# Describing POC's Skin...



## DragonOfTheAerie

I just read this hilarious thing (Or at least I found it hilarious...) 

If White Characters Were Described Like People Of Color In Literature

It's making fun of the way people of color's skin is often described in books. It's very common to compare skin color to chocolate, coffee, latte, tea, cinnamon, caramel. This is generally reviled as fetishizing and objectifying. 

Now, I have no intention of being fetishizing or objectifying and I want to portray all my characters as respectfully as possible. However, two things give me pause: 

1. White people's skin is described this way and no one cares. ('Creamy,' 'peach', like that, or a blush as like some red food.)  So, the thing, though funny, isn't completely accurate. Its no less objectifying, but no one frowns upon objectifying a white woman by comparing her to delicious food. (Of course, describing a white persons skin tone isn't considered a necessity, since in books it's White Until Proven Non-White. We're supposed to assume it.) 

2. How DO I describe skin color in a way that's not offensive? My options are narrowed down rather quickly. I can't say 'tan' because readers will assume a tanned white person. Lots of skin color descriptions I've read in recently, trying to avoid this, are weird and make no sense. A book I read recently described a character as having 'golden' skin. Golden. I don't even know what that is supposed to mean. I also keep reading 'as dark as the night...' Skin tones THAT dark are not common, so it sounds as if the character was made to fit the description for lack of a better descriptor, not the other way around. Not to mention that reading that someone was 'as white as a cloud' (to flip it around) would be downright WEIRD. 

For some reason 'copper' sounds racist, I'm not sure why. Same with bronze. Im sick of reading 'bronzed,' besides being overused I have no idea what color it's talking about. 

Trying to think of brown things with positive connotations and honestly I'm realizing, what do I have to work with? Dirt, bark, dead leaves...poop? 

Closely connected is my failure to find a useful way to describe brown eyes. I find brown eyes very beautiful, but all the ways I can think of to describe their color sound...not so beautiful. 

So, maybe the reason that people of color are compared to food so much is that there simply aren't a lot of good comparisons with positive connotations. Not because authors are subconsciously objectifying and fetishizing them. Honestly these things that are so reviled accurately describe actual human skin tones, while things like 'golden'...do not. 

All the same, I want to avoid it. Is it worth avoiding or am I just being paranoid?


----------



## Ireth

I have exactly that problem with a certain biracial character of mine. He's half black and half West Indian, so I have no idea how to describe him in terms of what exact shade of brown he is. He's not a POV character or the MC, so theoretically it should be easier for me (I have a heck of a time working in descriptions of viewpoint characters from their own POV), but it's not. I have no idea if the MC (who is not of the same ethnicity) would be able to identify this character's mixed identity in terms of ethnicity. With his boyfriend, it's easy enough to say he has Polynesian features, like dark brown eyes and black hair (though I'm unsure of an adjective for the skintone there too).


----------



## Penpilot

For me I generally dont describe skin color. I just find other ways to get a character's race across. Skin color is superficial. A character's ethnicity is more than that, even if they were born in the west.


----------



## DragonOfTheAerie

Penpilot said:


> For me I generally dont describe skin color. I just find other ways to get a character's race across. Skin color is superficial. A character's ethnicity is more than that, even if they were born in the west.



That's true, but in a fantasy setting with no connection to earth, ethnicity isn't the same, cultures are different, so you can't use them as a reference. 

I can say my one of black characters has bouncy, tightly curled dark hair, but...even a white person can have hair like that.


----------



## DragonOfTheAerie

I'm also in a bind due to the fact that both my POV characters' love interests are people of color. I don't outright say that my MC's are white, but I picture them that way. (Weeeellllllll, one of them has blond/light hair, and they're brother and sister...) I just know people are going to be up in arms about that. Not completely sure why, but...

At any rate, them being love interests makes these particular characters especially hard to describe without sounding objectifying. It could be argued that love interests are inherently objectified.

In any case I'm not about to make them white.


----------



## Nimue

For what might be the third or fourth time on this forum, here's Writing with Color's master post on the subject.  They have a lot of posts that address exactly the kind of thing you're worrying about, DOTA, and this one's about specific descriptives.  There's a previous one about what exactly is so objectionable about food comparisons.

Frankly, I don't find this issue to be all that challenging? Maybe it's because I'm always describing my characters too much.


----------



## Penpilot

DragonOfTheAerie said:


> I can say my one of black characters has bouncy, tightly curled dark hair, but...even a white person can have hair like that.



What I said still applies. Don't focus necessarily on the physical. If it's fantasy then you can focus on the character's culture and where they came from and add that to key physical traits that will paint complete picture, not just a physical one. 

Here's a bit of a heavy handed example to illustrate my point.

"Sam came from the Yels region, where the sun scorched the lands dry for most of the year. He carried the tradition of his people, cutting the tight curls of his hair short, but he'd learn in short time long is better here, where the sun isn't so generous with her warmth. Here in the North, no one had seen anyone with skin such as his, and all stared when they first caught glimpse of its shade."


----------



## DragonOfTheAerie

Nimue said:


> For what might be the third or fourth time on this forum, here's Writing with Color's master post on the subject.  They have a lot of posts that address exactly the kind of thing you're worrying about, DOTA, and this one's about specific descriptives.  There's a previous one about what exactly is so objectionable about food comparisons.
> 
> Frankly, I don't find this issue to be all that challenging? Maybe it's because I'm always describing my characters too much.



I've read this post before. Frankly, most of the examples for comparisons are useless (in my opinion). Topaz, might work for brown eyes. I could see clay/terra cotta for skin. But the others? I haven't even heard of some of those flowers and minerals. No chance the reader has. And...driftwood? Cattails? Acorns? Seashells? What? Seashells can be all sorts of colors, for starters, I have a dark pink one with white markings, and also white ones and orange ones, so I have no idea how you would compare someone's skin to a seashell. Is wood even those colors until it's stained? Also, most of them apply mainly to pretty light-skinned people (hay, sand) like, light skinned as in white. This is essentially what I mean when I say we don't have any good comparisons. 

The part at the beginning about basic colors and shades, though, is extremely helpful. 

I also read the post about why food comparisons are offensive. Am I the only one who thinks that "chocolate/coffee comparisons are offensive because slave labor is used to harvest them and black people were (are) slaves" is a huge stretch? I mean, I'm white, so I don't know if my opinion matters on this count, but really, if I said a character's hair was as white as cotton would everyone freak out because slave labor was once used to harvest cotton? 

I do understand why it's a good idea to avoid food-related comparisons, but... is anyone really bothered by them for that reason? It makes me wonder how much the author's opinions reflect the opinions of most other people...


----------



## DragonOfTheAerie

Penpilot said:


> What I said still applies. Don't focus necessarily on the physical. If it's fantasy then you can focus on the character's culture and where they came from and add that to key physical traits that will paint complete picture, not just a physical one.
> 
> Here's a bit of a heavy handed example to illustrate my point.
> 
> "Sam came from the Yels region, where the sun scorched the lands dry for most of the year. He carried the tradition of his people, cutting the tight curls of his hair short, but he'd learn in short time long is better here, where the sun isn't so generous with her warmth. Here in the North, no one had seen anyone with skin such as his, and all stared when they first caught glimpse of its shade."



I really wish this worked in my situation...

My world has gone through a society-ending catastrophe pretty much, and cultures have fallen apart, governments have been destroyed, and united under a totalitarian state except for a few outliers...

Basically, cultural context doesn't even exist because all the world's various peoples have been mixed together and their cultures basically abolished. It's a very diverse crowd anywhere you go. No one would have any ties to the land their ancestors lived in. It would all be gone.


----------



## La Volpe

I don't know, it seems a little paranoid. Why are you trying so hard to get across that the said person has a different shade of skin colour?

I generally just don't describe skin colour (or hair or eye colour) at all, unless it specifically comes up. E.g. I have one race of people living amongst another, and they have different skin tones. The only reason I mention it is because they have different status in the society, and it's fairly impossible for one race to impersonate the other (which specifically comes up).

If you must mention it, compare it to something relevant. What I mean is that a country full of black people won't describe themselves as having dark skin, simply because everyone has it. It's like mentioning that people have two arms and two legs. Everyone has that, so there's no need to mention it.

If, however, you have a light-skinned character that meets a dark-skinned person for the first time, you can mention that the latter has darker skin the the former. You don't resort to weird chocolate metaphors, and you get the message across because it's relevant. Or you can mention that someone stands out in the dark because of their white skin. Etc. etc.


----------



## DragonOfTheAerie

La Volpe said:


> I don't know, it seems a little paranoid. Why are you trying so hard to get across that the said person has a different shade of skin colour?
> 
> I generally just don't describe skin colour (or hair or eye colour) at all, unless it specifically comes up. E.g. I have one race of people living amongst another, and they have different skin tones. The only reason I mention it is because they have different status in the society, and it's fairly impossible for one race to impersonate the other (which specifically comes up).
> 
> If you must mention it, compare it to something relevant. What I mean is that a country full of black people won't describe themselves as having dark skin, simply because everyone has it. It's like mentioning that people have two arms and two legs. Everyone has that, so there's no need to mention it.
> 
> If, however, you have a light-skinned character that meets a dark-skinned person for the first time, you can mention that the latter has darker skin the the former. You don't resort to weird chocolate metaphors, and you get the message across because it's relevant. Or you can mention that someone stands out in the dark because of their white skin. Etc. etc.



Hmm, I suppose it's because I really like to describe my characters. I like to know what characters look like when I read books; I get frustrated when nothing is described because I can't see it clearly. And I have a very clear picture in my mind of what many of my characters look like, and I want to share at least some of it with the reader.


----------



## Legendary Sidekick

Nimue said:


> Frankly, I don't find this issue to be all that challenging? Maybe it's because I'm always describing my characters too much.


Does anyone here watch Braindead? I ask 'cause reading this reminds me of a scene. Senator Red is looking at a security video and asks his chief of staff about two of the series' heroes who happen to be black...


RED: Those two black people. Who are they? And I'm not being racist. I'm being descriptive. If they were dwarves, I'd say "those two dwarves."

GARETH: I don't think you can say dwarves, either.

RED: Well, it's a good thing they're not dwarves.


----------



## Penpilot

DragonOfTheAerie said:


> I really wish this worked in my situation...
> 
> My world has gone through a society-ending catastrophe pretty much, and cultures have fallen apart, governments have been destroyed, and united under a totalitarian state except for a few outliers...
> 
> Basically, cultural context doesn't even exist because all the world's various peoples have been mixed together and their cultures basically abolished. It's a very diverse crowd anywhere you go. No one would have any ties to the land their ancestors lived in. It would all be gone.



I'm fairly confident it probably could even in your world. There will always be divisions formally or informally. And there will always be non-food elements in a world that you can play off of. You just have to find them.

I'd suggest just start picking random books off your shelf and take a gander at how a wide selection of authors get character ethnicity across. Find the right books and you'll have a treasure trove of examples you can learn off of.


----------



## Legendary Sidekick

On topic, I say just describe and don't be shy about it. I think it's weirder if you go out of your way to avoid description. (I do understand how it's equally insulting to not describe the white people then spend a paragraph describing non-white.

It's funny for me in real life. My daughters are "biracial" (Irish-Italian-Chinese), and they can't help but notice differences among themselves. My middle child is the darkest in the family, my oldest is the lightest, and my youngest has the curliest hair. My daughters all call Amelia "white" and Sabina "creamy brown." I don't know where creamy brown comes from... it's just a phrase the girls made up and are comfortable with. They don't think of anyone as white except Amelia, who really does have very light skin. I'm actually darker than my wife, despite being the only "white" person in my house.

I honestly don't know how I'd describe my own family, but I'd probably use "a dark complexion" rather than "creamy brown." I think I'd want the reader to get an idea of what the character looks like, and less purple prose is good for descriptive purposes and less likely to offend.


----------



## Peat

I'd kinda missed the whole food descriptors being uncool thing. Annoying, because the were used for a reason - they're the most easily identifiable, most evocative shades of brown out there. Who cares that they were cliche? Cliche descriptions exist for a reason, its so someone can describe someone as quickly as possible and get back to the story.

*shrugs* I got nothing. And that Writing with Color post was as helpful as a brick to the face - lets me know there's a problem, does nothing about helping me solve it.


----------



## Miskatonic

Dark complexion seems easy enough. I don't think you have to pussy-foot around it by getting cute with the description.


----------



## Nimue

I feel like I've never really felt a dearth of descriptives sticking to the usual suspects...amber, bronze, copper, ochre, umber, mahogany, ebony, tawny, dusky, nut-brown, fawn-brown, olive-brown, etc etc.

@DOTA, I do think there is a lack of the ingrained, archetypal associations of beauty for images describing darker skin, as a function of inherited language in literature and particularly genre lit, but.... On the other hand, who really wants to stick to describing skin like porcelain and alabaster and those dang gemstone eyes?  If you stop looking for "pretty" imagery that follows those exact same lines, there's plenty out there.

You can describe bronze statues and burnished wood, wine-dark or sloe-dark eyes, sunlight on a shallow stream, gleaming pottery, the brown of ancient ink or autumn leaves or copper jewelry or yes, the red-brown of freshly-tilled earth or the dark richness of forest loam.  There are as many connotations as there are words out there, and a great deal depends on context.  What is a positive association for the POV character?  Not everyone thinks in terms of riches and artwork.

Also, I feel like it would be very odd if someone described color every time they thought of their lover's skin.  You do want to make it clear to avoid white-by-default, but after the reader has the correct image, you can of course use the usual skin descriptives without prefacing it with color: warm, soft, smooth, supple, yielding... Alright, I'll take my purple thesaurus ass out of here.


----------



## DragonOfTheAerie

Nimue said:


> I feel like I've never really felt a dearth of descriptives sticking to the usual suspects...amber, bronze, copper, ochre, umber, mahogany, ebony, tawny, dusky, nut-brown, fawn-brown, olive-brown, etc etc.
> 
> @DOTA, I do think there is a lack of the ingrained, archetypal associations of beauty for images describing darker skin, as a function of inherited language in literature and particularly genre lit, but.... On the other hand, who really wants to stick to describing skin like porcelain and alabaster and those dang gemstone eyes?  If you stop looking for "pretty" imagery that follows those exact same lines, there's plenty out there.
> 
> You can describe bronze statues and burnished wood, wine-dark or sloe-dark eyes, sunlight on a shallow stream, gleaming pottery, the brown of ancient ink or autumn leaves or copper jewelry or yes, the red-brown of freshly-tilled earth or the dark richness of forest loam.  There are as many connotations as there are words out there, and a great deal depends on context.  What is a positive association for the POV character?  Not everyone thinks in terms of riches and artwork.
> 
> Also, I feel like it would be very odd if someone described color every time they thought of their lover's skin.  You do want to make it clear to avoid white-by-default, but after the reader has the correct image, you can of course use the usual skin descriptives without prefacing it with color: warm, soft, smooth, supple, yielding... Alright, I'll take my purple thesaurus ass out of here.



I would use descriptors like forest loam or freshly tilled earth or riverbank clay, because those are positive associations for me as a nature lover...but would those be positive associations for others? Am I overthinking this? 

And the majority of characters won't be described in terms of skin color, but some characters are just going to be around for a long time and are really important to the story, so I want to describe them well. Honestly, if I don't say otherwise readers are going to assume them to be white, and I don't want that, because I don't picture them that way. 

In my world, being white isn't that common. It's a tropical climate so it's not very useful. The majority of people have skin that is some shade of brown. In fact, later in the story the characters come across a village led by a young woman with red hair and they're fascinated by it because they've never seen that color hair before. Everyone's hair, practically, is brown or black.

I don't see the purpose in describing my POV characters, since they narrate in the first person and why would they describe themselves...?


----------



## Steerpike

I think descriptors relating to coffee, or caramel, or chocolate, or what have you are so overused to have become cliche , and they're often used in a way that doesn't even seem to me to be accurate (e.g. a story where "caramel" was used to describe a black person's skin), in other words they're just bad writing. Getting beyond that into ideas of colonialism, racism, dominance, subjugation, and the like seems to me to be a bit of a stretch. Have there been academic studies building an argument for these connections, or are these just ideas that people have tossed out? There are situations, as with any cliche, where one might use some terms, and I'm not seeing a lot of support for the colonialism and other ideas in my brief Google search for them, just a lot of people stating those views as opinions (but using language that suggests they aren't opinions). Maybe someone can provide a reference....


----------



## Nimue

I think it would be strange if you described white characters in terms of marble or alabaster and then described brown characters as earth, but if it's not weirdly specific like that, and it makes sense in the eyes of a POV character who's a farmer or a nature-lover in that way, you'd probably be fine.  Again, context is everything. And I meant that the imagery of other people present in the narration should fit with the associations of the POV character describing that, not that you need to describe a 1st person POV character in detail.

Also, if there's variety in your descriptions it'll help you avoid a pitfall like that.  Even if most of the characters are brown, wouldn't you be describing a range of colors regardless? In a majority-white setting we still describe a range of skin-tones--peachy, pale, sallow, tan, etc--and obviously people of color have a million undertones and shades as well.  No population is so homogenous that there are no variations in skin color, particularly with sun exposure taken into account.


----------



## Penpilot

O





DragonOfTheAerie said:


> I would use descriptors like forest loam or freshly tilled earth or riverbank clay, because those are positive associations for me as a nature lover...but would those be positive associations for others? Am I overthinking this?
> 
> And the majority of characters won't be described in terms of skin color, but some characters are just going to be around for a long time and are really important to the story, so I want to describe them well. Honestly, if I don't say otherwise readers are going to assume them to be white, and I don't want that, because I don't picture them that way.



I think you're over thinking this. 

Will some take offence? Sure, but there's no pleasing some. 

And as for dedaulting white, maybe it's just me, but I create my own image of characters based on their feel, regardless of how many descriptors you give.  If the character feels white then I see a white character in my head. If they feels Chinese then that's what I see.


----------



## Peat

Steerpike said:


> I think descriptors relating to coffee, or caramel, or chocolate, or what have you are so overused to have become cliche , and they're often used in a way that doesn't even seem to me to be accurate (e.g. a story where "caramel" was used to describe a black person's skin), in other words they're just bad writing. Getting beyond that into ideas of colonialism, racism, dominance, subjugation, and the like seems to me to be a bit of a stretch. Have there been academic studies building an argument for these connections, or are these just ideas that people have tossed out? There are situations, as with any cliche, where one might use some terms, and I'm not seeing a lot of support for the colonialism and other ideas in my brief Google search for them, just a lot of people stating those views as opinions (but using language that suggests they aren't opinions). Maybe someone can provide a reference....



My google search found nothing either.

I can see the fetishistic angle and god knows its cliche as all get out - although what doesn't get fetishised and there's so many more cliche descriptors -  but as you say, the slavery link seems weird to me.


----------



## Nimue

I'm not sure the colonialism arguments are the strongest, but I can see the connections there.

Also, whenever people bring up that white characters are also sometimes described like food, I can't help but think...isn't it usually women and/or love interests described as creamy or peachy or honey-skinned?  In any context, there is something weirdly sexual about it, like calling someone luscious or delicious.  Like, keep it in the bedroom scene--and so often the caramel/chocolate/mocha stuff is in all sorts of scenes and genres.

And I think that tying someone through imagery to a consumable dessert has an element of objectification or subjugation.  Most of all, I don't think this issue is a blanket to cover any and all mentions of food, but to address the widespread and unthinking use of this imagery as a default or cliche.  I always think it's a good idea to consider why we use the words we do, and why the first thing we think of was so readily there....


----------



## FifthView

_her face, at first just ghostly, turned a whiter shade of pale_

So out of curiosity, because I couldn't remember, I looked at the first chapter of _The Archer's Heart_ by Astrid Amara (having it on mind because of other discussions lately), which is set in a world modeled on ancient India.

Keshan and his brother both decided to forego the hot confines of breastplates and diadems, choosing instead to adorn themselves with strings of abalone shell and pearls from their home in Tiwari.  Keshan knew very well that the lustrous beads suited his dark skin and only heightened the impact of his short, black hair and dark eyes.​
Here, a whole image is presented, with the strings of shell and beads contrasted with "dark" skin, hair and eyes.

Later, two men are described as having "long black hair" and another man is described as "darkly handsome."  Then comes this description of another:

The man had bright blue eyes, a rarity in Marhavad.  Along with his tall body and light brown skin, the man's eyes brought an instant surge of arousal through Keshan's body.​
So as a whole, it seems that dark, darkly and light brown are used, with the addition of mentions of black hair and a note about the rarity of blue eyes. 

These are fairly basic descriptors, and I wonder if a general awareness of variations in skin color would naturally lead to thinking in terms of dark, darker, light, lighter more than coffee, mocha, etc.  Although, if something exists behind the notation, e.g. a POV from a character with a poetic sensibility or in a state of heightened awareness (like attraction), maybe those more descriptive terms would be fine.  I often think of Langston Hughes' poem "Harlem Sweeties" when this subject arises.

Edit:  I would say that, as a rule of thumb, consider how the POV character would view these things.  I'm assuming a first person or limited third approach.  There are reasons why a particular POV character might use a sensual and/or poetic or even derogatory description of skin color.  But a POV character might be so habituated to the variations in color, he'd think in terms of lighter or darker.  Or, in general think in one way but in some special circumstance might slip into a more poetic or sensual type of awareness of the skin color.


----------



## Steerpike

Is Langston Hughes being critical of the use of those descriptors? That's not the sense I got from the poem.


----------



## Russ

IF you are worried about the political/social implications of how you describe skin colour, and that skin colour is the equivalent of real world races, than I would recommend you read some people who do it really well and emulate them.

Halo Hopkinson and Greg Iles spring to mind.  I am sure there are a plethora of others.


----------



## FifthView

Steerpike said:


> Is Langston Hughes being critical of the use of those descriptors? That's not the sense I got from the poem.



No, I think it's a sensual celebration of the diversity.  Fetishizing, yes, but in a positive way.


----------



## SaltyDog

DragonOfTheAerie said:


> I've read this post before. Frankly, most of the examples for comparisons are useless (in my opinion). Topaz, might work for brown eyes. I could see clay/terra cotta for skin. But the others? I haven't even heard of some of those flowers and minerals. No chance the reader has. And...driftwood? Cattails? Acorns? Seashells? What? Seashells can be all sorts of colors, for starters, I have a dark pink one with white markings, and also white ones and orange ones, so I have no idea how you would compare someone's skin to a seashell. Is wood even those colors until it's stained? Also, most of them apply mainly to pretty light-skinned people (hay, sand) like, light skinned as in white. This is essentially what I mean when I say we don't have any good comparisons.
> 
> The part at the beginning about basic colors and shades, though, is extremely helpful.
> 
> I also read the post about why food comparisons are offensive. Am I the only one who thinks that "chocolate/coffee comparisons are offensive because slave labor is used to harvest them and black people were (are) slaves" is a huge stretch? I mean, I'm white, so I don't know if my opinion matters on this count, but really, if I said a character's hair was as white as cotton would everyone freak out because slave labor was once used to harvest cotton?
> 
> I do understand why it's a good idea to avoid food-related comparisons, but... is anyone really bothered by them for that reason? It makes me wonder how much the author's opinions reflect the opinions of most other people...



I try not to compare to things or food, so far what I've down is just say a color, such as a soft brown, etc.  

In my case I have many races, (Talking about Elves, Dwarfs and other beings I created, not the skin color for us humans,)   one race is very white in skin color, due to living in caves and having very little to no contact of sunlight.  So I describe them that way, chalk white, and very pale.  No skin morphs or different colors.

But with my other species,(I'll be saying that since it might get a little confusing) I do have a wide variety of ethnicity, so I don't leave anyone out.  I do tend to stay away from discussions like this, as it is really up to the author in what goes into his/her book, though if they plan to make money, they then should probably choose wisely.

Anyway, each writer here has their own different way of showing what color the person is, some choose by comparing, others by there origin, of where they came from.  I choose to describe as a color, brown, black, white, etc.


----------



## SaltyDog

Penpilot said:


> O
> 
> I think you're over thinking this.
> 
> Will some take offence? Sure, but there's no pleasing some.
> 
> And as for dedaulting white, maybe it's just me, but I create my own image of characters based on their feel, regardless of how many descriptors you give.  If the character feels white then I see a white character in my head. If they feels Chinese then that's what I see.



I feel the same way


----------



## Chessie

Another vote here for worrying about it too much. As a dark-skinned person, I've often referred to my skin color as caramel or cinnamon. Clearly I'm neither of those things lol. But it's kind of a romantic way of describing it if the subject should ever come up. People in my family do it. Friends of mine that have dark skin do it. Really, it's no big deal and we're not easily offended. We're just like anyone else and seriously, if you write a bomb story then who's going to care that you described a character's skin as milk chocolate?

Far as describing characters goes, readers will pick up on what they look like from your sensory details. Think culture, personality, manner of speech, clothing and jewelry, etc. These are the things you can focus that will boost the image of characters as well rounded people. As another poster here mentioned, if you have different skin colors of characters then yes, that should be mentioned. For example, my WIP has a lead character developed from Alaska Native culture. She's got tan skin. Her husband is white. So right away I give the reader an impression of how different she is from him: skin the color of caribou hide, facial features sharp like the mountain valleys of her home, petite in stature, covered in furs, etc.


----------



## Devor

White skin does get described as milky, or as a peach color.  Peach, to me, is the name on the jar of white-skin paint, but milky does often carry a lot of connotations to it.  "She (it's always a she) had milky skin" because she's never been in the sun, which makes her either pretentious or attractive or both depending on the story.

I don't mention that to make any point in particular.

I'm not generally a fan of internet outrage.  But I think if certain words annoy people - whether you or I think they should or not - then it's a small kindness not to use them.  To me it's that simple.

I don't have a high opinion of the notion that you shouldn't mention or describe skin tone.  It's your setting; they're your characters; set the scene already.  I know that there's this idea that people should interpret the character how they want to.  But there's a word for the first image that comes into your head with minimal prompting:  It's called a stereotype.


----------



## JCFarnham

The thing about Writing with Colour is that the mods there know exactly what they're talking about. They live it, day in day out. And there's an awful lot of stuff that the privileged white don't realise is damaging. A lot of ingrained stuff. We don't mean to be racist, we don't set out to be, it's just society. Just look at your grandparents. Different era.

For example, a certain g word associated with traveling societies of eastern Europe, was used in horrific ways, scarred on people and so on.. but we just don't realise about a lot of those harmful connotations. 

It's often said on that blog that if in doubt you're probably racist. At first I wasn't comfortable with that suggestion... But in a way its not too far wrong. Not being aware of problematic cultural associations, doesn't make them any less harmful. We just have to try and learn you know. 

Using food to describe poc skin is hugely problematic, and a lot of poc find it distressing (a plenty don't but..). For that reason I don't use them. In fact, I tend not to describe skin full stop. Unless I need to say pimply or ill-looking perhaps. It just doesn't seem that vital, when other things celebrate and indicate heritage, race and other cultures far far better.

Even if it wasn't a bit racist, it's way too cliche haha there's plenty of other metaphors you could utilise besides.


----------



## Gryphos

As far as I'm aware, there's nothing wrong with just saying 'brown' when describing black characters' skin. You can add any number of modifiers: rich brown, earthy brown, walnut brown, oak brown, etc.

For characters coded to be middle eastern-esque in ethnicity, I've mostly ended up using metals like copper or bronze. I myself aren't qualified to say if there's anything problematic in this, but I haven't heard anything to suggest it is.

East asian coded characters are where it perhaps gets a little trickier, since purely with regards to skin tone there isn't much separating them from northern europeans, or at least, they're similar enough that it makes description difficult when you want to explicitly present the character as east asian and not white. To be honest, I haven't written enough such characters to have a useful solution, but I do plan on having an asian coded character in my next project, so we'll see.

One thing I think is important is that if you describe skin colour, don't just describe POC characters' skin colour; describe the white characters' skin too (unless of course the character is minor enough to not warrant an physical description). Otherwise, you're inadvertently perpetuating the idea of white being default.


----------



## TheKillerBs

White being the default is really only a thing for white people. If you don't give me a description I'm going to default to brown, because I'm brown. Black people default to black because they're black, and so on and so forth. People tend to default to what is most familiar to them.


----------



## SaltyDog

TheKillerBs said:


> White being the default is really only a thing for white people. If you don't give me a description I'm going to default to brown, because I'm brown. Black people default to black because they're black, and so on and so forth. People tend to default to what is most familiar to them.



That makes a lot of sense.


----------



## Demesnedenoir

I think a lot of default will also occur with the setting and culture as seen in Earth history. If a character is wandering through frozen mountains with an axe in the deep north of the world... The default will tend toward pale skin. 

A character wandering through an equatorial jungle will more than likely default to a darker skin.

If you're cruising around the countryside horseback with recurve bows and tend to collect in hordes... yeah, it's probably going to conjure up images.

Personally I tend to write in fairly strict POV, so if the character doesn't note their color... I don't. Now, when my character meets the LÃ»xuns with their blue skin and feather-like hair... you bet he notes it, LOL. 

In the book I've got on the back burner, the ruling majority of the people have black skin, not brown, black. They would see brown as freaky... of course, there're also a few people running around with tusks growing out of their faces, so brown wouldn't be all that freaky, LOL. Black is black, brown is brown, white is... not very white, really, not for the most part. I have been lobster red in parts now and again, no offense to any crustaceans and their departed and eaten loved ones.


----------



## Miskatonic

In my main story I have a continent based off of Africa that has the sub Saharan-esque region where people live that in appearance would look very close to African tribes-people but the culture/architecture has been changed to add some different elements. I plan on using names familiar with the real world version of that region, for the people as well as locations, to give the needed impression.


----------



## FifthView

I suppose my general default in word choice would be to not worry about how it reflects on the writer, but rather on how it reflects on the POV character.

What we notice and how we describe it says a lot about us.  Same with POV characters.

Omniscient voice could throw a curve on this approach, but then again I tend to think of the narrator as a character, i.e. the storyteller. Who, in some cases, ventriloquises the characters.  (Not that I use omniscient often, although I'm considering it for my latest project.)


----------



## Miskatonic

A good editor will point out things like this if your word choice may run the risk of being insulting to certain people.


----------



## Miskatonic

Demesnedenoir said:


> I think a lot of default will also occur with the setting and culture as seen in Earth history. If a character is wandering through frozen mountains with an axe in the deep north of the world... The default will tend toward pale skin.
> 
> A character wandering through an equatorial jungle will more than likely default to a darker skin.
> 
> If you're cruising around the countryside horseback with recurve bows and tend to collect in hordes... yeah, it's probably going to conjure up images.
> 
> Personally I tend to write in fairly strict POV, so if the character doesn't note their color... I don't. Now, when my character meets the LÃ»xuns with their blue skin and feather-like hair... you bet he notes it, LOL.
> 
> In the book I've got on the back burner, the ruling majority of the people have black skin, not brown, black. They would see brown as freaky... of course, there're also a few people running around with tusks growing out of their faces, so brown wouldn't be all that freaky, LOL. Black is black, brown is brown, white is... not very white, really, not for the most part. I have been lobster red in parts now and again, no offense to any crustaceans and their departed and eaten loved ones.



Exactly. You aren't going to see a huge native population of red-haired, freckle-faced people living in the jungle. And yeah white is more like pink. I've seen Asians that are far whiter than "white" people.


----------



## ascanius

k?




JCFarnham said:


> The thing about Writing with Colour is that the mods there know exactly what they're talking about. They live it, day in day out. And there's an awful lot of stuff that the privileged white don't realise is damaging. A lot of ingrained stuff. _*I*_ don't mean to be racist, *I didn't* set out to be, it's just *my view of* society. Just look at your grandparents. Different era.



I think my corrections make more sense giving your tying not to be racist.  Right and that makes it ok to use some half brained stereotype and label all white people racist, based off of?  Oh the color of their skin.  Common. It takes some good double think to pull of such logic.  And frankly I find it insulting that you think it is ok to make such a broad statement about PEOPLE just because the color of their skin, so don't include me in that 'we.'  I suggest stop thinking about people as labels, instead as people.



JCFarnham said:


> It's often said on that blog that if in doubt you're probably racist. At first I wasn't comfortable with that suggestion... But in a way its not too far wrong. Not being aware of problematic cultural associations, doesn't make them any less harmful. We just have to try and learn you know.



So doubt is now racism?  Looks like logic went out with the bath water.  This is getting ridiculous.


In my opinion, the writing with color blog is a much more detrimental than it is beneficial.  It's nothing more than a PC writers handbook.

That whole writing with colour blog on which this whole thread is about makes the argument that foods to describe a skin color fetishize a whole group.  A statement based of the bloggers personal experience, I don't understand how that translates to the rest of the population but ok.  The entire post is frankly so hypocritical, illogical and frankly asinine.  Common, they are saying it's not ok to use chocolate as a descriptor because of slavery then go on to say it's ok to use spices, precious metals and gems, plants and wood.  Right because you know none of those were ever gathered by slaves.  Nope only chocolate and coffee drove the slave trade, historical context and accuracy...goodbye.  How is being described as any of those things not dehumanizing but chocolate and other foodstuffs is?  Only black people can refers to each other that way, because that's not encouraging a stereotype and you know segregation....  The list goes on but I'll stop.

There is a lot of stuff on that site that is nothing more than very week arguments to push an agenda that has more use as political propaganda that actual fantasy writing.

If your worried about how your describing a character be it skin color or height, take a step back and try to figure out how to do it better.  don't just decide to cater to some group to be PC, at that point you may as well use 1/6(4pi-3[SUP]1/3[/SUP])r[SUP]2[/SUP] to describe almond shaped eyes, until math becomes racist too that is.  "Write your characters as people" Is the only sacrosanct advice about characters that EVERY writer should follow everything else is superficial.  Readers are not stupid labels so don't treat them like children who need your protection.


----------



## TheKillerBs

Demesnedenoir said:


> I think a lot of default will also occur with the setting and culture as seen in Earth history. If a character is wandering through frozen mountains with an axe in the deep north of the world... The default will tend toward pale skin.
> 
> A character wandering through an equatorial jungle will more than likely default to a darker skin.
> 
> If you're cruising around the countryside horseback with recurve bows and tend to collect in hordes... yeah, it's probably going to conjure up images.



I see these things as indirect descriptions. Names can also have that role. I'll have a different default for someone whose name is Wu than for someone whose name is Chuck.


----------



## Xitra_Blud

I just say they had brown skin. If they had dark brown skin then I say that had dark brown skin. If they have light brown skin I say their skin was light brown. If they look like they were mixed, I say they look mixed. I don't think there's any need to get real fancy about it. Also, I wouldn't worry about offending anyone. No matter what you write, you're going to offend _someone_, especially in this day and age. Just describe it as what it is. Readers will get the idea.


----------



## Legendary Sidekick

Gryphos said:


> East asian coded characters are where it perhaps gets a little trickier, since purely with regards to skin tone there isn't much separating them from northern europeans


Nine-year-old photo of my wife and I agrees.

You can still describe hair and eyes to imply Asain. Hair is not just black (our Japanese friends' daughters have very, very dark brown hair, while my middle daughter's hair is real black), but often the hair is much finer than European hair. My youngest daughter's eyes are so dark they're nearly black. Mine are brown, and I always thought a dark brown, but next to the women and girls in my house, my brown eyes don't look so dark. Mine are acorn brown while my daughters' are… acorn _hat _brown.


----------



## TheKillerBs

Legendary Sidekick said:


> You can still describe hair and eyes to imply Asain. Hair is not just black (our Japanese friends' daughters have very, very dark brown hair, while my middle daughter's hair is real black), but often the hair is much finer than European hair. My youngest daughter's eyes are so dark they're nearly black. Mine are brown, and I always thought a dark brown, but next to the women and girls in my house, my brown eyes don't look so dark. Mine are acorn brown while my daughters' are… acorn _hat _brown.



Also, epicanthic eyefolds.


----------



## Xitra_Blud

ascanius said:


> k?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I think my corrections make more sense giving your tying not to be racist.  Right and that makes it ok to use some half brained stereotype and label all white people racist, based off of?  Oh the color of their skin.  Common. It takes some good double think to pull of such logic.  And frankly I find it insulting that you think it is ok to make such a broad statement about PEOPLE just because the color of their skin, so don't include me in that 'we.'  I suggest stop thinking about people as labels, instead as people.
> 
> 
> 
> So doubt is now racism?  Looks like logic went out with the bath water.  This is getting ridiculous.
> 
> 
> In my opinion, the writing with color blog is a much more detrimental than it is beneficial.  It's nothing more than a PC writers handbook.
> 
> That whole writing with colour blog on which this whole thread is about makes the argument that foods to describe a skin color fetishize a whole group.  A statement based of the bloggers personal experience, I don't understand how that translates to the rest of the population but ok.  The entire post is frankly so hypocritical, illogical and frankly asinine.  Common, they are saying it's not ok to use chocolate as a descriptor because of slavery then go on to say it's ok to use spices, precious metals and gems, plants and wood.  Right because you know none of those were ever gathered by slaves.  Nope only chocolate and coffee drove the slave trade, historical context and accuracy...goodbye.  How is being described as any of those things not dehumanizing but chocolate and other foodstuffs is?  Only black people can refers to each other that way, because that's not encouraging a stereotype and you know segregation....  The list goes on but I'll stop.
> 
> There is a lot of stuff on that site that is nothing more than very week arguments to push an agenda that has more use as political propaganda that actual fantasy writing.
> 
> If your worried about how your describing a character be it skin color or height, take a step back and try to figure out how to do it better.  don't just decide to cater to some group to be PC, at that point you may as well use 1/6(4pi-3[SUP]1/3[/SUP])r[SUP]2[/SUP] to describe almond shaped eyes, until math becomes racist too that is.  "Write your characters as people" Is the only sacrosanct advice about characters that EVERY writer should follow everything else is superficial.  Readers are not stupid labels so don't treat them like children who need your protection.



This is very well said. Thanks!


----------



## JCFarnham

Okay seriously didn't mean to hit a nerve there...

I'll leave you guys to it.


----------



## DragonOfTheAerie

Guys please don't start a fight, k? Keep it civil.


----------



## Devor

To interject here just a little, I think there's a difference between something that is inherently racist and something that might be racially insensitive.  To me, racism is something that has to come from a person.  If the connotations didn't come from the author, but instead from the reader's personal experiences, I would describe it as racially insensitive.

The last time this topic came up, somebody mentioned that whenever black women get hit on or cat called by men of other races, there's usually a reference to chocolate.  I would never have known, or thought about that.  To me, I could easily have used the word chocolate just trying to name the color.  The sexually aggressive connotations that are there for a black reader might not be there for the author.

At least some portion of this discussion is centered around a basic type of miscommunication, not something that warrants the kind of blame or hostile implications some people might be prone to see.


----------



## Nimue

ascanius said:


> That whole writing with colour blog on which this whole thread is about makes the argument that foods to describe a skin color fetishize a whole group.  A statement based of the bloggers personal experience, I don't understand how that translates to the rest of the population but ok.  The entire post is frankly so hypocritical, illogical and frankly asinine.  Common, they are saying it's not ok to use chocolate as a descriptor because of slavery then go on to say it's ok to use spices, precious metals and gems, plants and wood.  Right because you know none of those were ever gathered by slaves.  Nope only chocolate and coffee drove the slave trade, historical context and accuracy...goodbye.  How is being described as any of those things not dehumanizing but chocolate and other foodstuffs is?  Only black people can refers to each other that way, because that's not encouraging a stereotype and you know segregation....  The list goes on but I'll stop.



"Well-said"?  Seriously?

People's lived experiences are valid.  Please stop trying to be the Objective Arbitrator of Logic on things that have deep historical, literary, and social connotations, and try to assess exactly how angry and insulting you should be getting about someone asking you not to use the word "chocolate" to describe people.


----------



## Chessie

Maybe it's not a big deal? As I mentioned earlier, I'm brown and use food to describe my skin color on occasion. It might bother some but might not bother others. Honestly, I'd be more worried about sounding cliche or stupid rather than racist. 

Chocolate bars, anyone?


----------



## Penpilot

Chesterama said:


> Maybe it's not a big deal? As I mentioned earlier, I'm brown and use food to describe my skin color on occasion. It might bother some but might not bother others. Honestly, I'd be more worried about sounding cliche or stupid rather than racist.
> 
> Chocolate bars, anyone?



I play on a softball team. For reasons I won't get into, most of us have nicknames. Sometimes they're chosen by others, sometimes they're chosen by the person. One of my teammates is black and they chose the nickname hot chocolate.


----------



## Reaver

I see some heated posts here so before things get out of hand, I'm going to give all participants in this thread a friendly reminder:



Black Dragon said:


> *PUBLIC SERVICE ANNOUNCEMENT*
> 
> Mythic Scribes is a community comprised of writers with different perspectives and goals.  For example, some members approach writing as a casual hobby, while others prefer a professional or career-focused approach.
> 
> Please remember that these and other differences in perspective are welcome at Mythic Scribes.  What unites us is a shared love for the craft of writing, and we can't lose sight of that.
> 
> Therefore, it is imperative that everyone treat one another with mutual respect.  Please refrain from arguing, and instead focus on helping one another to grow and improve.  If you must disagree with someone, do so with respect and tact.
> 
> Also, be aware that the forum rules prohibit "argumentative or hostile behavior."  Going forward, this prohibition will be strictly enforced.
> 
> Finally, do not forget the Guiding Principle upon which Mythic Scribes is built:
> 
> 
> 
> Thank you for doing your part in keeping Mythic Scribes a beacon of light in the sea of hostility that is the internet.



I'll be checking in on this thread often to ensure this guideline is being followed to the letter. Thanks for participating!


----------



## Miskatonic

If we are worried about offending the PC police then we'll never get anything done. I think as adults we can tell the difference between something that is used as mere description and something that is used as a description _and_ a means to denigrate a group of people. 

This isn't the turn of the 20th century where cultural norms would have lead us to use language that would be offensive to those who grew up later in a different culture where the same descriptive language had fallen out of fashion for whatever reason. 

The social justice brigade will throw a fit at even the most tame language because they have nothing better to do and are apparently offended by everything under the sun. 

Just use your own judgement and reader/editor feedback.

Also don't forget that a character you are writing might actually be racist or bigoted so them using a description that fits their mentality would make sense, even if it might make you uncomfortable.


----------



## Holoman

And this is why I never give the colour of my characters' skins. Especially in fantasy, there is no real reason to give it. It tells you nothing about their personality, upbringing or culture because the world is not our own. The only reason to go over and above describing all the ethnic minorities in your story is, imo, just to show how "inclusive" you are.

My MC is probably closest ethnically to Assyrian, but he's never described. Most readers will probably imagine him as white, others may imagine him as black. I don't mind, whatever floats their boat.

If I really want to emphasise race, I usually use the name. If I call someone Tao Wang, you know what race he is. No doubt some social justice warriors would claim that is racist too.


----------



## Legendary Sidekick

Good point about names. I also like to write characters from cultures I know something about, and I usually know someone from the real life culture. When I named a character Kojima Hanako, I asked a Japanese friend if the name meaning was what I believed it was. My mother-in-law named my Chinese-culture based nun, and even gave suggestions for colors she should wear and having nine "dots" on her shaven head which are self-inflicted burns from an incense stick. She worried she gave me too much, but I loved it.

I think generally speaking, respect the culture you write about. If you have the opportunity to talk to someone who your character is representing, do so. The conversation you have may be a surprisingly rewarding one.


----------



## Gryphos

Holoman said:
			
		

> And this is why I never give the colour of my characters' skins. Especially in fantasy, there is no real reason to give it. It tells you nothing about their personality, upbringing or culture because the world is not our own. The only reason to go over and above describing all the ethnic minorities in your story is, imo, just to show how "inclusive" you are.



Well, technically, there's no real reason to describe a character's hair colour, or eye colour, or any other physical attribute. But as we all know, description allows for more vivid images. Obviously, of course, some characters are minor enough not to warrant any physical description.


----------



## Steerpike

Personally, I prefer that characters not be described, apart from maybe one or two highly significant features.


----------



## Miskatonic

Holoman said:


> And this is why I never give the colour of my characters' skins. Especially in fantasy, there is no real reason to give it. It tells you nothing about their personality, upbringing or culture because the world is not our own. The only reason to go over and above describing all the ethnic minorities in your story is, imo, just to show how "inclusive" you are.
> 
> My MC is probably closest ethnically to Assyrian, but he's never described. Most readers will probably imagine him as white, others may imagine him as black. I don't mind, whatever floats their boat.
> 
> If I really want to emphasise race, I usually use the name. If I call someone Tao Wang, you know what race he is. No doubt some social justice warriors would claim that is racist too.



Well as long as you don't have fans wanting to draw the characters from your books you should be alright.


----------



## FifthView

Holoman said:


> And this is why I never give the colour of my characters' skins. Especially in fantasy, there is no real reason to give it. It tells you nothing about their personality, upbringing or culture because the world is not our own. The only reason to go over and above describing all the ethnic minorities in your story is, imo, just to show how "inclusive" you are.



"It tells you nothing...because the world is not our own."  This _sounds_ like you are saying that in our world, skin color _can_ tell you all these things about a person.  Hmmm.

In any case, I think that everyone alive notices skin color regularly.  We might or might not think about it, consciously note it, but we see it as a matter of course.  The same way we see all the grass and trees and every crack in the cobblestones in our field of view.  Well, those of us who live anywhere cobblestones are used.  In our fictional worlds, do we describe every scene down to the last detail?  Nope.  We pick and choose what to tell.  I sometimes wish some writers would operate from the understanding that details about a scene can be described even if the POV character isn't consciously thinking about them; but that's a different issue.

I suspect that in many fictional worlds, in many situations, the characters would find in skin color some signals about other features, like culture, of other characters.  At least to the degree that skin color in those worlds correlates with other features.  (Ex., foreigners or even ethnic enclaves in cities.)  Even if these fictional cultures are unlike what we have in our own world, characters will still note significant differences, including skin color.  "He had the blue-green tint to his skin that spoke of Angularin ancestry, but mascara circled his red eyes in the Hurb fashion.  Those two peoples had warred nonstop for centuries, and Jamis wondered what kind of man this must be."

I still return to the idea that we should choose what is noticed and how it is described with the understanding that these things reflect upon the character who is making comments or viewing another person and not on the author.  As others above have mentioned, they or some they know may be fine describing themselves using food items.  But others might not be fine. This speaks to a diversity of outlooks.  Individuals are different.  (Should go without saying?)  So our characters will have different outlooks, depending on upbringing, the society in which they live, individual personalities, and so forth–and, depending on particular situations.  But the caveat here is that we also need to be careful because we may not want readers to react negatively to a character that we intend to be highly sympathetic.


----------



## DragonOfTheAerie

I really like to describe my characters. Maybe you guys don't, but my preference is to give a clear idea of what my characters look like. A character's appearance can say a lot about what they are like (clothing, body language...) I have a picture in my mind of what most of my characters look like, which I want to share. Also, having fan art sounds amazing...

Of course, I write in the first person, so my descriptions will be based on my MCs' perception. My MC's might not notice skin color that much. They live in the tropics, where light skin is relatively rare. (Average would be maybe a medium brown.) People with light skin are familiar but they exist outside the bell curve. So, my characters might feel compelled to describe a light-skinned person's skin color, but not someone with a darker skin tone. It might be more interesting to focus on clothing, weapons, and stuff like that in description rather than skin/hair/eye color. (There's rarely a reason to describe eye color. I don't even notice eye color when I meet someone.) But, skin color will probably come up. Especially with the love interest of my female MC, who loves to describe. (Her POV provides lots of description.) 

My MCs themselves probably won't feel the need to describe themselves or each other.


----------



## Nimue

I always forget, between these discussions, that straight white amateur writers are the most persecuted people in the world.  Every day, they face the risk of a person maybe critiquing their writing on social issues one day when it gains enough traction for anyone to even care.

I'm slightly done.


----------



## Reaver

Again, I want to remind all participants in this thread to treat other members with respect. The posts in this thread are the opinions of the members posting them. There are no right or wrong opinions. If you can't participate in this thread without being respectful, then don't participate. 

This is my final reminder. Any further disrespect will not be tolerated.


----------



## aceunavailable

I, personally, enjoy describing my characters. I want my readers to be able to picture them as clearly as I do, because to me that's part of reading a book. Sure, you want to be entertained by the plot, but to be fully immersed in a novel, for me, I have to be able to picture the characters. And, considering that I'm writing a fantasy/dystopian monster of a genre novel, skin color matters to how well they blend in to their surroundings, identifying what jobs they may do (some of the lower castes work almost exclusively outside, giving them a more tanned appearance and meaning that more melanin in the skin would be a helpful feature), and otherwise just telling my main character(s) (it switches between their viewpoints chapter to chapter) more about their history. Certain races (wing colors) tend to have more people of a certain race. All of this has lead me to this point: there has been a lot of discourse on this thread as to how (not to mention why or why not) to describe people with varying brown complexions. However, I've noticed there's little to nothing on how to describe Latinx skin tones (the post somewhere above that describes how Europeans (generally considered "white") have pinker tones to their skin than those of Asians (in general, may not always be the case) has been very helpful). Does anyone have any ideas for how to describe Latinx skin tones? Is the commonly used "olive" ok or not? I also want to work on describing my white character (s? unsure yet if more than one), because I know NOT describing white characters skin tone after describing everyone else's only perpetuates the White Until Proven Otherwise problem novels have. Sorry, I just want to be able to describe my characters in a way that isn't hurtful to anyone, or at least the majority of people.
I do know that it's being debated whether or not TO describe skin tones, but to put that aside for a moment, can anyone tell me HOW? (Not just people with brown complexions but all complexions, white included?)


----------



## Devor

On a related topic, this was on my facebook feed recently.





__ https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=1898869586865124


----------



## Svrtnsse

I've got characters of varying skin tones, and I've ended up just using the names of the colours to describe them. White, pink, grey, brown, black. 

After threads and discussion like this one, I decided the best option for me would be to keep it plain and stick to just colours. I don't often go into elaborate detail about how my characters look anyway, so keeping it simple works better for me.


----------



## VfortheShadow

I'm erring on the side of not describing skin tone. I've been working on these characters for so long that their appearance in my head is too ingrained to change, but they default far too often. This best solution I can come up with is to let the reader default too.

But if you want to you don't want to go that route, this is where beta readers come in handy. The more people who you get as betas, the more perspectives you can get to find out if you're coming across as insensitive or not. You can even higher editors specifically for that kind of service.

You also could-and really should-do research into the opinions on the subject.

But all this is jumping ahead. You've got to finish the book first, so write what you're going to write and fix it in post.


----------



## Firefly

This is a tricky thing. Comparisons are difficult, as skin has a very specific texture and feel. It oftentimes ends up feeling weird when you compare it to things that don't match. (You probably wouldn't say your character's skin is the color of cardboard or bark, for example, even if those objects are the right shades.) And there aren't a lot of texturally appropriate skin colored objects out there that don't feel either cliche, insulting, or out of place. You can still think of things, of course, but sometimes it's more of a brainwashed than its worth.
I've resorted to just using boring words like pale, brown, dark, and tan most of the time. They don't make for extraordinary prose, but they're hard to overuse. When that doesn't give quite the picture I want, I sometimes resort to undertones like golden or pinkish or bronze. I dislike terms like fawn and dusky, I feel like their meaning isn't clear enough and not enough people know what they mean.


----------



## toomanyhobbies

I don't worry too much about describing the exact shade of skin; I always imagine people can - and will - use their imaginations (I'm also into illustrating, and several illustrators I know have taken to drawing Harry Potter as black, because of how Rowling always contrasted Voldemort's "white" skin with Harry's when Harry was seeing things from Voldemort's point of view). It's not really *that* big a deal of they guess the shade wrong...is it?

Anyway, when I'm describing appearances, I really don't mention their skin much except maybe in contrast with someone else's; I usually describe hair and body or facial structure just as much, if not more than, skin color. This is going to sound bad, but we do have stereotypes on our side, if you think about it. *Traditionally* speaking, if someone is blond, they'll usually be Caucasian; likewise with red hair. Not always, but often! So if they they have a type of hair that typically goes with a certain skin color, you may not have to mention the skin at all. If your character is African American but they have blond hair, then you'll have to clarify it; otherwise, we'll just assume the skin color that fits the traditional stereotype of the hair. Likewise blue eyes are somewhat stereotypical to lighter skin; while black, tightly curled hair is generally expected to go with dark skin. I know white people can have black, tightly curled hair, but realistically, it won't be most people's first thought. In one of my books, a main character was African American. The main characteristic I used wasn't her skin (I may have mentioned once that her skin contrasted with the light-colored dress she was wearing), but her hair. I referred to her tightly curled, springy black hair a few times, and nobody ever questioned her ethnicity. Eye shape, cheek bones, face shape, and most especially hair (texture, color, style) are all very important - it's not all about skin color! 

With that said, one of my ethnicities in my current story is the exception; they're pretty much all about skin color. I always thought it was funny that Snow White's skin had to be literally snow white, and her hair as black as ebony (with red lips, of course), so I invented a culture of people that nearly fit the Snow White look. Whenever I mention that someone is from that country, you know they have black hair and extremely pale skin. Another country's people always only have brown or blond hair and always freckles.  One country's people always have charcoal or grey hair. I don't actually know what color their skin is - I hadn't thought about it. I may simply leave that to the imagination. If it doesn't matter to the story, I feel like sometimes you don't really need to specify. Let the reader choose - you know?


----------



## A. E. Lowan

I'm sure this has been touched on at some point in this necro'ed discussion (too busy at the moment to read all the way through), but one of the reasons it's important to describe a character's skin tone is that the default description in our world is white. No matter what you see in your head, if we aren't crystal clear that we are describing a person of color, the reader will envision a white person. And the reason we want to avoid using food descriptors for skin color is that it really is considered creepy and fetishizing by many persons of color - not to mention cliché, and I don't throw that word around lightly.

Nimue linked to Writing with Color, a fantastic blog on Tumblr that addresses many of these issues, and one of their arguments is that there are so many other ways to describe PoC skin tones than with food. For example, in our urban fantasy series, we have three black men with different skin tones, terracotta, chestnut, and mahogany, respectively. We make very sure to describe their skin color because we don't want readers to fix a white man in their mental image, and because their skin color does inform on some of their life experiences and how they will react to some things in the plot.

I think most of us know about the controversy surrounding The Hunger Games, when little Rue wasn't sufficiently described in the book and appeared as a young black girl from a predominantly black community in the movie. People went nuts, mostly because they had a little white girl fixed in their heads as the default descriptor. Katniss herself is a woman of color, and is described as such, but people still see her as white to the point that a white woman was cast for the movie roll because the writer did not make it clear enough.

Getting descriptions right is important, because readers want to be able to see themselves in the characters they read. Representation is the silver bullet to positive self esteem in children and adults, especially in a world where media is dominated by white faces.


----------



## Svrtnsse

A while back I wrote an article on the importance of first impressions when writing descriptions, and when doing the research for that I found something that's relevant to this topic. The first two things we notice about someone is their gender and their race (source: What’s in a face?).

If you don't mention skin colour when describing your character, your reader will fill it in on their own, and the character will default to whatever first comes to mind for the reader. It's not an attribute we can leave unmentioned and then fill in later and hope the reader will have imagined the same thing we did.


----------



## Devor

Svrtnsse said:


> A while back I wrote an article on the importance of first impressions when writing descriptions, and when doing the research for that I found something that's relevant to this topic. The first two things we notice about someone is their gender and their race (source: What’s in a face?).
> 
> If you don't mention skin colour when describing your character, your reader will fill it in on their own, and the character will default to whatever first comes to mind for the reader. It's not an attribute we can leave unmentioned and then fill in later and hope the reader will have imagined the same thing we did.



Yeah, I agree, I don't understand the advice of "don't do it."  Sure, if most people are the same ethnicity, you don't need to say it over and over.  If there's really a minor character, like the bartender, it really might not matter. But for characters of any importance or significance, the idea of not mentioning something, _as a rule_, doesn't strike me as good advice or good writing.


----------



## TheKillerBs

A. E. Lowan said:


> I'm sure this has been touched on at some point in this necro'ed discussion (too busy at the moment to read all the way through), but one of the reasons it's important to describe a character's skin tone is that the default description in our world is white. No matter what you see in your head, if we aren't crystal clear that we are describing a person of color, the reader will envision a white person.


I've mentioned this before, but readers will envision a white person if you aren't crystal clear you are describing a "person of colour" (I really hate this term, incidentally) if they, themselves, are white too. Absent evidence to the contrary, people tend to default to what they are most familiar with (i.e., their own race). I remember seeing a post from someone saying they thought Hermione could be black, because one of the books describes her as having dark skin, and of course, Hermione has curly hair. Representation is way more important in films and other visual media, where the race of the character is explicit because of the race of the actor - for example, for most of us who grew up with Harry Potter, Hermione will be forever tied to Emma Watson, but that's not on the books themselves.

Even in drawn media, people will tend towards what they're most familiar with. As an example:


----------



## A. E. Lowan

TheKillerBs said:


> I've mentioned this before, but readers will envision a white person if you aren't crystal clear you are describing a "person of colour" (I really hate this term, incidentally) if they, themselves, are white too. Absent evidence to the contrary, people tend to default to what they are most familiar with (i.e., their own race). I remember seeing a post from someone saying they thought Hermione could be black, because one of the books describes her as having dark skin, and of course, Hermione has curly hair. Representation is way more important in films and other visual media, where the race of the character is explicit because of the race of the actor - for example, for most of us who grew up with Harry Potter, Hermione will be forever tied to Emma Watson, but that's not on the books themselves.
> 
> Even in drawn media, people will tend towards what they're most familiar with. As an example:


I think that you're half right. People will absolutely envision what they are most familiar with in media. But they will not always envision themselves, especially not when the majority of the stories they ingest are about white people - white males, for the most part. I like sharing these essays because they speak to the need for representation from a different perspective than my own.

Alternate Visions: Some Musings on Diversity in SF

Transcript of "The danger of a single story"


----------



## S.T. Ockenner

You could just say light brown


----------



## A. E. Lowan

Dark Lord Thomas Pie said:


> You could just say light brown


Is this gentleman light brown?


----------



## pmmg

I would call him brown but by cultural standards he would be black. I don't think light brown is needed unless he was compared to others who were darker.


Edit: My fault, I did not see this was a larger thread (that is actually kind of a zombie). I thought A.E. Lowan (et al) was asking a direct question, I see now they were not. I avoided this thread way back then and will go back to avoiding it again. These types of threads IMO tend to focus on the wrong kind of energy and I generally prefer to pass on them.


----------



## Devor

A. E. Lowan said:


> Is this gentleman light brown?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 2659



According to Crayola he is... maybe “extra deep almond”?  Anyways they recently released a box of skin color crayons so there is now a kind-of standard.  It's all variations of rose, golden and almond.

:edit:


----------



## A. E. Lowan

Devor said:


> According to Crayola he is... maybe “extra deep almond”?  Anyways they recently released a box of skin color crayons so there is now a kind-of standard.  It's all variations of rose, golden and almond.
> 
> :edit:


Yeah, I think you're right. He's definitely extra deep almond, or as we describe him in our books, mahogany. The point is, you can't just use a single term such as "light brown" to describe skin tone. Personally, I have alabaster skin with a swarm of freckles waiting to merge.

Also, I love these crayons.

Plus, does this thread count as a double necro? Cus wow.


----------

