'Re-describing' a character in a sequel.

lovecraft68

Bad Doggie
Joined
Jul 13, 2009
Posts
45,688
In our stories/books what have you, we tell the reader what our MC and supporting characters look like.

Some people do this subtly, a little at a time, others its a long info dump, but regardless of how its done, its necessary,

But in the case of a sequel(not a steady on going series, but a second book with months in between) how do you handle this?

Do you use the general assumption no one will read it who has not read the first and knows the characters appearance and be pretty vague about it.

Or do you take into consideration there could be people reading two before one and go into the whole nine yards again?

Thoughts?
 
I assume each might be read by a standalone and repeat descriptions with at least a bit of variation--not in the description of the character but in the wording used to convey it.
 
I assume each might be read by a standalone and repeat descriptions with at least a bit of variation--not in the description of the character but in the wording used to convey it.

So do it, but don't be repetitive. Makes sense.
 
I assume each might be read by a standalone and repeat descriptions with at least a bit of variation--not in the description of the character but in the wording used to convey it.

I'm with Pilot. I'm disenchanted with multi-part series, and stories with headnotes that say "this won't make any sense to you if you don't first read the first fifty chapters" piss me off.

So I re-introduce the major characters with different words and often different emphases.
 
I don't typically write sequels but I have written a few spin-offs where some of the minor characters from the first story become the headline for the new story. When I do that I try to keep my descriptions consistent as far as technicalities go, but I don't obsess over the details. I figure people change. Hell my wife goes from platinum blonde to raven-haired to Purple streaks in bleach blonde to green spikes. Sometimes all in the same week. So if I say she has dirty blonde hair in one story and in the next she has strawberry blonde hair, it could just be that she put in highlights. And maybe she gained a little weight between stories, or lost a little.

The only descriptions I truly obsess over is personality. I want to have the personality make sense from story to story. So a shy reserved gal in story one won't magically become super slut in story two ... without a reason anyway.
 
If you want the reader to "get" that you're bringing a character back (like bringing a minor character back to be the protagonist or vice versa), you do have to make them identifiable to the reader as the exact same character, not an indication that you write the same character all the time.
 
Or you could put a Prologue in the second one that's a synopses of the first. Just a thought.
 
Just a thought...

I'm not a big believer in describing the character the first time. I'd rather describe how he/she thinks and talks...and let the reader fill out their own fantasy of how they might look.
 
Yeah, I have to disagree with the premise of this thread. I keep physical descriptions to the absolute minimum. If it is important to the story what color hair a character has, or what body type, I'll find a way to sneak it in. But in general I'll let the reader picture the character any way they want to.

Their personality, of course, is very important to the story, but describing that falls under the rule to "show, don't tell."
 
Yeah, I have to disagree with the premise of this thread. I keep physical descriptions to the absolute minimum. If it is important to the story what color hair a character has, or what body type, I'll find a way to sneak it in. But in general I'll let the reader picture the character any way they want to.

Their personality, of course, is very important to the story, but describing that falls under the rule to "show, don't tell."

I have to agree with this. When I find myself forcing a description into a story, I hit the backspace key. I prefer only the basics.
 
The issue with mine is she has some special features that the reader has to be aware of as some of her abilities are tied to runes and symbols tattooed on her body.
 
The issue with mine is she has some special features that the reader has to be aware of as some of her abilities are tied to runes and symbols tattooed on her body.

I was inclined, until I read this to say don't worry repeating a physical description in the sequel, but now you mention its key to the plot I would say crowbar it in there some how, but the more but you can be the better.

More generally, I want to know what the characters i'm reading look like, i get antsy if i haven't figured it out by half way through a book and personally I tend to do physical descriptions through the eyes of another character but fairly minimally.
 
Yeah, I have to disagree with the premise of this thread. I keep physical descriptions to the absolute minimum. If it is important to the story what color hair a character has, or what body type, I'll find a way to sneak it in. But in general I'll let the reader picture the character any way they want to.

Their personality, of course, is very important to the story, but describing that falls under the rule to "show, don't tell."
I respectfully disagree with this. I like to paint a picture for my reader. I wouldn't describe a rose without telling the reader its color and likewise I describe my characters.

I don't like descriptions that are forced and I don't like giving out stats. That is not painting a picture. But when a man sees a beautiful woman and I'm describing what he sees, I'm probably going to mention hair color as well as eye color, skin color, and what she smells and sounds like.

That is probably why I write porn and not erotica :rolleyes:
 
I don't do too much description of the protagonist most of the time. I often just have the protagonist shown as sexual attractive to a bunch of the other characters and let the reader fill in what that means.
 
I respectfully disagree with this. I like to paint a picture for my reader. I wouldn't describe a rose without telling the reader its color and likewise I describe my characters.

As a reader I don't really like having the characters described in physical detail. If they have features that are important to the story or to their characterization (perhaps they're very short or very tall, for instance) then that needs to be described.

I have a good imagination and I'd rather fill in the blanks myself rather than having the writer give me details that aren't important to the story. I suspect that most readers have pretty good imaginations, otherwise they would be watching something rather than reading.

My favorite serial story was C.S. Forester's Hornblower books. I recall that he did redescribe Hornblower's physical appearance in each story, but only as far as it was necessary to establish his gradual maturation, from a tall and awkward Midshipman to (eventually) the white-haired and rather rotund Admiral.

Incidentally, I'm not old enough to have read those stories when they originally came out, serialized in (I think) the Saturday Evening Post. My father read them that way. I checked the books out of the library.

Edit: It sometimes helps to check history.

C.S. Forester's Hornblower books weren't originally written serially. The first two books where the stories of Captain Hornblower, published in the late 30's. It probably was those stories that my father remembered as being serialized in the Saturday Evening Post. Forester filled in the earlier and later stories late in his career.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top