Characters

[TxRad]

I posted this in another thread but thought it might be an interesting question for here.

Characters:

How much information is enough for a reader to see the character in their mind? How much information do we as writers want to give and how much should we let the reader flesh out the character to suit themselves?

These are important questions. If we give too much information then the character is locked in to our mental image and may put the reader off. If there is not enough then the character become nothing but a cardboard cut out.

Where is the line?

 

[Carnevil9]

I try to supply the bare minimum description. Basically, just characteristics that are essential to the plot, or necessary to distinguish the character from other characters. The more the details that are filled in by the reader, the more that reader "owns" the character.

I know other approaches exist and perhaps are even better, but this works for me.......Carney

 

[TxRad]

I try to supply the bare minimum description. Basically, just characteristics that are essential to the plot, or necessary to distinguish the character from other characters. The more the details that are filled in by the reader, the more that reader "owns" the character.

I know other approaches exist and perhaps are even better, but this works for me.......Carney

But what is the bare minimum?

Is, "A tall blond walked in the bar." enough?

That's about as minimum as it gets.

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

TEX

Mencken is maybe the best there ever was for characterizing people; he always captured souls in a few, brief sentences.

http://grammar.about.com/od/rhetoricstyle/a/hlmwoodrow.htm

 

[Carnevil9]

But what is the bare minimum?

Is, "A tall blond walked in the bar." enough?

That's about as minimum as it gets.

If the plot doesn't require her to be tall or blonde, I wouldn't mention it. "She walked into the bar" would suffice. Call me the Hemingway of Erotica.

 

[TxRad]

If the plot doesn't require her to be tall or blonde, I wouldn't mention it. "She walked into the bar" would suffice. Call me the Hemingway of Erotica.

Hemingway never impressed me all that much. Too much about too little and too little about too much.

 

[sr71plt]

The skeletal figure of a man lurched out of the alley, stooped to pick up a cigarette butt just flicked to the ground by a flash of tight skirt, rat's nest hair, and a broad slash of vermillion lipstick, and vanished into the darkness to the sound of rustling cardboard.

Just spur of the moment, but I think in one sentence, less than fifty words, you can establish not only two characters but the setting and mood as well.

 

[TheeGoatPig]

A tall leggy blond with a huge set of knockers that could only be fake walked into the bar. She pointed at the three biggest burliest men in the room, said the words, "You, you, and you are coming with me," and walked back out the door expecting them to follow like a pack of well trained animals. The person that told her this bar was the best place to find men should have mentioned it was a hangout for strictly gay men. It would be another two minutes of standing out in the cold autumn air before she would turn back around and catch two of the three men she pointed at sharing a wild kiss, and another minute after that before she stopped staring and returned to the hunt for her own wild night of passionate group sex.

__

Why do you people keep making me write scenes that entertain me for one paragraph but don't go anywhere interesting after that?

 

[TxRad]

The skeletal figure of a man lurched out of the alley, stooped to pick up a cigarette butt just flicked to the ground by a flash of tight skirt, rat's nest hair, and a broad slash of vermillion lipstick, and vanished into the darkness to the sound of rustling cardboard.

Just spur of the moment, but I think in one sentence, less than fifty words, you can establish not only two characters but the setting and mood as well.

Well, some people can. Us long winded writers take a little more space.

I can picture the two characters above but if one is central, is the descriptions given enough to flesh out the character for the reader? After all the reader has to see who we see in their own mind. But which is better, our version or theirs?

 

[sr71plt]

Well, some people can. Us long winded writers take a little more space.

I can picture the two characters above but if one is central, is the descriptions given enough to flesh out the character for the reader? After all the reader has to see who we see in their own mind. But which is better, our version or theirs?

Well, in good writing you don't lay the character out at one go anyway.

And it's the reader's vision that counts. That's why if you get too specific in description, you're fighting with the reader and the reader quite likely will lose interest in and ownership of your story. You need to give them the impression that they are working some things out for themselves to keep them engaged.

 

[TxRad]

A tall leggy blond with a huge set of knockers that could only be fake walked into the bar. She pointed at the three biggest burliest men in the room, said the words, "You, you, and you are coming with me," and walked back out the door expecting them to follow like a pack of well trained animals. The person that told her this bar was the best place to find men should have mentioned it was a hangout for strictly gay men. It would be another two minutes of standing out in the cold autumn air before she would turn back around and catch two of the three men she pointed at sharing a wild kiss, and another minute after that before she stopped staring and returned to the hunt for her own wild night of passionate group sex.

__

Why do you people keep making me write scenes that entertain me for one paragraph but don't go anywhere interesting after that?

Why don't you see the humor in that story and flesh it out into something more. There is so much you could do with it.

 

[TxRad]

Well, in good writing you don't lay the character out at one go anyway.

And it's the reader's vision that counts. That's why if you get too specific in description, you're fighting with the reader and the reader quite likely will lose interest in and ownership of your story. You need to give them the impression that they are working some things out for themselves to keep them engaged.

Believe me, I understand metering out the details. It took a while to learn that one.

I agree with the readers vision being the one that counts. But where is that fine line of too much and just how much do they need to work things out for themselves.

You've seen a certain critic that's main objection to all stories was he couldn't see the characters. Why was that? Was it his limited imagination or his need for full descriptions because that is the way he writes?

Where is that fine edge? I figure it is a floating edge depending on the story but then again... What the heck do I know?

 

[sr71plt]

Where is that fine edge? I figure it is a floating edge depending on the story but then again... What the heck do I know?

Since the fine edge would be different for each story, I don't think this is a question that can be answered.

The invitation is to fall back on the judge's "I know it when I see it." But I think this is one of those cases that if you saw the edge, it's because you went over it--that doing it well would mean it was invisible but that it worked.

For instance, sorry Three Goat, but I think his example immediately goes over the edge. Too much front-end telling. I'd have a hard time, as a reader, getting engaged at all. I'd think, "the author of this doesn't need me at all--he's going to tell everything to me and leave me no space to be involved." (Beyond the disconcerting reference to "blond," which is male. For a female, it's "blonde.")

A mistake I think a couple of our infamous critiquers (one now departed) made for years here on the Feedback board was complaining that the protagonist and maybe other characters weren't given names and/or descriptions right off the bat and/or the start of the story was confusing. You don't need a name to establish a character and it's the most reader-engaging stories that puts into the reader directly into the action and into confusion and makes them help reach clarity. And the clarity doesn't have to be the author's chosen clarity for the reader to "get" the story in his/her own terms.

 

[TheeGoatPig]

Why don't you see the humor in that story and flesh it out into something more. There is so much you could do with it.

Nope. It's not my story anymore. I banish it from the realm of my existence! If someone else wants to adopt it and expand it they can have it.

"Hey! He's abusing that story idea! Call the authorities!"

Oh crap...

*runs away*

__

I actually want as many of the major details of a person's appearance up front at their introduction so that I form a metal image early, and I don't get contradicted later on. I don't want to start thinking of a character as a busty brunette Philippine and then find out later that she is a flat chested blond Nigerian.

However, I want reminders later on, with specifics filled in as we go along. I don't want twenty characters introduced on the first two pages with all of their physical traits all at once and then they aren't mentioned again.

"Sally is a tall blond with large knockers, Kelly is a medium redhead with pert tits, Jennifer is short with a wide ass, Sara only wears shorts and t-shirts, Donna only ever wear blue jeans and halter tops, Carrie never goes anywhere without her purse..."

and then there isn't another reminder for the next five pages, or the next ten sequels of which character is which. You have to keep going back to that first page to keep track of who everyone is. I really hate that.

 

[TheeGoatPig]

For instance, sorry Three Goat, but I think his example immediately goes over the edge. Too much front-end telling. I'd have a hard time, as a reader, getting engaged at all. I'd think, "the author of this doesn't need me at all--he's going to tell everything to me and leave me no space to be involved." (Beyond the disconcerting reference to "blond," which is male. For a female, it's "blonde.")

Two points.

First, there is no R in my name.

B, I have been wondering about the difference between "blonde" and "blond" (blonde shows up as a typo in my programs). I always figured it was a dialect thing.

And lastly, my example was more of a joke. I change when and where I place my descriptions (if at all) from story to story.

 

[sr71plt]

Two points.

First, there is no R in my name.

B, I have been wondering about the difference between "blonde" and "blond" (blonde shows up as a typo in my programs). I always figured it was a dialect thing.

And lastly, my example was more of a joke. I change when and where I place my descriptions (if at all) from story to story.

Thrrrrrrree Goat: I did take your paragraph as satire when I first read it--but then another poster took it seriously, so I thought . . . well, one never knows.

It fit in well with the point I was trying to discuss.

 

[sr71plt]

I don't want to start thinking of a character as a busty brunette Philippine and then find out later that she is a flat chested blond Nigerian.

Then you no doubt in the example I gave would be ticked off to discover in paragraph thirteen that the "tight skirt, rat's nest hair, and a broad slash of vermillion lipstick" turned out to be a transvestite.

 

[favoritesgoddess]

Believe me, I understand metering out the details. It took a while to learn that one.

I agree with the readers vision being the one that counts. But where is that fine line of too much and just how much do they need to work things out for themselves.

You've seen a certain critic that's main objection to all stories was he couldn't see the characters. Why was that? Was it his limited imagination or his need for full descriptions because that is the way he writes?

Where is that fine edge? I figure it is a floating edge depending on the story but then again... What the heck do I know?

I think there's a right amount of characterization for each story, and part of being a good writer (and perhaps having a good editor) is knowing when you've found the balance for that story. But I don't think it's a measurable ingredient in any concrete way. I agree that it's a floating edge.

And because the reader is essentially a partner in the story and has his own idea of how much character is enough, the answer "is it enough?" is going to have a variety of answers up and down the scale, depending on the preference of the reader.

 

[TxRad]

I think there's a right amount of characterization for each story, and part of being a good writer (and perhaps having a good editor) is knowing when you've found the balance for that story. But I don't think it's a measurable ingredient in any concrete way. I agree that it's a floating edge.

And because the reader is essentially a partner in the story and has his own idea of how much character is enough, the answer "is it enough?" is going to have a variety of answers up and down the scale, depending on the preference of the reader.

I agree with this but i was asking so a variety of authors could put in their two cents and maybe find out whether they are using too much or too little.

Give and take of opinions in this case is a good thing.

 

[FallingToFly]

About average for me...

Ah yes, Adrian. Therein lay the crux of Drake's frustration. Clarissa's oldest child had the golden good looks of a fallen angel, and the charm to match. Like Drake, he had ignored the heavy hints from his mother and Drake's father about tonight's dinner being a formal occasion, showing up in jeans that hugged his body like a lover's gaze and a grey silk shirt that made his remarkable storm-colored eyes even more striking. Beneath a careless, wavy mass of golden hair, his not-so-innocent eyes had followed Drake's every move, filled with uncertain attraction.

And:

Drake's half-naked body was tall and slender, like a finely tempered tool. It was his fantasies come to life; with shoulders almost too broad for such a narrow body, and a chest sheathed in the kind of hard, flat muscle that only comes from heavy physical labor. The black leather pants he had appeared at dinner in had scandalized his mother, but they framed the long legs and narrow hips perfectly, to Adrian's way of thinking. With his thick, blue-black hair pulled back into a ponytail and his arms folded over his magnificent chest, Drake looked like a romance novel pirate come to life.

I think that a paragraph of basic description, with details added as the story unfolds, helps build and refresh the character in the reader's mind. Then again- I love description, my computer fonts should all default to purple. I enjoy touching all five sense in the process of setting a scene- in this case-

Sight: the physical attributes of the two men involved
Sound: the clink of glasses and the crackle of the fire, laughter, and voices
Touch: the textures of the room- furniture, floors, temperature, skin, hair, etc
Smell: Smoke, shampoo and leather
Taste: Whiskey, port, skin

Long ago, when I was taught to do creative writing in elementary school, our teacher started us off with a project called "what it is..."

(color) looks like
(color) sounds like
(color) feels like
(color) smells like
(color) tastes like

When we finished, she explained that any story, in order to be "real" in the mind required a basis for the reader to connect. By using the elements by which we live our lives, we create a "reality" to our stories that allow the reader to suspend belief and enter the world we create for them.

 

[amicus]

After I understood, "plot, plot, plot" as the three essential ingredients in any fictional story, and after the initial flush of success in 'plotting' out a story, beginning, middle and end...I gave some not so small considerations to 'character' in the fictional people I created on a blank page.

I would suggest, with no small amount of uncertainty, that your 'main' character, leave the 'secondaries' for a later discussion, should be introduced with the bare minimum of description, be it physical or psychological, and let the circumstances of the story develope your character to fit the scene, plot and intricacies as the action and internal conflicts develope.

This is where I, personally, run into a brick wall with my fellow Litsters. I maintain that your main character must, must be consistent and congruent with every aspect of his or her personality that you, as the creator, endow them with.

You have to have a 'vision' of who this person is, why they are as they are, and where those characteristics will logically and inevitably lead them to be.

In all my stories, I 'know' who my guys are and who my gals are, and I 'know' what I want them to say and be.

You won't like this, from our previous encounters, but your characters will express your own, personal, 'sense of life', and anything else you offer that contradicts that, will come across as shallow characters.

A lot of writers say writing is fun, fuck them, it is the hardest and the loneliest work you will ever do.

Amicus

 

[TxRad]

About average for me...



And:



I think that a paragraph of basic description, with details added as the story unfolds, helps build and refresh the character in the reader's mind. Then again- I love description, my computer fonts should all default to purple. I enjoy touching all five sense in the process of setting a scene- in this case-

Sight: the physical attributes of the two men involved
Sound: the clink of glasses and the crackle of the fire, laughter, and voices
Touch: the textures of the room- furniture, floors, temperature, skin, hair, etc
Smell: Smoke, shampoo and leather
Taste: Whiskey, port, skin

Long ago, when I was taught to do creative writing in elementary school, our teacher started us off with a project called "what it is..."

(color) looks like
(color) sounds like
(color) feels like
(color) smells like
(color) tastes like

When we finished, she explained that any story, in order to be "real" in the mind required a basis for the reader to connect. By using the elements by which we live our lives, we create a "reality" to our stories that allow the reader to suspend belief and enter the world we create for them.

A good teacher is always a bonus. I just wish I had paid more attention back then but who knew.

 

[scriptordelecto]

I like to feed bits of the description at a time, especially if the characters are already acquainted. This bit is from the piece I'm working on now.

“I’m going to find him. I’m going to do it before he hurts anyone else.” His voice was barely above a whisper. He was sure he hadn’t spoken loud enough for anyone else to hear him, but he straightened from the body to find a pair of piercing blue eyes assessing him.

He’d be damned if he would act apologetic. He met the gaze steadily, unable to read the expression on the man’s face. Cameron Michaels was a master at hiding his emotions. As Medical Examiner, he had to be. Bennett would have thought the man completely desensitized to death, but every now and then, he’d catch a glimpse of something in the man’s eyes that proved he was still human. Ben gave a slight nod and stepped aside to let him get closer to the body.

“Ready to get to work Doc?”

 

[mynameisben]

I posted this in another thread but thought it might be an interesting question for here.

Characters:

How much information is enough for a reader to see the character in their mind? How much information do we as writers want to give and how much should we let the reader flesh out the character to suit themselves?

These are important questions. If we give too much information then the character is locked in to our mental image and may put the reader off. If there is not enough then the character become nothing but a cardboard cut out.

Where is the line?

This really comes down to a matter of style. If I (or anyone else) told you the best way to paint your characters, and you took that advice, you'd be writing crap.

That said, here are a few simple guidelines that I follow:

* If the character is mysterious, magical or evil, supply minimal description.

* If the character is outgoing, provide more description.

* If the character is based on your mother-in-law, then drag that pus-dripping, festering cunt across the coals and detail every carbuncle, every hairy facial hemorrhoid, and every character flaw your imagination can dredge up from the depths of hell, from whence she slithered.

 

[TxRad]

I like to feed bits of the description at a time, especially if the characters are already acquainted. This bit is from the piece I'm working on now.

“I’m going to find him. I’m going to do it before he hurts anyone else.” His voice was barely above a whisper. He was sure he hadn’t spoken loud enough for anyone else to hear him, but he straightened from the body to find a pair of piercing blue eyes assessing him.

He’d be damned if he would act apologetic. He met the gaze steadily, unable to read the expression on the man’s face. Cameron Michaels was a master at hiding his emotions. As Medical Examiner, he had to be. Bennett would have thought the man completely desensitized to death, but every now and then, he’d catch a glimpse of something in the man’s eyes that proved he was still human. Ben gave a slight nod and stepped aside to let him get closer to the body.

“Ready to get to work Doc?”

This works and works well.

But what i find with new readers is that they are more influenced by the visual media. The character is up there on the screen for you to study. Wardrobe has done its job, the background and foreground are carefully staged. Detail's, details, and more details.

New writer get bogged down in trying to do the same thing with words. I think that is why new writers seem to use so much intro, blocks and blocks of it when a little of the right stuff goes a long ways.

So, what is the right stuff? We have some good examples to pick and choice through.