When to use visual descriptors

[Jabrosky]

We've all encountered the question of exactly how much description we should write into our stories, and I used to struggle with this. After some musing on this subject I think I've finally figured out precisely when you should describe things in detail:

1) If the details are somehow significant to the story or action. For example, if your protagonist ever uses a knife in his possession, you might want to mention him carrying a knife around when you introduce him.

2) If you are describing something not intimately familiar to most of your readers. Most modern Americans know what a Starbucks cafe looks like, but much fewer people can accurately imagine a predynastic Egyptian village without the help of description.

As an aside, I believe that if you describe one character from a given group as having X characteristic, readers will imagine the rest of the group as having that characteristic unless otherwise specified. For instance, if you say that the first elf character you introduce has dark skin but don't bother to mention the other elves' skin color, people will assume that your elves are generally dark-skinned.

3) If your characters or other subjects look visibly different from a commonly held stereotype or archetype. For instance, if you are writing about ninjas in feudal Japan, you might want to emphasize their historically accurate outfits so that readers don't picture them wearing Hollywood-style black pajamas.

4) If you want people to feel a certain way towards a character. In this instance the specific descriptors you use will matter a lot. For example, if your romance's heroine is a beautiful African woman, not only should you describe her beauty, but you should use descriptors with positive or at least non-negative connotations (for instance, "polished obsidian" sounds nicer than "soot black" in my estimation).

Can anyone think of other situations when description is needed?

 

[Penpilot]

I think I can mostly agree but there's one more thing which guides the when you use these methods that's not here. Your POV character guides how things are described and when. What catches the POV characters attention and peaks their interest is what tends to be described in detail and the words used to described are guided by the POV character.

The instances mentioned above also have to be well timed and set up. Noticing the details of a Starbucks is good and all but generally not timed well when someone is holding a gun to your POV characters face.

 

[Feo Takahari]

Your POV character guides how things are described and when. What catches the POV characters attention and peaks their interest is what tends to be described in detail and the words used to described are guided by the POV character.

This has interesting implications when writing a character like Sherlock Holmes or Jason Bourne, who notices even the tiniest details of his or her surroundings. Perhaps it's for the best that Holmes always had his Watson to narrate . . .

(I often use omniscient third person specifically so I can get away with saying things my viewpoint character wouldn't think.)

 

[Anders Ämting]

...I need to get more sleep. I kept reading the thread title as: "When to use velociraptors."

 

[BWFoster78]

...I need to get more sleep. I kept reading the thread title as: "When to use velociraptors."

As often as possible?

Seriously, you should also use visual descriptors to set the scene. The reader needs to be shown enough to come up with at least a broad mental image of the setting for each scene.

 

[Kit]

One of my POV characters is a child, and I'm finding it interesting to write from her POV partly because she doesn't notice the same things- or at least notice them in the same way- that the adults (and I) would. I have to be really conscious to put myself in her head and think what she would pay attention to and what she wouldn't.

When she met one of the other MC's, I deliberately left his physical description pretty vague, because she wouldn't really be looking at him as much more than "an adult".

 

[Lorna]

@ BWForster

Seriously, you should also use visual descriptors to set the scene. The reader needs to be shown enough to come up with at least a broad mental image of the setting for each scene.

I'm in agreement this should be one of the priorities. Descriptions of a character's surroundings are needed to embed the reader in the narrative, guide them through the world and get them into the character's head space. Without description of the immediate surroundings it's like swimming through a void. I like to be carried into someone's world by smells, sights, sounds etc.

 

[Shockley]

As often as possible?

Seriously, you should also use visual descriptors to set the scene. The reader needs to be shown enough to come up with at least a broad mental image of the setting for each scene.

While I am going to give my broad agreement, I am going to nitpick here.

It really, really depends on the scene. If it's something new, important, etc. then it's fair game. But if it's something mundane, just let it go.

 

[Steerpike]

Of course, it all comes down to style.

If you adopt a very descriptive style for the work, you may use heavily visual description throughout, painting rich scenes at every turn, evoking all of the senses, and so on.

If you adopt a sparse, lean style, you might do very little in the way of visual description, even when it comes to setting a scene.

Neither of these is wrong, it simply depends on what you are trying to achieve. There is plenty of middle ground as well.