# Are the eyes and hair enough?



## MzSnowleopard (Sep 22, 2014)

When it comes to the limited word length of short stories- some magazines max out at 5,000 words, some academic programs max out at 3,000 words- do you think that a writer can get away with a limited description on a character like mentioning the color of the eyes and or the hair, maybe a vocal accent? 

I'm asking because my current story is maxed by the assignment at 3,000 words. As it is now, it's at 2,326. And there are 3 characters that have no description.


----------



## altoid967 (Sep 22, 2014)

I would think so. The eyes and hair are usually the most prominent feature. The rest can be filled in by the imagination of the reader.


----------



## Blade (Sep 22, 2014)

I would think so as well. The whole attraction and challenge of a short story, IMHO, is to do more with less. Skeletal description allows the reader to imagine and fill in the blanks.


----------



## Sam (Sep 22, 2014)

I rarely describe my characters at all. I leave most, if not all, of that to the reader's imagination. They're going to picture the character themselves anyway. Why waste words?


----------



## dale (Sep 22, 2014)

Sam said:


> I rarely describe my characters at all. I leave most, if not all, of that to the reader's imagination. They're going to picture the character themselves anyway. Why waste words?



i agree with this. sometimes it matters, like if you're trying to establish an ethnicity or describe an alien planet race or something like that. 
but i think leaving the reader to develop their own imaginative physical renderings of the characters as much as possible is the best way.
it lets a person relate more to the characters if they can somehow personalize them.


----------



## T.S.Bowman (Sep 22, 2014)

Snow..in all 85k (so far) of Side Worlds, I think MAYBE 100 of them have been used describing the characters. That includes the MC.

Like Sam said, and like I told you yesterday, a reader is going to "see" the characters however _they_ want to see them no matter how detailed (also known as BORING) the description is.


----------



## Cran (Sep 23, 2014)

Agreeing with all replies before me; unless there is a particular something or somethings about a character that you want your reader to build into that mental image - in which case, do it as early as possible - let it slide. Your reader will construct how the character looks, sounds, even smells, often without thinking about it and often with far more detail and depth than any description from you could match.


----------



## popsprocket (Sep 23, 2014)

Hair and eyes are enough.

My big two would be hair and whether or not they're good looking. Mostly because I rarely take note of other people's eye colour when meeting them so including it seems a little weird.

If I could add a third short descriptor that'd make it hair, good looking or not, height (relative to other characters). So for example, the pretty, blonde girl who the POV character thinks of as short or tall or whatever.


----------



## InkwellMachine (Sep 23, 2014)

Don't be afraid of more general descriptions. One of my recent favorites came from _Fragile Things, _by Neil Gaiman. "Face like a hatchet." Not even that specific of an image, but it certainly embedded character qualities into my mind.

But as everyone else on the forum will probably tell you, visual descriptions aren't usually as important as new writers make them out to be. Only point out things that having some bearing on your story, aesthetically or otherwise. I tend to stick with the features that imply the most about the character. Maybe someone has red rings under their eyes from too many sleepless nights, or has the face of a teenager, rashed and riddled with pustules. I wouldn't bother pointing out that someone has innocuous brown hair and green eyes though--unless I was writing romance, that is, where characters are prone to becoming stricken by the looks of other characters.

Short answer, only describe things that really do need a description. Otherwise, leave it up to the reader's imagination.


----------



## stevesh (Sep 23, 2014)

Should be enough, but I wonder if three named, described characters are too many for 3000 words.


----------



## MzSnowleopard (Sep 23, 2014)

I like the idea of giving just enough to churn the readers imagination. To give an example- this is what I have on the teen's description:



> "Hey kiddo you coming?" He called out to fifteen year old Jessica who was restocking a bin with water bottles.
> 
> She looked up and smiled. Her blue eyes sparkled with excitement. "Are you serious?"
> 
> ...


----------



## Bishop (Sep 23, 2014)

In addition to what's been said, a lot of who a character is, what they are, comes out from their actions and their words far more than what color underwear they're wearing that day.


----------



## Terry D (Sep 23, 2014)

Bishop said:


> In addition to what's been said, a lot of who a character is, what they are, comes out from their actions and their words far more than what color underwear they're wearing that day.



The door to the dank, gloomy cell slammed shut behind me. It took a few long moments for my eyes to begin adjusting to what little light seeped through the tiny windows far overhead, but my nose detected his rank presence instantly, and I heard his shallow breathing and the soft, wet sounds of his feet against the stone floor as he approached. He was huge; his body covered with ropes of scar-tissue, his shoulders and back slumped as if weary of carrying his own weight. I'd encountered trolls before, but this one was different. I knew I was in trouble when it shuffled into the dim glow and I saw the pink thong wrapped tightly around its thick loins.


----------



## Bishop (Sep 23, 2014)

Terry D said:


> The door to the dank, gloomy cell slammed shut behind me. It took a few long moments for my eyes to begin adjusting to what little light seeped through the tiny windows far overhead, but my nose detected his rank presence instantly, and I heard his shallow breathing and the soft, wet sounds of his feet against the stone floor as he approached. He was huge; his body covered with ropes of scar-tissue, his shoulders and back slumped as if weary of carrying his own weight. I'd encountered trolls before, but this one was different. I knew I was in trouble when it shuffled into the dim glow and I saw the pink thong wrapped tightly around its thick loins.



Yeah, but how he _handles _that pink thong... that's what really tells you who he is. 

EDIT:

Also, thank you Google:


----------



## Gamer_2k4 (Sep 23, 2014)

Sometimes they're too much.


----------



## T.S.Bowman (Sep 23, 2014)

> "Hey kiddo you coming?" He called out to fifteen year old Jessica who was restocking a bin with water bottles.
> 
> She looked up and smiled. Her blue eyes sparkled with excitement. "Are you serious?"
> 
> ...



That, for me, is plenty to get an image of what Jessca and everyone else looks like.


----------



## Newman (Sep 23, 2014)

MzSnowleopard said:


> do you think that a writer can get away with a limited description on a character like mentioning the color of the eyes and or the hair, maybe a vocal accent?
> 
> I'm asking because my current story is maxed by the assignment at 3,000 words. As it is now, it's at 2,326. And there are 3 characters that have no description.



For me, what the character feels and believes is most important. When I use description, it's to reflect that. Color of eyes and hair is unimportant IMO.


----------



## Jeko (Sep 23, 2014)

I can understand hair, but eyes_? _That's one of the last things I recognise and remember about a person.

I also wouldn't limit yourself to specifics; write in such a way that the reader gets the impression you want them to get. 'A face like a geometry set' is more general, for example, but it gives me a lot more than if I were to try to describe each bit of his face in a geometry-set-ish sort of way.


----------



## MzSnowleopard (Sep 23, 2014)

I agree about the feelings, I spend more time on Lynn's reaction to the unexpected arrival of her bo.


----------



## Offeiriad (Sep 23, 2014)

If you ever want to know how readers feel about their own vision of a character in any series, join a forum which focuses on one big series of books. If it's popular, there will be a thread about who people think should play certain roles were a film to be made based on the series. There will be many different ideas and all of them equally valid because we all see others - even in our daily lives - differently.


----------



## dale (Sep 23, 2014)

i don't even like when the book cover has artist renderings of the characters on it. i remember reading the hobbit and the drawing of bilbo
on the front looked nothing like how i pictured him in my mind and it irritated me to look at it.


----------



## Bishop (Sep 23, 2014)

dale said:


> i don't even like when the book cover has artist renderings of the characters on it. i remember reading the hobbit and the drawing of bilbo
> on the front looked nothing like how i pictured him in my mind and it irritated me to look at it.



I had the same issue with many a book...


----------



## T.S.Bowman (Sep 23, 2014)

That's why, when I am trying to think of cover art, I mostly picture my MC with his back turned to the reader.


----------



## Offeiriad (Sep 23, 2014)

I don't want people on the cover of my book, if I ever get to that stage.


----------



## Pidgeon84 (Sep 23, 2014)

Whatever you want to do. You could probably get away with more, you could probably get away with less. You know man, whatever you feel the story needs. I would generally like a little more than that but it's NBD if you don't go that way.


----------



## dale (Sep 23, 2014)

T.S.Bowman said:


> That's why, when I am trying to think of cover art, I mostly picture my MC with his back turned to the reader.


or leave their figures kind of shadowed in a creatively mysterious way. something like that.


----------



## T.S.Bowman (Sep 23, 2014)

Offeiriad said:


> I don't want people on the cover of my book, if I ever get to that stage.



I would go that direction except for the fact that the concept of the book would seem to make him being on the cover in some way pretty integral.

- - - Updated - - -



dale said:


> or leave their figures kind of shadowed in a creatively mysterious way. something like that.



Something like that.


----------



## Poet of Gore (Sep 23, 2014)

MzSnowleopard said:


> When it comes to the limited word length of short stories- some magazines max out at 5,000 words, some academic programs max out at 3,000 words- do you think that a writer can get away with a limited description on a character like mentioning the color of the eyes and or the hair, maybe a vocal accent?
> 
> I'm asking because my current story is maxed by the assignment at 3,000 words. As it is now, it's at 2,326. And there are 3 characters that have no description.



i think you need to add a veiny beak or maybe some tentacles and dry skin or fish scales


----------



## MzSnowleopard (Sep 23, 2014)

Poet of Gore said:


> i think you need to add a veiny beak or maybe some tentacles and dry skin or fish scales



Ah but I do, just wait until the first fight scene between Lynn and a demon, for the most part I go with the idea they use in Supernatural, where demons possess humans ( in my books though, the people are willing participants who serve the demons and long to be among the possessed)

Anyway, I get a bit graphic in describing the demon - some people have said "that's gross" others say "that's cool, I can picture it."
Haven't considered a beak though- perhaps a vulture like demon?


----------



## T.S.Bowman (Sep 23, 2014)

Lots of demoons have vestigal wings. Why not add a beak?


----------



## MzSnowleopard (Sep 24, 2014)

that would make it difficult to speak, unless it was telepathic- which is a possibility in my series.


----------



## T.S.Bowman (Sep 24, 2014)

Telepathy could work. Might be stretching a bit though.

But, hey, it's your book. If you think it's a good idea, you'll figure a way to work it in.


----------



## Morkonan (Sep 24, 2014)

MzSnowleopard said:


> .. do you think that a writer can get away with a limited description on a character like mentioning the color of the eyes and or the hair, maybe a vocal accent?
> 
> ,,




I am going to tell you what a writer can "get away with." This one secret will give you the ability to immediately identify everything that you can sneak past the Reader or even your Publisher! Shhh... don't tell anyone!

Here's how to identify what you can get away with: If it's not necessary for the story, you can get away with not writing it.


OK, let's talk briefly about character descriptions: I don't know or remember whether or not some of my favorite characters are supposed to look like, according to their authors. In fact, there's nothing about how a character looks which is absolutely necessary to include unless it is either critical to the story or its description somehow adds to the value of the story.

"Tim had brown hair and hazel eyes." 

OK, does that add value to the story? Mabye... But, such a description doesn't really do much service to any sort of story, does it? At best, it gives the Reader some sort of idea what the person looks like. But, "what they look like" has no bearing on the story, does it? It's not even necessary for dialogue, action, introspection or anything that character does, is it? So, why include it? Writers are writers, not painters. We may expect to actually "see" a person when we interact with them on the street. But, in a written story, the Reader is internalizing all of that and doesn't need a visual representation of a person in order to figure out that when "Sam speaks" he's a "person", even though the author hasn't told them what Sam looks like.

"Clegg stood upon his box and gazed upon the crowd. His bald and wrinkled head swiveled on a neck that seemed much to fragile to support it. A wave of ducking heads marked the presence of his gaze as it slowly crept across the gathering, people instinctively ducking or turning their heads in order to ward off Clegg's attention. After a moment, he stepped down from his box, his stilt-like legs propelled him through the crowd as the people made way for him, his tremendous beaked nose serving as a rudder through a hesitant sea."

OK, this is a different sort of "character description" isn't it? It's still purely a physical description, but there's a Dickensonian quality about it. Clegg's physical description is provided as part of a literary style that uses such descriptions to give the Reader insight about certain sorts of characters. 

"Nelly was constantly in motion. It seemed that what people often called "nervous energy" was what Nelly depended upon to fuel her life. Whatever it was, it certainly wasn't food. Whenever we had lunch together, Nelly never took the time to enjoy whatever it was she was eating. I don't even think she noticed, herself. Instead, she wolfed it down without hesitation, leaving us to fend for ourselves before anyone had even begun their own meals. Hair habitually wild and unkempt and eyes that never properly stayed still within their sockets, a nervous twitch one could watch cycle across her body and return to where it started, only to begin again, Nelly was the most nervous dog I had ever known."

Did any of that "character description" include anything specifically "physical?" No. With the exception of "wild unkempt hair" and a bit about the "eyes", there are no physical descriptions. Indeed, we don't even find out that Nelly is a dog until the end of the paragraph. But, does her being a "dog" have anything at all to do with our interpretation of her description? Absolutely not - It still applies equally, since we're writing a story and all stories have characters, even if they're just a dog...

It is likely that nobody cares what any of your characters look like, MzSnowleopard. And, it's for good reason - If their description brings nothing extra of value to the story, nobody is going to care about it. So, do these descriptions have anything of value that they add, besides the content of their words, for your story? Do they speak something extra to the Reader? If not, if they're just simply a physical description with no flair or literary merit, you know what you should do with such descriptions, right? Of course you do! Edit them out!

Worry more about giving the Reader enough information so that they can "picture" the character in their own imagination, without any silly worries about "physical description." For the majority of standard fiction, a physical description of a character isn't necessary. When it is, when you think it adds something of value to the story, make it a meaningful description. Use that opportunity to tell your Reader something "extra" about the character.

Lastly, I always reference Mervyn Peake whenever anyone posts a question regarding character descriptions and their use or necessity. Head over to this website and click on a few links to character descriptions written by Peake: http://www.mervynpeake.org/gormenghast/

Mervy Peake was an artist as well as a writer. Peake's Dickensonian style is perfect for incorporating his artist's eye for physical description. NONE of Peake's voluminous paragraphs of physical description fail to bring value to his stories. Each one is as wonderful to read as it is as meaningful for the story.

To sum: If it does not bring value to the story, either it's own or something meaningful for the plot or for the Reader, or is unnecessary fluff, don't write it. (Sorry, got some work going on at the house, so have been distracted while writing this. If something doesn't make sense, I'll fix it later.  )


----------



## dale (Sep 24, 2014)

T.S.Bowman said:


> Telepathy could work. Might be stretching a bit though.
> 
> But, hey, it's your book. If you think it's a good idea, you'll figure a way to work it in.



woody woodpecker and donald duck spoke with beaks.


----------



## Seedy M. (Sep 24, 2014)

I didn't describe my main character in the Nick Storie series. It was something that developed as the stories went along. Other than that he was a very large man (Paddy) or that he was a human mountain, not just big, but obese. You'd think a doctor would know better (Tiny) and that Marsha was black and that Lonnie was extraordinarily handsome, with a body like the famous David and very fine facial features, with light brown somewhat long hair and an always pleasant smile. No physical descriptions of them. Lonnie got the most description. In _Morality Play_, the 7th book in the series, a reviewer wrote, _I can picture Nick, Marsha, Tiny, and Paddy very easily, but I can't picture Lonnie, perhaps because I never met such a person._
In other words, the one with the most description was the one more people couldn't relate to. The ones not described were the ones people could picture in their mind.
In the SciFi things, of course, much more description is necessary. The beings described are nothing like the readers had ever seen.


----------



## Morkonan (Sep 24, 2014)

Seedy M. said:


> ...In the SciFi things, of course, much more description is necessary. The beings described are nothing like the readers had ever seen.



And, that's why many Science Fiction reader read that genre! Knowing one's audience is necessary for a good writer. Any rabid Science Fiction fan would go nuts if a new alien was introduced and they didn't get a description of it or a character's reaction to it! That's "bread and butter" sort of stuff for that genre.


----------



## MzSnowleopard (Sep 24, 2014)

I suppose that's one of the reasons I'm going along with the like of "budget friendly" sci-fi, with the exception of a handful of characters, my characters are human.


----------



## Seedy M. (Sep 24, 2014)

I have a galactic society. The only human in most of them (45 books) is Z until _Return to Earth_ and the last three or four books in the series.
_Return to Earth_ sort of tells it like I see it. If the policies of today are followed for 200 years - which would mean that Earth would be a radioactive dessert and there wouldn't be anything to write about except maybe Maita saying, in the first (and only) paragraph, *There isn't anything here! I can't see why you would want to see how things are progressing!*


----------



## Bishop (Sep 24, 2014)

Well, since we're talkin' about it, I have 4-5 'core' races that most of my characters stem from, but I'm trying to branch out as I create more races. I try to keep it varied, but my main character is almost always human, and there'll be one or two other humans within the cast, but always a mix of aliens in the bunch. Makes for some fun times to have variation, especially when cultural confusion props up and aids with both drama and comedy.


----------



## bazz cargo (Sep 24, 2014)

Female breast size.


----------



## Morkonan (Sep 24, 2014)

bazz cargo said:


> Female breast size.



My tiny, reptilian brain, cartwheeled over to my eyes and made them lock on your post, even though the font is smaller than anything on the page... Magnets, I tell you! _MAGNETS!_


----------



## T.S.Bowman (Sep 24, 2014)

dale said:


> woody woodpecker and donald duck spoke with beaks.



That is a damn good point. And I would think that a demon would have much more power than a duck or a woodpecker. For a demon, speaking should be easy as pie. *thumbsup*


----------



## Poet of Gore (Sep 25, 2014)

MzSnowleopard said:


> Ah but I do, just wait until the first fight scene between Lynn and a demon, for the most part I go with the idea they use in Supernatural, where demons possess humans ( in my books though, the people are willing participants who serve the demons and long to be among the possessed)
> 
> Anyway, I get a bit graphic in describing the demon - some people have said "that's gross" others say "that's cool, I can picture it."
> Haven't considered a beak though- perhaps a vulture like demon?



any orifice could have a beak or appendage


----------



## MzSnowleopard (Sep 25, 2014)

Morkonan said:


> My tiny, reptilian brain, cartwheeled over to my eyes and made them lock on your post, even though the font is smaller than anything on the page... Magnets, I tell you! _MAGNETS!_


ya think LOL ;-)


----------



## MzSnowleopard (Sep 26, 2014)

Anyway... This is what I have on Digger. I went a little more into the details because he's a prominent character in this scenario.

~

Digger was a lanky man, well tanned, with thin strands of white hair peaking from under his hardhat. Although he showed signs of aging, his hazel eyes were as bright and aware as anyway half his age. Still, his hands shook as he lifted a small leather satchel from the chest pocket of his faded overalls. The satchel was worn from age with its draw strings tied neatly in place.

~

- I've decided to take the other guy Jacob - since he has no description and seems to appear out of nowhere- and merge the two together. It will make for a more compelling event towards the end.


----------



## T.S.Bowman (Sep 26, 2014)

MzSnowleopard said:


> ADigger was a lanky man, well tanned, with thin strands of white hair peaking from under his hardhat. Although he showed signs of aging, his hazel eyes were as bright and aware as anyway half his age. Still, his hands shook as he lifted a small leather satchel from the chest pocket of his faded overalls. The satchel was worn from age with its draw strings tied neatly in place.



Ok.

I understand why you think you need to describe Digger that much. But what you need to understand is that most readers are going to get a "visual" of the character based on his name alone. "Digger" to me, conjures up and old, wrinkled dude. The rest  of the description you gave was just "fluff" to me. 

I'm not saying it's bad. You didn't get too wordy with it and that's a good thing. I, myself, just didn't need the rest of the description to "see" Digger.


My opinion only, of course.


----------



## Fivetide (Sep 26, 2014)

I once read, a good trick is to ask a friend to describe you in one sentence. Although it did backfire on me, I don’t know why she was so angry, this toilet seat rule is so complicated !


----------



## MzSnowleopard (Sep 26, 2014)

T.S.Bowman said:


> That's why, when I am trying to think of cover art, I mostly picture my MC with his back turned to the reader.


 


dale said:


> or leave their figures kind of shadowed in a creatively mysterious way. something like that.


 
Like they do with Malachi or is it Moluchi? on TV show Sleepy Hollow


----------



## T.S.Bowman (Sep 26, 2014)

MzSnowleopard said:


> Like they do with Malachi or is it Moluchi? on TV show Sleepy Hollow



I've never watched it.


----------



## MzSnowleopard (Sep 27, 2014)

It's an interesting take on the fable.


----------



## Deafmute (Sep 27, 2014)

yea many people have mentioned it, but I feel in a short story description is only there if its important. The readers will create a mental image for the character based on their personality, role, situation, all of which are more important than "he had blue eyes".

now if you want to talk about a scar on his left butt cheek, and use 1000 of your words to do so that may be totally valid as well. The story is most important description is a tool to enhance the story. If the description is important put it in, if not leave it out. Longer stories may benifit from rambling descriptive verse, but that all depends on the skill of the writer to keep the audience engaged while they do so. But in a short story description is much lower priority.


----------



## MzSnowleopard (Sep 30, 2014)

I see your point Deafmute, although if someone uses 1,000 words to describe a scar on a butt cheek- I don't want to read it- unless it's describing how the scar was obtain, so long as it's not perverted or sexual. It's not my thing.


----------



## T.S.Bowman (Sep 30, 2014)

MzSnowleopard said:


> I see your point Deafmute, although if someone uses 1,000 words to describe a scar on a butt cheek- I don't want to read it- unless it's describing how the scar was obtain, so long as it's not perverted or sexual. It's not my thing.



Never read anything by Jean Auel, then.

That woman can take 1000 words to describe a freaking blade of grass.


----------



## MzSnowleopard (Oct 1, 2014)

That's torture- plan and simple, torture.


----------



## T.S.Bowman (Oct 1, 2014)

MzSnowleopard said:


> That's torture- plan and simple, torture.



Oh it was. Hence my hatred for the writing of Jean Auel.


----------



## MzSnowleopard (Oct 1, 2014)

that kind of detail would put me to sleep.


----------



## T.S.Bowman (Oct 1, 2014)

MzSnowleopard said:


> that kind of detail would put me to sleep.



I'm not joking even a little when I say it was the single most tedious piece of writing I have ever read in my life. I forced myself to slog through it even though I shouldn't have.


----------



## MzSnowleopard (Oct 1, 2014)

I've come to realize in my writing that - aside from the main characters -I don't describe someone who appears once or only a few times, but the characters who are  secondary- ones who appear consistently, they do get descriptions. I know some people who think that this isn't enough, they want descriptions on every character. To me, that's just a waste of words. Why go into detail describing someone who appears in one or two scenes? For me, an exception to this would be the victim of killer.


----------



## T.S.Bowman (Oct 1, 2014)

I don't describe anyone who doesn't play a decent sized part in the story.

There is a race of people who only show up once, but they are pretty important, so I describe them. There is a Council that has several members, none of which I describe. 

I am a firm believer that the reader is going to fill in a lot, if not all, of the details of a characters look simply based on the characters attitude and actions.

My MC still hasn't been described except for hair color at this point. I may give him a bit more when he meets a certain character who is about to appear, but I kinda doubt it.


----------



## Santa (Oct 1, 2014)

Deafmute said:


> If the description is important put it in, if not leave it out. Longer stories may benifit from rambling descriptive verse, but that all depends on the skill of the writer to keep the audience engaged while they do so. But in a short story description is much lower priority.



Agreed. Tom Clancy could use a 1,000 words to describe a gun, but it wasn't necessary. I only describe characters if they are a main character and I want the reader to come away with a certain look or characteristic. Otherwise I stop at the eyes, hair and maybe height or build, as I believe the rest should be from the reader. I'd bet they would have a better description than me anyway!


----------



## MzSnowleopard (Oct 1, 2014)

T.S.Bowman said:


> I don't describe anyone who doesn't play a decent sized part in the story.
> 
> There is a race of people who only show up once, but they are pretty important, so I describe them. There is a Council that has several members, none of which I describe.
> 
> ...



That's the same for 'the council' in my current project- they are described as wearing long red robes and that's about it. The main reason is that that's all I see of them when I think about their scenes. The other is that I refuse to spend the word count describing each individual counselor - considering that there's 12 of them.

And a character that has 1 maybe 2 or 3 lines out of 80,000 words- Forgetaboutit! He'll get a name and maybe some actions but that's about it. With one character I handled this by using walkie-talkies (do they even call them this anymore?). And he's the funniest one in the scenario. We don't see him so there's no point in describing him. If he shows up later, which might be possible- then I'll say something.


----------



## colorfulpoet (Oct 4, 2014)

I sometimes think instead of saying what a person looks like, describe a bit about their appearance through action or dialogue. For example. Instead of: "Anne looked into the mirror and looked at her messy brown hair. She reached over and grabbed her hair brush and began on the tedious one hour task of brushing her luscious locks." I think you could incorporated it in an action or dialogue.

Anne was meeting up with Susan at the mall for the first time all summer. The two friends embraced in a hug after not seeing each other since the last day of school. Susan reached over to touch Anne's hair.
"I think the brown suits you? When did you get it dyed?" she asked.


----------



## Poet of Gore (Oct 4, 2014)

Santa said:


> Agreed. Tom Clancy could use a 1,000 words to describe a gun, but it wasn't necessary. I only describe characters if they are a main character and I want the reader to come away with a certain look or characteristic. Otherwise I stop at the eyes, hair and maybe height or build, as I believe the rest should be from the reader. I'd bet they would have a better description than me anyway!



one thing that kills me about king is every little character has to have some anecdote told about him. who cares?


----------



## ninjacover3d (Oct 8, 2014)

Let the minds of your reader do the work and stop getting yourself worried of the eyes and hair of your character.


----------



## MzSnowleopard (Oct 8, 2014)

not worried at all - as I had asked in my OP- 

do you think that a writer can get away with a limited description on a character like mentioning the color of the eyes and or the hair, maybe a vocal accent? 

I know some who think a writer needs to describe every detail of every character that appears in their works- no matter how much a character is used. 

Not to disrespect these people- I wanted to get the perspectives of others. Again, no worries about it.


----------



## T.S.Bowman (Oct 9, 2014)

MzSnowleopard said:


> do you think that a writer can get away with a limited description on a character like mentioning the color of the eyes and or the hair, maybe a vocal accent?




Not only CAN they get away with it, in a majority of cases they probably should try to. I am currently read Stolen Prey by John Sandford. In it, he describes Lucas Davenport as "rich", which would have been plenty. Instead of going with that, he started describing the 200 dollar shirt and Hermes tie and several other things in detail that I, as the reader, really didn't need to translate the word "rich."



> I know some who think a writer needs to describe every detail of every character that appears in their works- no matter how much a character is used.



I consider those writers to be, for the most part, afflicted with the "Look at MEEEEEEE!!!' Syndrome.

_"Look, everybody! See how great I am, I can use 500 words to describe someone's left shoe! Aren't I an awesome writer?"_


----------



## Bishop (Oct 10, 2014)

T.S.Bowman said:


> _"Look, everybody! See how great I am, I can use 500 words to describe someone's left shoe! Aren't I an awesome writer?"_



CHALLENGE ACCEPTED:

          I wore that left shoe longer than I wore the right one. I lost the right one in a canal a couple of weeks ago, and really couldn’t afford more shoes. The left one stayed on my foot, covering my sock and keeping me warm. Its worn, desolated leather flexed with an awful sound as I walked, and every time it did I longed for Rightie.

          Still, Lefty was good, and loyal, and being as homeless and downtrodden as I was, I counted myself lucky to have one shoe at all. They were once a two hundred dollar pair, when I was on Wall Street, but now were probably worth about thirteen cents. Wait, make that six and a half cents. Oh… Rightie, where are you?

          At one time they were black, but the wear and tear of the ground had long taken its toll on Lefty and reduced it to a brownish-blackish mess of dirt and mud-colored filth. It had begun to smell like the sewer where Old Mitsy, the cat lady with the shopping cart lived. That is, like dead fish and foot odor. Maybe with a hint of cheese. Either way, it was better smelling than Old Mitsy herself.

          The laces were frayed, with little lace-lets spewing out from the ends of the long worn down rope. They still gripped around my foot, so long as I didn’t tie them through the top loops of the wings of the shoe. That leather had snapped when I was being chased by the police out of that donut shop I tried to rob with my sewer shank—I think it was called “Holes of Justice” and had a badge on the giant donut over the restaurant. That should have been a clue, but I didn’t get to where I am on clear thinking, okay?

          The sole of Leftie was wearing down as well. I spend most of my days walking, and frankly, it’s starting to take its toll. The bottom of my right sock is in far worse shape, and really it’s now just a covering over the top of my foot. Doesn’t even really keep me warm, just hides the hideous sight of my callused skin.

          Leftie, on the other hand, only had one hole where the arch of my foot began just behind my toes. I could feel the cold concrete of the city when I walked on it, and that coldness got larger, and made a hole in my sock, and the smell got worse, and my days of running from donut shops were over. 

          I had moved up to panhandling on 82[SUP]nd[/SUP] street. I always tucked Leftie under my other leg when I did, so people thought I didn’t have any shoes. Of course, my right foot gets frostbite in the winter… but that’s the burden of Leftie. Always keeping me safe from harm.

          When I lost my right foot entirely, the situation became perfect. The peg leg and Lefty, stomping me along.


----------



## MzSnowleopard (Oct 10, 2014)

That is a rather entering read.


----------



## Bishop (Oct 10, 2014)

MzSnowleopard said:


> That is a rather entering read.



Entering indeed


----------



## T.S.Bowman (Oct 10, 2014)

Bishop said:


> CHALLENGE ACCEPTED:
> 
> I wore that left shoe longer than I wore the right one. I lost the right one in a canal a couple of weeks ago, and really couldn’t afford more shoes. The left one stayed on my foot, covering my sock and keeping me warm. Its worn, desolated leather flexed with an awful sound as I walked, and every time it did I longed for Rightie.
> 
> ...



^This = prime example of why I hate you. LOL


----------

