# When readers don't view your characters the way you do



## sunaynaprasad (Nov 8, 2013)

A review had said that my main character was not pretty, yet I described her a lot. The key features were tailbone length, pale blonde hair, skinny, and narrow shoulders, and I don't understand why someone wouldn't consider that pretty. It is similar to Barbie and because some people thought Barbie was too pretty, there is now a pudgier doll of her to make her more realistic. But back to my MC. I have always considered her pretty and still think she is incredibly beautiful. So why would someone not consider the key features I mentioned pretty?


----------



## FleshEater (Nov 8, 2013)

The way a reader interprets your character is all in the way you present them. If your reader doesn't find your character pretty, it's because you failed to invoke the image. There's no other reason. As writers, we're responsible for every detail. Usually theme is left to the readers imagination, since that isn't presented in such an up front manner.

Edit: Also, the terms you used in your post aren't exactly flattering. A tailbone is not sexy. Neither are the words skinny or pale.


----------



## Tettsuo (Nov 8, 2013)

FleshEater said:


> The way a reader interprets your character is all in the way you present them. If your reader doesn't find your character pretty, it's because you failed to invoke the image. There's no other reason. As writers, we're responsible for every detail. Usually theme is left to the readers imagination, since that isn't presented in such an up front manner.
> 
> Edit: Also, the terms you used in your post aren't exactly flattering. A tailbone is not sexy. Neither are the words skinny or pale.



This.

There's clearly something about the description of the character that gave the reader a different visual than the image in your head.

Honestly, from the description you provided, she's sounds scrawny.  Scrawny is very unattractive as it invokes an unhealthy image.


----------



## Terry D (Nov 8, 2013)

sunaynaprasad said:


> The key features were tailbone length, pale blonde hair, skinny, and narrow shoulders, and I don't understand why someone wouldn't consider that pretty.



How about; "She was as lithe and athletic as an Olympic gymnast with hair the color of an August sun." I really don't know what to say about the tailbone length, it doesn't seem like something I'd mention unless it was exceedingly long and prehensile.


----------



## sunaynaprasad (Nov 8, 2013)

My character's skinny body is actually pretty important because she doesn't get to eat what she likes.


----------



## Grape Juice Vampire (Nov 8, 2013)

sunaynaprasad said:


> A review had said that my main character was not pretty, yet I described her a lot.



Frequently describing a character will not make them beautiful or ugly, it's how and what you describe that does that. The way you have it now, it  sounds like she's a walking skeleton. The tailbone thing, that's  just so...awkward and unnecessary. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, but even a beholder uses flattering terms.


----------



## sunaynaprasad (Nov 8, 2013)

Tailbone length hair is a little bit past the hips. In other words, it is really long hair. If you search for it in Google, you'll get images of women with hair down to their butts.


----------



## SarahStrange (Nov 8, 2013)

Saying tailbone length hair is not a very pretty desfription. If I were you, I'd find some other way to describe the length. Say down to her hips, butt of waist. 

And you don't have to describe her using the word skinny, which has decidedly negative connotations. You could say slender, thin, whip thin. All of these have better connotations that skinny.


----------



## FleshEater (Nov 8, 2013)

We get that. What we're all saying is to describe it in a beautiful or sexy way. Also, her skinny body isn't important. All that's important is that she isn't indulging in foods she enjoys. Tell a reader your character is skinny once, and they got it. Tell them one hundred times, and that book will hit the wall and they won't buy anymore of what you're selling.

Her blonde hair rested on the small of her back, just above the pockets on her jeans. 

That, in my opinion, sounds much more attractive than tail-bone length pale blonde hair.


----------



## sunaynaprasad (Nov 8, 2013)

When I say my character is skinny, I say it once and I use it in a back story. It talks about how her uncle puts her and her cousin on a strict diet, despite their skinny bodies. When I say tailbone length hair, I also add "a few inches past the hips."


----------



## Kevin (Nov 8, 2013)

So...what's your explanation then?


----------



## bookmasta (Nov 8, 2013)

sunaynaprasad said:


> A review had said that my main character was not pretty, yet I described her a lot. The key features were tailbone length, pale blonde hair, skinny, and narrow shoulders, and I don't understand why someone wouldn't consider that pretty. It is similar to Barbie and because some people thought Barbie was too pretty, there is now a pudgier doll of her to make her more realistic. But back to my MC. I have always considered her pretty and still think she is incredibly beautiful. So why would someone not consider the key features I mentioned pretty?


When I read the initial description my mind drifted towards the opposite, like a person who had anorexia and not someone who was pretty. If you're looking for pretty, I would go along with facial features rather than describing someone as lithe and skinny. That being said, athletic would be a much better choice of words.


----------



## FleshEater (Nov 8, 2013)

sunaynaprasad said:


> When I say my character is skinny, I say it once and I use it in a back story. It talks about how her uncle puts her and her cousin on a strict diet, despite their skinny bodies. When I say tailbone length hair, I also add "a few inches past the hips."



Okay. No matter what, tail-bone doesn't invoke an image of beauty, or pretty. Neither does skinny. 

I think there have been enough answers in this thread. Are you trying to justify her beauty to yourself, or to us now?


----------



## Kyle R (Nov 8, 2013)

You could also describe how other characters react to her appearance. From their reactions, the reader will get a good measuring stick for how attractive she is.

If you have other characters sneaking glances at her, or swooning over her beauty, the reader will consider her beautiful. And vice-versa, as well as everything in between.

It touches on the old discussion favorite (or not-so-favorite) topic: Show, don't tell! :encouragement:


----------



## sunaynaprasad (Nov 8, 2013)

Okay. Maybe I didn't describe her well enough to make readers view me the way I do. On the bright side, though, I can change the way I describe her in future books. I can find different ways to say tailbone and skinny to make them sound more fun.


----------



## Morkonan (Nov 8, 2013)

sunaynaprasad said:


> A review had said that my main character was not pretty, yet I described her a lot. The key features were tailbone length, pale blonde hair, skinny, and narrow shoulders, and I don't understand why someone wouldn't consider that pretty. It is similar to Barbie and because some people thought Barbie was too pretty, there is now a pudgier doll of her to make her more realistic. But back to my MC. I have always considered her pretty and still think she is incredibly beautiful. *So why would someone not consider the key features I mentioned pretty?*


 (Emphasis mine)

Because, silly, you didn't do your job right. 

Also, it's likely that you didn't include the reaction of other characters to your character. It's all well and good to go through the motions of physical description (Actually, it's not all well and good to do that...) but if you don't include some reactions or observations of other characters, then you're leaving everything entirely up to your descriptions and your reader's interpretations of them. In short, do yourself a favor and let another character "see" this pretty character of yours.
_
"Hair all the way down, legs all the way up, I would have sacrificed my truck to the god of good luck if she had just glanced my way. Darn, that girl was pretty."_

There, not one bit of plain physical description, but you now know that at least one person thinks the girl was pretty and you have a couple of fairly innocuous attributes (long hair, long legs) to emphasize that fact. There is nothing further needed. I could write fifty-thousand words about this girl and I wouldn't have to include any more physical description. All I'd have to do is, from time to time, include a remark by another character or the narrator that the girl was "pretty." 

This doesn't mean that you must "tell" here, instead of "show." No, not at all. But, a pure physical description of a characteristic that you are treating as qualitative is NEVER going to work. I can not describe a "beautiful" painting to you. I will never be able to do that. Instead, I can describe to you what I think are its beautiful qualities, then tell you that I think its beautiful. In a few, very rare, instances, I can give what is possibly a beautiful description, but that does not mean that you, as a Reader, will have the opinion that what is being described is "beautiful" until I TELL you that it has that qualitative value.


----------



## sunaynaprasad (Nov 8, 2013)

I've been thinking that maybe the way readers view your character's physical appearances isn't all that important. I may still think my MC is beautiful, but I think the way they act and interact is more essential than what they look like.


----------



## Kevin (Nov 8, 2013)

Oh, don't give up so easily. How 'bout this? : tell them that despite her being dirty, malnourished and perhaps bordering even on sickly, she possessed a certain beauty that others could readily see...or something like that. I think Victor Hugo did that a couple of times, in the only book I ever read by him,_ Les..._


----------



## Apple Ice (Nov 9, 2013)

I think a rather easy way to bypass this is to just say she's pretty. There is such a thing as a skinny and pretty person. Don't give too much description, only what you need. Saying skinny and pretty with blonde hair will automatically make the reader create a skinny and pretty character according to their preference. Best to just let the readers come up with the characters appearance I think

Although I don't particularly like her, Kiera Knightly is a fairly recognizable skinny pretty woman.


----------



## The Tourist (Nov 9, 2013)

I think we're trying to find "literary" reasons for a far simpler condition.  Here's what struck me:

_"now a pudgier doll of her"_

You simply have differing taste in women.  Give you a fer-instance, that being my own father.  He was the kind of easy-to-offend micro-manager that considered anyone else's free choices to denigrate his.  The character of Sheldon Cooper on "The Big Bang" is a classic example.  And in like manner, he used to comment on every girl I brought home because my taste in just about everything irritated him.

I don't think it's just the "readers" and the illusion of them "not getting it."  You're baffled that the example you set is not the gold standard.  This bled through your prose when the adjective you used (pudgier) was more of a epithet than something to define a comparison.

Clearly, writers choose characters with attributes they admire.  However, the play's the thing, not your esthetic.  Personally, anorexic paper dolls bore the snot out of me.  Give me a woman--and a story's female lead--that leaves bruises and fond memories.  It's what I told my dad...


----------



## Gamer_2k4 (Nov 9, 2013)

sunaynaprasad said:


> I've been thinking that maybe the way readers view your character's physical appearances isn't all that important. I may still think my MC is beautiful, but I think the way they act and interact is more essential than what they look like.



You got it.  Appearances rarely matter; what matters is the character.  I couldn't even tell you what most of my characters look like.


----------



## Morkonan (Nov 9, 2013)

Gamer_2k4 said:


> You got it.  Appearances rarely matter; what matters is the character.  I couldn't even tell you what most of my characters look like.



Appearances _can_ matter. They don't have to, but they can also be a huge part of a character. If the writer gets it wrong and ends up with poor descriptions or even inaccurate ones, then it's worse than having no physical descriptions at all.

Darth Vader... Darth Vader's entrance in the first Star Wars movie is one of the most brilliant stage-entrances ever! Even though it's a movie, seeing it in writing wouldn't be too difficult. Just about everything we need to know about Darth Vader could be included in his physical description and the description of his first entrance. Intruding, violating the safety of the white-walled, innocent (even virginal), spaceship, he moves from a cloud of smoke, debris and dust into full view, ominous black armor, featureless face with no hint of human compassion or empathy, his powerful, confident strides, complete and utter belief in his mastery of his immediate surroundings as he towers over the minions surrounding him... blah blah blah. That sort of description matters. It's too important to leave up to "in walks this big scary guy."

I do agree that not all physical descriptions matter. But, certainly, one can do a great deal with them and they can turn from being a hindrance to being a great help in creating the overall personae of a character.


----------



## Elowan (Nov 10, 2013)

FleshEater said:


> The way a reader interprets your character is all in the way you present them. If your reader doesn't find your character pretty, it's because you failed to invoke the image. There's no other reason. As writers, we're responsible for every detail. Usually theme is left to the readers imagination, since that isn't presented in such an up front manner.
> 
> Edit: Also, the terms you used in your post aren't exactly flattering. A tailbone is not sexy. Neither are the words skinny or pale.



Well said and very much on point.


----------



## The Tourist (Nov 10, 2013)

FleshEater said:


> tail-bone doesn't invoke an image of beauty, or pretty. Neither does skinny.



Since me wife is a teacher, this is the element that troubled me the most.  To many girls, this is the new concept of "beauty."  You know, that magic zone where "anorexia just short of death" is the new black.


----------



## Morkonan (Nov 10, 2013)

The Tourist said:


> Since me wife is a teacher, this is the element that troubled me the most.  To many girls, this is the new concept of "beauty."  You know, that magic zone where "anorexia just short of death" is the new black.



Yeah, what's with that? What's this whole "Thigh Gap" thing I keep hearing about? WTF?

Anyway, one thing I think we might overlook is that writers sometimes write for the times. I think the old Beehive hairdo's, with thirty-pounds of mislabeled spackling paste used as hair spray, are hideous. I think things hide in that hair, things that we're better off not knowing about. It's also much more likely for aliens to be able to infiltrate our society and place mind-control devices in PEZ dispensers as long as those Beehive hairdos can camouflage them....

But, "beauty" sometimes has a component that is entirely dependent upon the Era. It's for this reason that using the word "pretty"  or "beautiful" to describe a pretty or beautiful girl actually _works_ and will work just as well in the next decade as it will today. Within the slight ambiguity in the use of that word, there's really no ambiguity to be found in its_ function_. But, describe someone's physical appearance and their "majestic Beehive hairdo, armored with epoxy and hiding a legion of alien invaders..." Well, you get the idea - Sometimes, just saying someone is "pretty" is enough to make them "pretty" in the eyes of the Reader, no matter the Era or the current fads surrounding "beauty."


----------



## MrPizzle (Nov 10, 2013)

Everyone perceives beauty in a different way, the reader did not find your character attractive. Probably like's bigger girls or someone who isn't white.


----------



## TheYellowMustang (Nov 15, 2013)

sunaynaprasad said:


> A review had said that my main character was not pretty, yet I described her a lot. The key features were tailbone length, pale blonde hair, skinny, and narrow shoulders, and I don't understand why someone wouldn't consider that pretty. It is similar to Barbie and because some people thought Barbie was too pretty, there is now a pudgier doll of her to make her more realistic. But back to my MC. I have always considered her pretty and still think she is incredibly beautiful. So why would someone not consider the key features I mentioned pretty?



I'm confused. If the character being attractive was important to the plot, then the person who read it wouldn't have assumed she was ugly. Ergo, I'm guessing it wasn't really connected to the plot itself..? So why does it matter if he/she didn't find her pretty? Or if no one did for that matter?

And I agree Barbie is pretty, I just don't agree she'd be pretty as a human. Also, I think that if you're going to describe someone as "skinny" (a word that I think has some negative connotations) you should add something to explain why it wasn't a bad thing. For example, you could have someone say/think: "She was skinnier than a poor man's wallet, but oddly it suited her. She had a small frame, and her body had a soft, feminine quality - curvy and smooth like a vase." 

Okay that wasn't very good, but you see my point.


----------



## Gamer_2k4 (Nov 15, 2013)

TheYellowMustang said:


> Also, I think that if you're going to describe someone as "skinny" (a word that I think has some negative connotations) you should add something to explain why it wasn't a bad thing.



I prefer the words "slim" or "slender."  Skinny, to me, means "not curvy" - a connotation these alternatives don't share.


----------



## Macduff Inkwell (Nov 15, 2013)

As others said, what you described is a girl who appears to be half-starved. As for her tailbone length? Er, don't take this the wrong way, but to me that gave to mind some sort of deformity she has, like a lump of flesh that looks like a tail stump. 

Let me try to rearrange her description:

"The girl was of medium height with curved, slim features. Her light-yellow hair was short, ending in curled tips just shy of her small, curved shoulders."

As TheYellowMustang said, you can still have her be skinny, and add something like, "...but she couldn't give less of a damn about her appearance."

How's that?


----------



## sunaynaprasad (Nov 15, 2013)

I mentioned in an earlier post that what she looks like isn't as important than how she acts. I realized that a character's behavior will impact the way the reader views more than what they look like. And about tailbone length hair, it is really long and a little bit past the hips.


----------



## David Gordon Burke (Nov 15, 2013)

Hence the benefit of not giving physical descriptions of characters.  If the other elements of the story ie: other character's reactions give a beautiful 'air' to the character, the character will be seen as beautiful.  

Physical descriptions are like reading shopping lists.  Without envoking the 'Adverb Avengers' I'd say stay away from them as much or more than words that end with 'LY.'

Case in point - 50 shades of Grey - apparently (haven't read it - I'm too busy trying to catch all the missed episodes of Three's Company that I can see on-line) the book is rife with redundant descriptions of the main characters - chapter after chapter full of it.  SCARY.  That's what I call a Horror novel.  

David Gordon Burke


----------



## Alabastrine (Nov 15, 2013)

sunaynaprasad said:


> A review had said that my main character was not pretty, yet I described her a lot. The key features were tailbone length, pale blonde hair, skinny, and narrow shoulders, and I don't understand why someone wouldn't consider that pretty. It is similar to Barbie and because some people thought Barbie was too pretty, there is now a pudgier doll of her to make her more realistic. But back to my MC. I have always considered her pretty and still think she is incredibly beautiful. So why would someone not consider the key features I mentioned pretty?



From the description that you just gave her right there ^ ... I didn't picture someone very pretty. I pictured a bony, scrawny malnourished girl with long straggly hair. Most people I've seen with really long hair that length looks like it needs to be cut and taken better care of.


----------



## Jeko (Nov 15, 2013)

> A review had said that my main character was not pretty, yet I described her a lot.



There's your problem.


----------



## Gamer_2k4 (Nov 15, 2013)

Macduff Inkwell said:


> As for her tailbone length? Er, don't take this the wrong way, but to me that gave to mind some sort of deformity she has, like a lump of flesh that looks like a tail stump.



You ran into the problem that got a couple of us confused (myself included).  "The key features were tailbone length, pale blonde hair" doesn't mean that both her tailbone length and pale blonde hair are distinct features; it means she has pale blonde hair that extends to her tailbone.  The comma could probably be removed to aid clarity.


----------



## TheYellowMustang (Nov 15, 2013)

David Gordon Burke said:


> Hence the benefit of not giving physical descriptions of characters.  If the other elements of the story ie: other character's reactions give a beautiful 'air' to the character, the character will be seen as beautiful.
> 
> Physical descriptions are like reading shopping lists.  Without envoking the 'Adverb Avengers' I'd say stay away from them as much or more than words that end with 'LY.'
> 
> ...



Actually - and this is not me making fun of the book, I really mean it - skimming through half of Fifty Shades was very educational for me. She breaks all of those classic rules people kept telling me to learn (in crits and such), and not subtly either, which is great for those of us who are in the early stages of learning to write well. It just showed me exactly why those rules shouldn't be broken, and how annoying the writing can become when they are. 

Again, this wasn't a dis. That book made the writer filthy rich, so there's obviously some genius in it.


----------

