of filtering out extraneous information presented by our senses - background chaff. The same must happen with visual images flicked up by our imagination - our brains have to discount most of it or else be overwhelmed.

If I go to the bus stop, I don't visualise the entire route - I just walk there while thinking about something else. If I have to explain to someone else how to get there, then I'll generally provide them with landmarks that I think might help them navigate their way to it. Giving instruction to either a lost bus-user or for example, teaching someone how to sail a boat, then we need to be aware of how people process information: visual, kinetic, auditory, writing... so that they can comprehend the exercise and be successful in learning a new skill.

How much extra information from our senses do we need to comprehend our environment to let us function safely? Just enough. There's no need to describe every shade in the autumn leaves on our way to work unless it's relevant OR if we're later asked to recall it. Too much input into our conscious brain is exhausting and unhelpful. In writing we are more likely to stop and give consideration to how rain on the window sounded like gravel being thrown at it, or how the mist in the valley hugged the land like a chilly blanket...