posted
I keep reading and critiquing these stories where so many people feel they should give long -- boring -- descriptions at the start of their story. They can't seem to see or "feel" the difference between evocative description and useless descriptors.
Descriptions that start off a story can work...but...it seems to me...the reason so many fail is because that's all they are -- descriptions. The author tells us that the room has green walls. Big deal. so, it's green. Why should I care? If they are green because they are coated with slime...now that's interesting. I immediately flash on reasons why and how it feels (creepy) and what's going to happen in this nasty room.
If the sky is blue, so what? If it's purple with green lightning off in the distance, that's interesting. Am I on an alien world? Or has something happened to the sky on earth?
Same thing goes with descriptions of characters. He has blue eyes, is six plus feet tall, full of bulging muscles wearing a natty coat with -- ho hum. You lost me already.
[This message has been edited by arriki (edited August 20, 2008).]
posted
When I encounter a story up for critique that begins with static physical description, I play find the inciting moment or first cause, which makes slogging through the miasma of attempted stage or mood setting less onerous. My recommendations then suggest ways I project from the story to address the static quality of the beginning. Tone of the narrator, attitude toward the topic is my more common suggestion, if imagery seems to be the intent. A babbling brook is a nice imagery but noisy in connotation, say, versus a whispering creek. Neither is especially evocative without context.
Posts: 6037 | Registered: Jun 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
It's a common fault when learning. I certainly used to ALWAYS describe setting (and in particular weather). It's part of the process, I think, of a writer settling in to a story, getting comfortable with the words. The best thing to do is to then, when you think you've really started, go back and look at whether you need the setting details (and if you do, work them in with the real story, not have them as a stuck-on prologue).
Just takes time to get comfortable enough with stories to know exactly where they actually start (arguably, you can't know where a story truly starts until you know where it ends, and a lot of first 13s here are from unfinished stories).
posted
I think it's also an issue of style. Tolkein liked description, Hugo was positively addicted to it, and Card is a bit skimpy because he likes fast pace. Personally, I'm with Card - and I think modern publishing tends to lean in that direction, but like any art I think it's still an issue of style.
Posts: 2195 | Registered: Aug 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Arriki hit the nail on the head, so to speak. Descriptions need to do more than tell you eye color.
In the other thread on this issue, a character is described as:
"Kate was an expensive woman. From her french pedicure to her pouty, botox lips, every inch of the woman's lean frame was perfection and she had the receipts to prove it."
Now I don't know anything about her eye color, height or body mass but I have a very definate image of her. That's a description that works double duty. Triple duty really because it also establishes a bit about the POV and his/her voice.
In Seabiscuit - the horse's owner is described as a locomotive. While there isn't a bit of physical description in that paragraph, there is a definate image created.
So descriptions that are more than just "the feild was golden" or he was "six two" will almost always work for me.
Make the descriptions tell the reader something about both the POV and the person/thing observed.
posted
The novel I'm working on right now starts with a paragraph of description -- but you're absolutely right. Description doesn't work if you're just telling me what something looks like. It has to say something about the world, character, or situation that goes beyond green walls.
In my current novel, I begin with description because the story has a heavy milieu component and so to me it made sense to make sure the reader knows, from line one, that this is a far-future scifi story. Even so, I spend exactly 61 words doing that and then in the second paragraph, begin to introduce character and tension.
As with anything else, description at the beginning can work or not work. Action at the beginning of the story is another typical mistake from novices who think that because things are blowing up, I'll be interested. In fact, I don't care if that building is blowing up unless you've already introduced me to the family of four living in the corner penthouse.
Printer-friendly view of this topic
