"From the cerulean vault above, a tempestuous deluge of tepid precipitation descends with startling alacrity, its diaphanous droplets pirouetting through the ether like crystalline tears of Olympian deities". "Holy crap, what is happening?" "It rains".
Honestly this looped back around the silly to being pretty great. I was expecting a Douglas Adams or Terry Pratchett kind of flip at the end... 'This, some boring souls would be inclined to call "rainfall". But for the inhabitants of [Placename] it was an event of divine rarity.'
@@jasminv8653 I like that addition, my initial takeaway from the original was to think "that rain better be the start of The Flood to be so described" so the inclusion about it being a "divine rarity" fits well!
I also thought that speaking this way can create a very memorable and pretentious character, which adds comic relief in contrast with normal-speaking people. Reminds me of Sheldon from "The big bang theory".
It's hard to believe how much high-quality content you put out so frequently! I'm imagining these are excerpts/summaries from your course to advertise for it, and brother, IT IS WORKING
Thank you! So I actually don't want to cannibalize from the courses, so this is mostly new material. But yes, you should get a subscription to Bookfox Academy. :)
Another fantastic subject, John... thank you. Stephen King said something like: Description begins in the writer's imagination, but should finish in the readers. As an avid reader myself, I've gotten lost in the detail before. Readers are smart, leave the minutiae to them.
I love that! I agree, if we readers wanted every detail spelled out, well, we'd watch a movie. Creating and filling in the details in one's imagination is part of the fun of reading; everyone sees a slightly different scene that way.
I used to edit as I go. Your advice is better than most realize. Get that draft done, crap or not. No one is supposed to read a rough draft! Polish is a large percent of our craft
Hi John thank you for the amazing video. I watched it and then got inspired to change my paragraph. Thank you. Original:"This guy, with his immaculate expression and attire, is still working as an associate director for Gary Davison Show. I could never forget his edgy smile but sadly, I forgot his name. Dam. If they all could’ve worn some name tags around here, my life would’ve been so much easier. “ Modified:"This guy-oh, sure, he still wears those Langerfeldian glasses, which totally sparked a neuron in me the last time I was on the show. I think he’s the associate director for Gary. That sterile smile? Oh, it’s still frozen in my brain. His name, though? Not so much. If only people wore name tags around here-my life would be so much easier."
This video is something I really needed 😅. I am such a dialogue person and honestly struggle with description. Most of the time I get very lost in conversations and body language of characters rather than being more specific with other things the characters experience. I will try to keep those tips in mind
That Steinbeck description is brilliant. Like, yeah, sure John. We've got some people stumbling out of a night club who have been dancing all night and you're describing licking and whispering, fine smells, and exposed things. This is totally about the beach.
I've just finished my manuscript and I'm working on revisions while also taking your Bookfox revision course. This video is perfect for what I am trying to address right now! Thank you.
in regards to the sensory deprivation section: Chuck Palahniuk got great advice from his mentor Spanbauer about describing the inside of a characters mouth. Is it dry, is it sour? Can the character still taste a hint of cherry lip gloss, or is there meat stuck between someone's teeth? Whenever I need some truly visceral "taste" description, I use this method. You'd be surprised how grounding it is.
I recently started on my first novel, I foresee myself writing to be a 10 year project if I want to sell one. And I have to say these videos have helped me so much, boosting the way i think about writing and giving me confidence in the craft. Thanks for the awesome videos.
Good description will make or break a book for me so it's something I'm always hyper aware of in my own writing, so I appreciate the tips! I just want to share one of my favorite parts of any book ever, because while paragraphs of description are hard to pull off well, I think it is the PERFECT paragraph and a masterful display of the writing craft. I kept thinking about it during this video because it falls in line with so many of these tips. So here is an excerpt from Chitra Banerjee Divakaruni's "Sister of my Heart," I hope it inspires others like it inspires me: "Lastly (I use this word with some guilt), there's my own mother, Nalini. Her skin is still golden, for though she's a widow my mother is careful to apply turmeric paste to her face each day. Her perfect-shaped lips glisten red from paan, which she loves to chew - mostly for the color it leaves on her mouth, I think. She laughs often, my mother, specially when her friends come for tea and talk. It is a glittery, tinkling sound, like jeweled ankle bells, people say, though I myself feel it is more like a thin glass struck with a spoon. Her cheeks feel soft as the lotus flower she's named after on those rare occasions when she presses her face to mine. But more often when she looks at me a frown ridges her forehead between eyebrows beautiful as wings. It it from worry or displeasure? I can never tell. Then she remembers that frowns cause age lines and smooths it away with a finger." PHEW. Like not only do we get the full array of senses, but we also get a sense of who her mother is, how she's perceived by others, and how the main character perceives her/their complex relationship. My favorite bit has to be where she contrasts how others hear her mother's laugh, like ankle bells (something beautiful, but only really used for performance), with how she hears it like a "thin glass struck with a spoon" (showing how she, who lives with her mother and is not just witness to her performance for outsiders, views her mother as fragile and passive). The whole book is one of my favorites but this passage is brilliant.
I wish I could trade for your experience- My tank smelled of mildew, and the salt stung my.....mucus membranes. I really doubt its possible to block or dull my senses.
The Hair/Eyes Cliche is actually a fascinating echo of how the human brain recognizes & identifies other humans. Artists know brains emphasize EYES, MOUTH, and then everything else. Hair color is all you see at a distance. It’s pattern recognition & emphasis on communication. Avoiding danger. Finding friends. The nose tells us little, most of the time. Anime/Manga plays on this famously. So, I’d say not to be too hard on yourself if you fall into this one as it’s psychologically/biologically “normal”. I tend to include the ancillary details like the nose when i want to “zoom the reader in” to a small expression of emotion. Perhaps falling into the “wrinkled nose” cliche? 😂 Cliche exist for a reason, and if you think about why they exist it helps in avoidance / thoughtful usage.
Ha, when you said "do not start with a description" - I immediately thought about the book "The hunchback of Notre Dame". Two chapter devoted to the history of the building - too much for me. I started this book 3 times, I usually love V. Hugo, but could not go through them. Definitely something that worked before could not work nowadays.
Whenever I read Saul Bellows a lot of cringy "purple prose" arises from my purple, feathery quill. Some writers are so good, they can mess you up reading them and turn you into something you're not.
Miles Davis says, "It's not the notes you play, it's the notes you don't play." What's always amazed me is the ability of good writing to make you experience and remember more than what's on the page. And these videos are always thought provoking. The plot, theme, character, place, society/family should drive description. I think there are two approaches. Hilary Mantel said she spent a lot of her youth finding different ways to describe the weather, and probably all the other descriptive details. The open scene in Wolf Hall I found remarkable. I'd been in that situation (not quite as brutal....) but describe it? I'd use short hand. ABC and this time D. Cause, injury, end. Any consequences? So the advice write what you know? Great, but sometimes you know something dramatic so well you no longer see its uniqueness. Later, I think about page 79 Is a scene where a Protestant heretic is burned at the stake. It's surprisingly brief, but unforgettable, as it is unforgettable to young Thomas Cromwell. Often writers when they describe processes, and specific practices, really mess up. George Pellacanos in one of his books describes kayaking on the Potomac River. He's clearly never paddled a kayak. Meh. minor. S.A. Crosby describes cars, trucks, high speed driving. He knows what he's talking about and it's always interesting, exciting, intense. I've driven for decades, know a bit about cars... If I found out Crosby has only driven Hondas... no problem. Patrick O'Brian is an interesting case -- to a sailor. Amazing books, read all them at least twice. Apparently he lied about his experience sailing. Didn't have much. Most of his sailing descriptions come from research and 19th century log books. It's brilliant. Since I read all the books twice I became a sailor, picked up a lot of experience -- crossed an ocean. Re reading (listening) to the books again I realized that when they 'beat into the wind'? It's difficult, takes longer, they tack.. okay. But O'Brian never mentions how rough and bouncy it is. If you sail, you know this. You can be sailing close hauled and slamming slamming slamming, and then turn to run off the wind and it's like a completely different day. I think OBrian missed this detail (and it's not that important) because no Royal Navy officer would've ever felt the need to mention how rough three days of sailing close hauled and tacking was -- everyone reading that log would already know. It's like driving to the mall, you don't have to explain parking.
In the example from "All the Light We Cannot See," it helps that the viewpoint character is blind, so sounds are naturally the things she focuses on the most. It's a beautifully written book.
As much as I love the advice in these videos, I really appreciate the way you add to my reading list. I thought I was well read until I subscribed to your channel.
The cerulean vault part would be uneconomic and tedious in the long run in general fiction. But it fits with weird fiction, lovecraftian horror or, in small snippets, in lofty, pompous parts of fantasy like a poem fragment, an ancient inscryption or lines of a dignified narrator introducing the world and its lore. I agree that it can sound pretentious, so I wouldn't open the story with it and risk losing the hook into the story. Bal-Sagoth wrote howardian/lovecraftian lyrics in a similar vein and it helped the lyrics feel epic, lofty, ceremonious, fantasy-like, badass even.
Good stuff, Bookfox! I've seen/heard basic writing advice hammered until it's totally useless. I like how you address more elevated levels of writing, and explain why you suggest certain things with greater detail. I share these videos with my other writing peeps. Thanks!
@@marikothecheetah9342tbf some of the most interesting fanfic is the ones with a ship like that where the author actually manages to convince me... Amazing what good writing can do
8:07 In one of my favourite writing projects, I intentionally created characters with weird senses. One has a very powerful sixth sense that makes their descriptions extremely varied, another is a predatory eldrich monster that can barely see but can navigate on smell alone, and a third is a bit of a hive mind and describes things from multiple senses and perspectives It can be hard to write at times, but the results is worth it
I use descriptions as tool to enhance my character descriptions or their characters, or the scenes. My go to description is room/place any important character lives in. One of my characters is shallow and she has all those trendy stuff at her house but it is not coherent - it's just there, thrown together without any deeper sense of taste for decor. One of my characters is very cheerful and so is her room, using yellows and pastel colours to reflect that. Looks are important to me, so my characters will have a solid description but not extra detailed - that comes in moments of a close-up, when one characters looks at another for longer than two seconds. For scenes I either use an elaborate description (e.g. during a match the player realises that despite everything this is what he loves to do the most and he sees the ball, up in the air, dancing like a ballerina, swirling before his eyes like this delicate thing), or short and sweet one for the effect of a slicing knife - he smashes it hard into the ground. For me description is something I can use to manipulate time - more elaborate description - more time the scene takes place, less elaborate - less time. I also use descriptions to show dynamics between characters - those who like my character will notice little details in her looks that add to her beauty, her enemies will find faults or even claim her looks to be totally unmemorable, and I described her as having neutral looks, that often prompts: "nothing special" description from other characters. My OC usually dresses casually and has more of a sportsy style, so when her friends see her in an evening dress - they take notice of it and I am going to detail that look. I also give my characters something characteristic about their looks: two brothers have: grey/silvery and yellowish/golden eyes respectively, other has dark blue eyes after his father of different ethnicity than him, hairdos are also a thing I use often to distinguish my characters. I like detailed descriptions but purple prose isn't my thing so it makes me more laugh at the description rather than appreciate it. A bit of touch-up is fine, overdoing it renders description ridiculous. I sometimes do long descriptions as an exercise, as I am bad at them, so I describe and describe, and describe but when I write my story I try to treat description as an aid to develop the story, rather than a stand-alone concept, thrown into story just for the sake of it being in the story. Sensory descriptions are difficult for me, so I try to implement them as much as I can, especially taste, smell and touch. Unfortunately, I am HSP, which means I am easily overstimulated and even descriptions of smells make me uncomfortable, so I have to push through with descriptions of meals having this tantalising smell. It's easier with perfume or cologne, or flowers, if they are in the vicinity, less so with touch as a slight touch makes me itchy and I scratch my skin to blood, but I do realise other people don't have the same issue, so I try to implement those; slight touches into my prose. Auditory sensations are easier, as I process them easier, than any other sense. Hair and eye colour... Eh... I tend to start with posture because that is what we notice primarily - whether the person is tall or small or fat or lean. And I've learned that from crime shows and of course - Agatha Christie. I go from generalisation, to detail - my OC sees boys in the volleyball club she wants to be a manager of, and first she notices their postures - whether they are tall or lean, or bulky. Then comes hairdo - colour, yes, but also hairstyle, as some of these boys have pretty unique hairstyles. She doesn't notice their eye colour at all, and only notices captain's eyes, because they are silvery cold and she feels very uncomfortable because of it. I drop the eye colours of another characters when needed, but I also add voice. One of my characters is very calm, warm person and his voice very much reflects that. And clothes. One of my characters wears t-shirts that say something like; Ultimate Star, You rock etc. Another character gives my OC the meme T-shirt with Dalek and description: OMG! It's R2D2! I loved him in Star Trek! to show his a bit crazy nature. One has volleyball keychains at their school bag, another one wears a yin yang pendant. Phone ringtones also help me to "describe" a character. One of my character, a violinist has Campanella as his ringtone, another one has his gf's favourite song, yet another has his friend's number under a crazy song. Each of instances of a call being made I make sure to put that detail into my story. Additionally, I use looks as a way to characterise my character. My MC always wakes up with her hair tangled, my second character always ruffles his hair after waking up, or when he is nervous, third one dyed his hair red to make a stance and it is strictly connected to his backstory. Cars... I spent the whole day to choose cars for my characters and cars that will take part in an accident and why. I give the concrete model and colour and how the character treats the car: one chooses the sports car as he needs to chase another sports car but isn't thrilled about it, second one warmly looks at his Toyota Prius in red colour (his favourite), despite being rich enough to own a Ferrari, which says a lot about his attitude towards money. All in all - descriptions are great, I love them and I don't like undescribed characters, places that are just those blank spaces to me. I love how some authors make a certain character live through a description. For example, a nonchalant looks of Aramis when we first meet him or D'Artagnan tangled in Portos' cape - it adds so much to the scene and gives us glimpse into calm and vert aristocratic demeanor of Aramis and goofy nature of D'Artagnan. I live for these scenes.
As a fantasy guy, I really like Guy Gavriel Kaye, and I read Tigana and Songs for Arbonne and Lions of al-Rassir back to back. Glad I did. By the end of that, I really felt like I understood the music of that author. Are there any authors who you just binged? Straight through, put one book down, pick up the next one?
“Description is not only about the thing described but also about the describer”. Thats really going to stick with me, I don’t think I’ve ever heard it before.
about frontloading, I believe I always read somewhere that authors in the past had to offer a wealth of information via description because they introduced readers to things, places, and so on they couldn't imagine. Such as Jules Verne describing a trapper's camp full of furs. Today, we know - at least in general - about a lot of things, so when you read about a spaceship, for instance, images from movies and other media will pop to mind. The author doesn't have to go to great lengths to describe it to the reader. While Jules Verne's reader - unless he read as extensively as the author the magazines describing expeditions to the Poles - needed that information.
I think you only need a flowery (pun intended) description of a sunset if that moment is important to your character. Like, she's sitting alone on a hilltop, coming to terms with a terrible choice, and something in the colors or vanishing of the sun or finality of it has meaning to her. If there was just a pretty sunset one time, I think it's fair to just say, "She let herself forget for a minute or two, just watching the sun go down." The reader can draw an image from their own experience.
for the description order part, i feel it can be more easily explained, for both people AND objects, as "if YOU were to look at this person/object, what would you notice first?". for a big person you, of course, would notice the size first, then you'd go down the detail ladder the more you take the image in. Same with objects, if you are seeing a painting the first thing that will catch your eye will probably be the subject instead of the painter's name. The description order, for a person, can also change based on where the observer is. if they are on the ground and getting up then they'll probably first look at the shoes and then move up, if they are being tapped on the back and they turn around, they'll probably notice the head first
When it comes to the topic of a character's eye color, hair color, and hairstyle, I believe it should be addressed in a particular way. It can feel awkward or forced to mention all those details at the very beginning of the story; however, I think it should be done relatively early on. Let me explain: there's nothing worse for me than forming a mental image of a character, only to find out 100 pages in that they are, for instance, blonde with blue eyes when I had been picturing them as having dark hair and green eyes. It feels disappointing and frustrating to realize my vision and entire experience was incorrect, and I have to reimagine all those scenes, "fixing" them. My conclusion is this: either describe those three physical features upfront or don’t mention them at all, but if you do choose to include them, make sure to do it relatively fairly soon in the narrative. Of course, this should be done in an interesting way and not all at once.
I enjoy how Andy Weir describes his characters. He mostly doesn't say what they look like at all, but every one is full of personality, with their own quirks, mannerisms, speech patterns, and ways of relating to and interacting with others. The audio books are even better, because the narrators give them actual voices. Edit: on the other hand, he writes smells really weirdly. (A small spoiler warning for Project Hail Mary): there's a disaster which nearly leads to the main character's death, and takes lots of hard work to rectify. This disaster has a specific unpleasant odor associated with it. Some time later, that odor unexpectedly reappears in full force, and the character spends several seconds trying to figure out what it is, before it hits him. Smells don't work like that, they *instantly* bring you back, often very vividly with both images and emotions.
How one character describes another can also reflect their personality. I cannot remember the book I read it, but, how a street gang member looks over someone is indicative of their priorities. This character first looked for the colour of the handkerchief in their back pocket, bulges at the waist hiding a gun, their hands and then the eyes. Characters were described by colour and brand of clothing.
imo, most of the time, far - close is the best order. I find that the easiest as there is a lot of detailed features that I quicky project onto the person just based on age, gender and silhouette. As long as the reader get the vibe of the character and can distinguish them from the other quickly in their head. it doesn't really matter if the reader has the same image of a character as the writer (except of plot relevant details like "she had a robot arm" of course)
Yes!!! People always fall into, "I need you to know exactly how they look" or "I need to spend three pages explaining the floorplan." No, you don't. Like, ever. Ever.
I actually like detailed descriptions of the character, like colour of the hair, eyes, shape of the face - for me it indicates that the writer took the time to "paint" these characters in their head and by giving detailed descriptions I can imagine more clearly how the character looked like. If I can draw it - that's a good description. If I can't - then it's lacking, but it's just me.
@@marikothecheetah9342I think we all want a picture painted for us, especially of key characters and settings. But it can become burdensome when the author seems determined to say, "No, you must picture her precisely as I do!" It's a balance. The pro knows when to lay off and trust the reader.
@@Fauntleroy. That is true, but I see the tendency to leave it up to the reader completely how the character looks like. So if I am given an empty piece of paper, why should I be interested in it? :/
I love watching your videos so much - on repeat- and study them like a textbook.. that I began to analyze books I read, even movies or shows that I watch and pointing out things that are wrong or techniques used in them. I don't know if this is a good or a bad thing yet
For a lot of "descriptive" parts of my book, I'll make chapter breaks explaining certain ideas (like magic), bestiary entries, and panels that show what was briefly described in full raw detail. Makes it so the reader can skip it if they want but for the nerds like me can enjoy those breaks.
Many studies have shown video games improving attention span and concentration. It really just depends on the game and how the player engages with it. In competitive games players will sometimes derisively refer to others as dopamine addicts to explain them being stuck at a mid level despite years of playing due to only seeking easy dopamine without any thought or effort into improving their performance.
In the fantasy novel I'm trying to write, my MC is wandering an fog filled enchanted forest and I often describe "the bitter taste in the air" or "the biting cold" just before the enemy strikes. I should probably change that up a bit.😅
He was standing at the window, looking at the world crumbling under his sight, the wind piercing through his ears like blinging blades, the blood made an aura of shame and guilt around him. That's the best I could think of in 10 minutes, and I am a beginner.
This is less of a descriptive issue and more of an internal monologue issue. I've read books where a character is asked a question, and the character starts thinking a lot before answering, such that I think, "Hey dude. If this is happening in real time this person is probably wondering what's taking so long for you to answer them and why you suddenly zoned out. Is this a me problem or a real thing to be avoided when writing?
In my humble opinion it can be executed nicely, especially during a scene where a character is stupefied or stunned and has these thoughts on the matter, but doing it a couple of times during the book only - they will have an impact. But doing it all the time is an overkill. I remember a scene in Haikyuu!!, when the character needs to decide on his next play (volleyball) and to whom to set the ball. It takes about 30 seconds for us to watch it, but animators added timer and for the character it took 0.8 seconds. I love this scene because it depicted the process of thinking so accurately - we think much faster, than we speak, especially under pressure.
I have a question. I have been reading Stephen King’s On Writing, and he says to not use the word ‘felt’. I’m like, okay, makes sense, don’t say thing like “I felt so angry that morning”. But what if you are using felt in the sense of some thing like - “I felt like I was puking up my guts”? Would that be acceptable?
I've never bought a novel for the quality of the writing. I buy because it seems an interesting story. For me, really flowery description can be a distraction. But for college English majors, the quality of writing might well be far more enticing that the story itself. To each, his own. This may be why publishers put out more than 1 book at a time.
One mistake I've seen is writers describing mundane details, but not showing the reader the details that would catch the POV character's attention. A character in a setting they know well may not notice much, but one entering an unfamiliar area (especially a potentially dangerous one) will notice a LOT of details.
Oh, I got the quiz right! I actually found myself annoyed with a book I was reading recently because it did something like this. It actually annoyed me so much that it has stuck with me for over a month. Basically in the scene, the narrator is describing someone's expression, and compares the harshness of said expression to a specific feature on a piece of furniture - a desk leg, to be specific. It was so jarring because, instead of focusing on the other character's expression and how that made the narrator feel, I found myself forced to notice the furniture in the room, which added nothing of value to the scene or characters.
Here's a good example of a short story that uses all senses. My friend and I were walking down the street, right? Suddenly I saw something suspicious right in front of us. I stopped my friend and said, "watch out, don't step on the shit." My friend looked at it and said, "no man, that's not shit." I was confused, "dude, it looks like shit," I said. He disagreed. We got closer to have a better look but the smell caught me off guard. "Dude, it smells like shit, ugh!" But my friend was irreducible. "No, you're wrong, man, my shit doesn't smell like that." We each grabbed a little piece of it and in my hands it really felt like shit, but again my friend didn't seem to agree that it felt like shit to the touch. So in a last attempt to verify the thing I put it in my mouth. "Dude, it tastes like shit. It IS shit." He proceeded to put some of it in his own mouth. After some tasting he finally answered, "oh yeah, you're right it is definitely shit!"
I’ve used a sensory deprivation tank 3 times (It was a package). I found it to be interesting, but far, far, far from amazing. I think it might be more helpful for people who suffer from sensory overload. For me, it was worthless. One star. Do not recommend.
6:48 how would you say the personal taste of an author affects these emotions towards the things described? I couldn't help but wonder when you talked about seaweed being a somehow nasty smell, as I take it as a dear smell of my childhood and the sea town in which I grew up. In your example, such thing was only possible when the soldiers were borderline high on smiles. Characters are the ones talking, but the narrator (author), even in a 1st POV, is the one looking at things. Ultimately, characters are our vessels, right? A writer from Morocco would have a special inclination towards some smells, colours and sounds that a pacific islander would describe in a whole different way. Even through their characters. This adds another question. How can we "fake" these to create a more realistic character? Say you're writing a character who is a 20 y/o girl from Taiwan: your "author" senses should adapt to the senses and taste that girl would have, but based on another culture that you have not experienced in that way... Lots of subtleties, but they definitely make or break a character ❤❤
look i don't care about how fancy you are being with language. if i can't understand what is even happening anymore, i stop reading. if you want to awe me, do good character writing and intricate plots, not with an overly fancy description of a sunset. i don't read a book for any of that stuff and neither does anyone else (hopefully).
Rather than "paint a picture with words" use a few words evocative enough for the reader to paint the picture in their own head. Instead of endless detail, one detail in extreme focus that evokes the rest of the setting.
@bookfox. Sooo. I have a question regarding a scene I wrote weeks ago. It’s describing the stalker climbing a stair case and using the edges of the staircase with soft feet to avoid creaking. Well, I was reading the Butcher and the Wren yesterday and she described the same thing, using the feet on the edges and explaining why. Now I feel like readers will think I stole that idea 🤣. What are your thoughts on something like that, should I just leave it as is and hope people don’t see the resemblance? 😬. When I read it, I stopped and said aloud “ah crap”.
Keep it but make it your own, meaning: give the character a weird memory or mental image while he does it. Or add tension by making the footing slippery. Or maybe there's a sound nearby that's totally discordant with what's happening, like a TV playing an old sitcom with a laugh track. Lesson: don't abandon your idea, personalize it.
Try another approach - he put his feet like a ballet dancer, his toes first, then impeccably placing the middle part on the hard surface of the step and as if making the decicive swirl at the end of writing his name - he set his heel firmly, as if he did not do anything else in his life. he was like a cat, steadily but silently putting his toes first, then gliding to putting some weight on the middle part, perfectly balancing his stance, ending it with a beautiful, dance like placing of the heel on the steps, that would normally crack but he made the floor his dancing partner and the floor gracefully responded to his leading steps. If you want inspiration, read Liam Hearn's Across The Nightingale Floor - which highlights the technique of walking on a squeaky floor.
@@marikothecheetah9342 thank you. I actually do write about where she got the idea and all that, but I like your idea on making it a bit more “flowery” for the lack of a better term.
I disagree with your character description order. The first "wrong" one follows the eye of the person watching. If you see a person for the first time, you usually look at the face first, then look at the feet, and then on the rest of the body. The rule to describe in order is a trap which makes your writing boring and predictable. Also makes you fall into a trap of needing to describe everything from top to bottom creating monstrously big paragraph, while usually one or two details are more than enough.
It was actually bottom to top. Which is worse IMO unless the person describing it is looking from a vantage point where they would see in that order. I didn't keep them straight in my head well enough to realize the first wasn't top to bottom, but it still instinctively felt better because the face is the first thing you're going to notice the vast majority of the time. I'd prefer top to bottom though, but maybe it's because I basically never look at the feet, let alone second. Clothing is easier to notice than feet.
I'm confused. You said in another video to put what you want the reader to remember, last in a sentence. Here around 13:00 you say to put things in order. I'll give it some more thought, interesting concepts.
Well, the 2/3/1 principle means that people tend to remember what you mention last. The order in which you describe someone isn't really a sentence principle -- it's just about having an organized way to order description.
I disagree somewhat with your last point. For your example with the old truck, having it unspecific indicates the POV doesn't know or care about cars. If you add the year and make I am going to assume something about your POV. The same thing applies to specific measurements.
I cannot agree with the 1st description. Almost no one notices anyone by shoes first, than ankles, etc etc. The first thing we notice is someone's eyes or tattoos
It would indicate to me the observer has a habit of looking down or difficulty meeting eyes, due to anxiety, etc. For whatever reason, they were already looking down when this person approached and their instinct is not to immediately dart to eye contact. The overarching point is to present your description in a logical order the reader will find easily digestible.
ngl, I thought this was going to be about BOOK descriptions, as in that little elevator pitch you make when you're trying to sell the book. Little disappointed.
I have a scene where the protagonist is trying to get to work, but he is stuck because he can't get this girl out of his head. Her hair is dark, almost black, which is funny because he prefers blonds. Her eyes were dark too. He couldn't remember their color, only how caring they were. She had a mustache. It looked soft, and he found himself wanting to touch it, but that wasn't important. Her voice was pleasant, but it was the content of what she said that set her apart and erased all her flaws. I'm glad I found your channel..
You got some typos in the scents page: Purity-in block: ...Pip a change to smell fruit rotting and things dying and be approached by the sellers of oranges and friend things who’d install the speed bumps in the first place … Virgin Suicides -your description: And this smell is someone an answer to the mystery of why the girls killed themselves, but it’s also exceptionally mysterious in itself: Didn't find any others
In the alpha version of the book I'm writing, I had zero, flat out zero, description. In the beta, I added mostly frontloading of a paragraph or two and some sprinkles here and there. Even though I cut a lot of scenes, it went from 109k to 140k. My issue, as I see it, is that I don't care as much as what appears, but what happens, and the ideas behind them. so most of the book is like that, as (what I hope ia an inetersting) chess game, rather than a visual or audiotary experience. Still added those descriptions where I thought it mattered to the characters emotional state, but describing how each one they meet look? Who cares?
I think it matters to the degree that each point of description also has some impact on the story or tells something deeper about your characters. Such as the watery blue of someone's eyes appearing diluted, the pink folds of his eyes bringing to mind a newborn runt. Your POV character, by observing someone as such, might be showing they consider themselves superior. A stooped posture combined with sunken eyes, or someone wearing rumpled clothes with food on them can be indicative of deeper trouble in this person's life, to be expanded upon later. A woman with a habit of touching her blonde hairdo could be conscientious and tidy, or nervous, or she could be trying to make sure everyone notices a new ring. If we describe her shade of blonde as 'synthetic' or 'golden' or 'dirty' this can hint at something more about her as well as the observer, who might be judgmental, or attracted to her or repulsed. These are far more interesting and telling than saying she was 'blonde with blue eyes' or he was 'tall but of average looks.' You don't need a whole rundown of exact height, weight, posture, hair/eye colour, clothing style and complexion for every single character, (sounds exhausting to read!) but picking a few notable traits that MATTER for some reason or other can both deepen your story on a human level and make each character memorable. If your descriptions are easily slapped on after the book is written or your characters remain interchangeable, I would be concerned the characters themselves are underdeveloped.
@@HH-wq6se I understand, and thank you for the long explantion. I tried to add those type of things, but it does run contrary to my way of thought. For me, the charcter's main difference comes from their actions, behavior (reserved vs expressive, funny vs serious etc.), ways of thought (some are more logical, some more emotional, each concern themselves with different things, and approach life by different assumptions and set of beliefs etc.), and relationship to other characters. I tried to add some physical descriptors, and thinking what those might tell people of the pov over the situation, but it diesn't come naturally. This is the first book I'm writing, so I understand it needs work, or maybe it just different styles. Some examples- if I want to have someone who's snarky and competitive, it's very easy to have them act and speak this way- smirking while quipping, one-upping what was told to them etc., but if they are tall or short, have a sharp nose or bushy eyebrows, it doesn't matter much to me. Scenarios I was abke to add more description (at first it was where they were, but in the second iteration I added a lot of the ambiance and descripting hints to how the pov character interacts and feel about where they were). Describing action beyond what it is, is also a bit messy for me- if you turn around and a barrel of a gun pops out to be few inches of your face, the last thing you care for is the model of the gun, or how silvery or black it is. It's a f&ing gun in your f&ing face.
It doesn't matter what anyone writes. Unless you're wealthy, powerful, influential, and popular, no one's going to read your work. No exceptions. 🐲✨🐲✨🐲✨
"From the cerulean vault above, a tempestuous deluge of tepid precipitation descends with startling alacrity, its diaphanous droplets pirouetting through the ether like crystalline tears of Olympian deities".
"Holy crap, what is happening?"
"It rains".
Honestly this looped back around the silly to being pretty great. I was expecting a Douglas Adams or Terry Pratchett kind of flip at the end... 'This, some boring souls would be inclined to call "rainfall". But for the inhabitants of [Placename] it was an event of divine rarity.'
Now insert that line specifically to highlight how melodramatic a character is and it wraps back around to being a good, serious line 😊
The humid rain felt like awkward tears, something one wants to escape.
@@jasminv8653 I like that addition, my initial takeaway from the original was to think "that rain better be the start of The Flood to be so described" so the inclusion about it being a "divine rarity" fits well!
I also thought that speaking this way can create a very memorable and pretentious character, which adds comic relief in contrast with normal-speaking people. Reminds me of Sheldon from "The big bang theory".
It's hard to believe how much high-quality content you put out so frequently! I'm imagining these are excerpts/summaries from your course to advertise for it, and brother, IT IS WORKING
Thank you! So I actually don't want to cannibalize from the courses, so this is mostly new material. But yes, you should get a subscription to Bookfox Academy. :)
Another fantastic subject, John... thank you. Stephen King said something like: Description begins in the writer's imagination, but should finish in the readers. As an avid reader myself, I've gotten lost in the detail before. Readers are smart, leave the minutiae to them.
Well said!
I love that! I agree, if we readers wanted every detail spelled out, well, we'd watch a movie. Creating and filling in the details in one's imagination is part of the fun of reading; everyone sees a slightly different scene that way.
Well this channel has quickly become my favorite writing resource...
mine, too
Good video. For those who stop in the middle. He ends with the critical thought, correct these mistakes in the editing stages, not the initial draft.
Good point!
I used to edit as I go. Your advice is better than most realize.
Get that draft done, crap or not. No one is supposed to read a rough draft! Polish is a large percent of our craft
@@t3amtomahawkAgreed. Single most important lesson I ever learned after "less is usually more."
My inner perfectionist goblin: Don’t listen to these LIES 👹
I won't bore you with an encyclopedic description of how good this is.
"Swimming through a syrup of synonyms" - Ah there it is, the reminder of why I love your writing advice.
Hi John thank you for the amazing video. I watched it and then got inspired to change my paragraph. Thank you.
Original:"This guy, with his immaculate expression and attire, is still working as an associate director for Gary Davison Show. I could never forget his edgy smile but sadly, I forgot his name. Dam. If they all could’ve worn some name tags around here, my life would’ve been so much easier. “
Modified:"This guy-oh, sure, he still wears those Langerfeldian glasses, which totally sparked a neuron in me the last time I was on the show. I think he’s the associate director for Gary. That sterile smile? Oh, it’s still frozen in my brain. His name, though? Not so much. If only people wore name tags around here-my life would be so much easier."
This video is something I really needed 😅. I am such a dialogue person and honestly struggle with description. Most of the time I get very lost in conversations and body language of characters rather than being more specific with other things the characters experience. I will try to keep those tips in mind
The Red Badge of Courage is a masterclass in writing. A great and short novel that you can learn a lot from. Had to get that off my chest lol
That Steinbeck description is brilliant. Like, yeah, sure John. We've got some people stumbling out of a night club who have been dancing all night and you're describing licking and whispering, fine smells, and exposed things. This is totally about the beach.
I've just finished my manuscript and I'm working on revisions while also taking your Bookfox revision course. This video is perfect for what I am trying to address right now! Thank you.
in regards to the sensory deprivation section: Chuck Palahniuk got great advice from his mentor Spanbauer about describing the inside of a characters mouth. Is it dry, is it sour? Can the character still taste a hint of cherry lip gloss, or is there meat stuck between someone's teeth?
Whenever I need some truly visceral "taste" description, I use this method. You'd be surprised how grounding it is.
I recently started on my first novel, I foresee myself writing to be a 10 year project if I want to sell one. And I have to say these videos have helped me so much, boosting the way i think about writing and giving me confidence in the craft. Thanks for the awesome videos.
Good description will make or break a book for me so it's something I'm always hyper aware of in my own writing, so I appreciate the tips! I just want to share one of my favorite parts of any book ever, because while paragraphs of description are hard to pull off well, I think it is the PERFECT paragraph and a masterful display of the writing craft. I kept thinking about it during this video because it falls in line with so many of these tips. So here is an excerpt from Chitra Banerjee Divakaruni's "Sister of my Heart," I hope it inspires others like it inspires me:
"Lastly (I use this word with some guilt), there's my own mother, Nalini. Her skin is still golden, for though she's a widow my mother is careful to apply turmeric paste to her face each day. Her perfect-shaped lips glisten red from paan, which she loves to chew - mostly for the color it leaves on her mouth, I think. She laughs often, my mother, specially when her friends come for tea and talk. It is a glittery, tinkling sound, like jeweled ankle bells, people say, though I myself feel it is more like a thin glass struck with a spoon. Her cheeks feel soft as the lotus flower she's named after on those rare occasions when she presses her face to mine. But more often when she looks at me a frown ridges her forehead between eyebrows beautiful as wings. It it from worry or displeasure? I can never tell. Then she remembers that frowns cause age lines and smooths it away with a finger."
PHEW. Like not only do we get the full array of senses, but we also get a sense of who her mother is, how she's perceived by others, and how the main character perceives her/their complex relationship. My favorite bit has to be where she contrasts how others hear her mother's laugh, like ankle bells (something beautiful, but only really used for performance), with how she hears it like a "thin glass struck with a spoon" (showing how she, who lives with her mother and is not just witness to her performance for outsiders, views her mother as fragile and passive). The whole book is one of my favorites but this passage is brilliant.
Float tanks are legitimately the most relaxing thing I've ever experienced.
I wish I could trade for your experience- My tank smelled of mildew, and the salt stung my.....mucus membranes. I really doubt its possible to block or dull my senses.
The Hair/Eyes Cliche is actually a fascinating echo of how the human brain recognizes & identifies other humans.
Artists know brains emphasize EYES, MOUTH, and then everything else. Hair color is all you see at a distance. It’s pattern recognition & emphasis on communication. Avoiding danger. Finding friends. The nose tells us little, most of the time. Anime/Manga plays on this famously.
So, I’d say not to be too hard on yourself if you fall into this one as it’s psychologically/biologically “normal”.
I tend to include the ancillary details like the nose when i want to “zoom the reader in” to a small expression of emotion. Perhaps falling into the “wrinkled nose” cliche? 😂
Cliche exist for a reason, and if you think about why they exist it helps in avoidance / thoughtful usage.
Ha, when you said "do not start with a description" - I immediately thought about the book "The hunchback of Notre Dame". Two chapter devoted to the history of the building - too much for me. I started this book 3 times, I usually love V. Hugo, but could not go through them. Definitely something that worked before could not work nowadays.
Larry McMurtry is a master of description! In Lonesome Dove, the texas bull fighting the grizzly bear is a complete short story by itself!
Whenever I read Saul Bellows a lot of cringy "purple prose" arises from my purple, feathery quill. Some writers are so good, they can mess you up reading them and turn you into something you're not.
I once described a morning after a murder as "When the sun painted the sky in the color of her sin...." and i find that quite good to this day.
Miles Davis says, "It's not the notes you play, it's the notes you don't play." What's always amazed me is the ability of good writing to make you experience and remember more than what's on the page. And these videos are always thought provoking. The plot, theme, character, place, society/family should drive description. I think there are two approaches. Hilary Mantel said she spent a lot of her youth finding different ways to describe the weather, and probably all the other descriptive details.
The open scene in Wolf Hall I found remarkable. I'd been in that situation (not quite as brutal....) but describe it? I'd use short hand. ABC and this time D. Cause, injury, end. Any consequences? So the advice write what you know? Great, but sometimes you know something dramatic so well you no longer see its uniqueness. Later, I think about page 79 Is a scene where a Protestant heretic is burned at the stake. It's surprisingly brief, but unforgettable, as it is unforgettable to young Thomas Cromwell.
Often writers when they describe processes, and specific practices, really mess up. George Pellacanos in one of his books describes kayaking on the Potomac River. He's clearly never paddled a kayak. Meh. minor. S.A. Crosby describes cars, trucks, high speed driving. He knows what he's talking about and it's always interesting, exciting, intense. I've driven for decades, know a bit about cars... If I found out Crosby has only driven Hondas... no problem.
Patrick O'Brian is an interesting case -- to a sailor. Amazing books, read all them at least twice. Apparently he lied about his experience sailing. Didn't have much. Most of his sailing descriptions come from research and 19th century log books. It's brilliant. Since I read all the books twice I became a sailor, picked up a lot of experience -- crossed an ocean. Re reading (listening) to the books again I realized that when they 'beat into the wind'? It's difficult, takes longer, they tack.. okay. But O'Brian never mentions how rough and bouncy it is. If you sail, you know this. You can be sailing close hauled and slamming slamming slamming, and then turn to run off the wind and it's like a completely different day. I think OBrian missed this detail (and it's not that important) because no Royal Navy officer would've ever felt the need to mention how rough three days of sailing close hauled and tacking was -- everyone reading that log would already know. It's like driving to the mall, you don't have to explain parking.
I love your videos, they helped me so much on my journey as a writer. Your channel is top down the best thing when it comes to writing.
In the example from "All the Light We Cannot See," it helps that the viewpoint character is blind, so sounds are naturally the things she focuses on the most. It's a beautifully written book.
Sensory deprivation chambers are amazing.
Your videos are incredibly helpful. Thank you.
As much as I love the advice in these videos, I really appreciate the way you add to my reading list. I thought I was well read until I subscribed to your channel.
Glad to hear that! I certainly try to draw from a wide variety of books and authors.
Even you avoid cliches in this videos. You talk about show-dont-tell near the end. Usually it was first. Subscribed!
The cerulean vault part would be uneconomic and tedious in the long run in general fiction. But it fits with weird fiction, lovecraftian horror or, in small snippets, in lofty, pompous parts of fantasy like a poem fragment, an ancient inscryption or lines of a dignified narrator introducing the world and its lore.
I agree that it can sound pretentious, so I wouldn't open the story with it and risk losing the hook into the story.
Bal-Sagoth wrote howardian/lovecraftian lyrics in a similar vein and it helped the lyrics feel epic, lofty, ceremonious, fantasy-like, badass even.
Good stuff, Bookfox! I've seen/heard basic writing advice hammered until it's totally useless. I like how you address more elevated levels of writing, and explain why you suggest certain things with greater detail. I share these videos with my other writing peeps. Thanks!
Glad it was helpful, and thank you for sharing the videos as well!
17:06 yes, I always need the reminder that this not what my first draft needs to be. Revision is where it's at.
Not me using these videos to make fanfiction. (at least it will be high quality fanfiction)
YES! The Fanfic writer! Fuck YEAH! 😆
Absolutely real lmao
Fanfic can be as valid as anything else. There's just a lot of junk to sift through because there's rarely any quality control mechanism.
@@Fauntleroy. and tons of shipping that makes totally no sense and makes me question the sanity of the person who wrote them.
@@marikothecheetah9342tbf some of the most interesting fanfic is the ones with a ship like that where the author actually manages to convince me... Amazing what good writing can do
I really love this channel!
Thanks John
8:07 In one of my favourite writing projects, I intentionally created characters with weird senses. One has a very powerful sixth sense that makes their descriptions extremely varied, another is a predatory eldrich monster that can barely see but can navigate on smell alone, and a third is a bit of a hive mind and describes things from multiple senses and perspectives
It can be hard to write at times, but the results is worth it
Ooooo, that sounds really creative. Love it!
I use descriptions as tool to enhance my character descriptions or their characters, or the scenes. My go to description is room/place any important character lives in. One of my characters is shallow and she has all those trendy stuff at her house but it is not coherent - it's just there, thrown together without any deeper sense of taste for decor. One of my characters is very cheerful and so is her room, using yellows and pastel colours to reflect that. Looks are important to me, so my characters will have a solid description but not extra detailed - that comes in moments of a close-up, when one characters looks at another for longer than two seconds.
For scenes I either use an elaborate description (e.g. during a match the player realises that despite everything this is what he loves to do the most and he sees the ball, up in the air, dancing like a ballerina, swirling before his eyes like this delicate thing), or short and sweet one for the effect of a slicing knife - he smashes it hard into the ground.
For me description is something I can use to manipulate time - more elaborate description - more time the scene takes place, less elaborate - less time. I also use descriptions to show dynamics between characters - those who like my character will notice little details in her looks that add to her beauty, her enemies will find faults or even claim her looks to be totally unmemorable, and I described her as having neutral looks, that often prompts: "nothing special" description from other characters. My OC usually dresses casually and has more of a sportsy style, so when her friends see her in an evening dress - they take notice of it and I am going to detail that look.
I also give my characters something characteristic about their looks: two brothers have: grey/silvery and yellowish/golden eyes respectively, other has dark blue eyes after his father of different ethnicity than him, hairdos are also a thing I use often to distinguish my characters.
I like detailed descriptions but purple prose isn't my thing so it makes me more laugh at the description rather than appreciate it. A bit of touch-up is fine, overdoing it renders description ridiculous.
I sometimes do long descriptions as an exercise, as I am bad at them, so I describe and describe, and describe but when I write my story I try to treat description as an aid to develop the story, rather than a stand-alone concept, thrown into story just for the sake of it being in the story.
Sensory descriptions are difficult for me, so I try to implement them as much as I can, especially taste, smell and touch. Unfortunately, I am HSP, which means I am easily overstimulated and even descriptions of smells make me uncomfortable, so I have to push through with descriptions of meals having this tantalising smell. It's easier with perfume or cologne, or flowers, if they are in the vicinity, less so with touch as a slight touch makes me itchy and I scratch my skin to blood, but I do realise other people don't have the same issue, so I try to implement those; slight touches into my prose. Auditory sensations are easier, as I process them easier, than any other sense.
Hair and eye colour... Eh... I tend to start with posture because that is what we notice primarily - whether the person is tall or small or fat or lean. And I've learned that from crime shows and of course - Agatha Christie. I go from generalisation, to detail - my OC sees boys in the volleyball club she wants to be a manager of, and first she notices their postures - whether they are tall or lean, or bulky. Then comes hairdo - colour, yes, but also hairstyle, as some of these boys have pretty unique hairstyles. She doesn't notice their eye colour at all, and only notices captain's eyes, because they are silvery cold and she feels very uncomfortable because of it. I drop the eye colours of another characters when needed, but I also add voice. One of my characters is very calm, warm person and his voice very much reflects that.
And clothes. One of my characters wears t-shirts that say something like; Ultimate Star, You rock etc. Another character gives my OC the meme T-shirt with Dalek and description: OMG! It's R2D2! I loved him in Star Trek! to show his a bit crazy nature. One has volleyball keychains at their school bag, another one wears a yin yang pendant.
Phone ringtones also help me to "describe" a character. One of my character, a violinist has Campanella as his ringtone, another one has his gf's favourite song, yet another has his friend's number under a crazy song. Each of instances of a call being made I make sure to put that detail into my story.
Additionally, I use looks as a way to characterise my character. My MC always wakes up with her hair tangled, my second character always ruffles his hair after waking up, or when he is nervous, third one dyed his hair red to make a stance and it is strictly connected to his backstory.
Cars... I spent the whole day to choose cars for my characters and cars that will take part in an accident and why. I give the concrete model and colour and how the character treats the car: one chooses the sports car as he needs to chase another sports car but isn't thrilled about it, second one warmly looks at his Toyota Prius in red colour (his favourite), despite being rich enough to own a Ferrari, which says a lot about his attitude towards money.
All in all - descriptions are great, I love them and I don't like undescribed characters, places that are just those blank spaces to me. I love how some authors make a certain character live through a description. For example, a nonchalant looks of Aramis when we first meet him or D'Artagnan tangled in Portos' cape - it adds so much to the scene and gives us glimpse into calm and vert aristocratic demeanor of Aramis and goofy nature of D'Artagnan. I live for these scenes.
As a fantasy guy, I really like Guy Gavriel Kaye, and I read Tigana and Songs for Arbonne and Lions of al-Rassir back to back. Glad I did. By the end of that, I really felt like I understood the music of that author.
Are there any authors who you just binged? Straight through, put one book down, pick up the next one?
“Description is not only about the thing described but also about the describer”. Thats really going to stick with me, I don’t think I’ve ever heard it before.
about frontloading, I believe I always read somewhere that authors in the past had to offer a wealth of information via description because they introduced readers to things, places, and so on they couldn't imagine. Such as Jules Verne describing a trapper's camp full of furs. Today, we know - at least in general - about a lot of things, so when you read about a spaceship, for instance, images from movies and other media will pop to mind. The author doesn't have to go to great lengths to describe it to the reader. While Jules Verne's reader - unless he read as extensively as the author the magazines describing expeditions to the Poles - needed that information.
Something I keep in mind when writing especially with purple pros is I want a child to be able to read it
I think you only need a flowery (pun intended) description of a sunset if that moment is important to your character. Like, she's sitting alone on a hilltop, coming to terms with a terrible choice, and something in the colors or vanishing of the sun or finality of it has meaning to her. If there was just a pretty sunset one time, I think it's fair to just say, "She let herself forget for a minute or two, just watching the sun go down." The reader can draw an image from their own experience.
Hey, that's really lovely.
Hey, let's avoid purple prose - but - a sky at sunset likened to a carnivorous flower that's good writing - LOL!
I admit that I never understood this
Purple prose relates to the volume of description, not the kind of description. Quality over quantity.
@@AnnaYoungStories Thanks for the clarification
It's just a metaphor, and one that doesn't come off as pretentious or confusing.
@@13scoops but I don't understand it. Am I stupid?
for the description order part, i feel it can be more easily explained, for both people AND objects, as "if YOU were to look at this person/object, what would you notice first?".
for a big person you, of course, would notice the size first, then you'd go down the detail ladder the more you take the image in. Same with objects, if you are seeing a painting the first thing that will catch your eye will probably be the subject instead of the painter's name.
The description order, for a person, can also change based on where the observer is. if they are on the ground and getting up then they'll probably first look at the shoes and then move up, if they are being tapped on the back and they turn around, they'll probably notice the head first
I love your videos. They are really helpful
When it comes to the topic of a character's eye color, hair color, and hairstyle, I believe it should be addressed in a particular way. It can feel awkward or forced to mention all those details at the very beginning of the story; however, I think it should be done relatively early on. Let me explain: there's nothing worse for me than forming a mental image of a character, only to find out 100 pages in that they are, for instance, blonde with blue eyes when I had been picturing them as having dark hair and green eyes. It feels disappointing and frustrating to realize my vision and entire experience was incorrect, and I have to reimagine all those scenes, "fixing" them. My conclusion is this: either describe those three physical features upfront or don’t mention them at all, but if you do choose to include them, make sure to do it relatively fairly soon in the narrative. Of course, this should be done in an interesting way and not all at once.
I enjoy how Andy Weir describes his characters. He mostly doesn't say what they look like at all, but every one is full of personality, with their own quirks, mannerisms, speech patterns, and ways of relating to and interacting with others. The audio books are even better, because the narrators give them actual voices.
Edit: on the other hand, he writes smells really weirdly. (A small spoiler warning for Project Hail Mary): there's a disaster which nearly leads to the main character's death, and takes lots of hard work to rectify. This disaster has a specific unpleasant odor associated with it. Some time later, that odor unexpectedly reappears in full force, and the character spends several seconds trying to figure out what it is, before it hits him. Smells don't work like that, they *instantly* bring you back, often very vividly with both images and emotions.
That was a very good post, John Matthew, keep up the great work.
How one character describes another can also reflect their personality. I cannot remember the book I read it, but, how a street gang member looks over someone is indicative of their priorities. This character first looked for the colour of the handkerchief in their back pocket, bulges at the waist hiding a gun, their hands and then the eyes. Characters were described by colour and brand of clothing.
imo, most of the time, far - close is the best order. I find that the easiest as there is a lot of detailed features that I quicky project onto the person just based on age, gender and silhouette. As long as the reader get the vibe of the character and can distinguish them from the other quickly in their head. it doesn't really matter if the reader has the same image of a character as the writer (except of plot relevant details like "she had a robot arm" of course)
Yes!!! People always fall into, "I need you to know exactly how they look" or "I need to spend three pages explaining the floorplan." No, you don't. Like, ever. Ever.
I actually like detailed descriptions of the character, like colour of the hair, eyes, shape of the face - for me it indicates that the writer took the time to "paint" these characters in their head and by giving detailed descriptions I can imagine more clearly how the character looked like. If I can draw it - that's a good description. If I can't - then it's lacking, but it's just me.
@@marikothecheetah9342I think we all want a picture painted for us, especially of key characters and settings. But it can become burdensome when the author seems determined to say, "No, you must picture her precisely as I do!" It's a balance. The pro knows when to lay off and trust the reader.
@@Fauntleroy. That is true, but I see the tendency to leave it up to the reader completely how the character looks like. So if I am given an empty piece of paper, why should I be interested in it? :/
This man is actively saturating the market by making us all much better writers
I love watching your videos so much - on repeat- and study them like a textbook.. that I began to analyze books I read, even movies or shows that I watch and pointing out things that are wrong or techniques used in them. I don't know if this is a good or a bad thing yet
Oh, that's so good to hear. And yes -- the point is for you to be able to dissect stories as well!
For a lot of "descriptive" parts of my book, I'll make chapter breaks explaining certain ideas (like magic), bestiary entries, and panels that show what was briefly described in full raw detail. Makes it so the reader can skip it if they want but for the nerds like me can enjoy those breaks.
The video editing today is great!
Glad you think so!
Very helpful. Thank you.
Many studies have shown video games improving attention span and concentration. It really just depends on the game and how the player engages with it. In competitive games players will sometimes derisively refer to others as dopamine addicts to explain them being stuck at a mid level despite years of playing due to only seeking easy dopamine without any thought or effort into improving their performance.
In the fantasy novel I'm trying to write, my MC is wandering an fog filled enchanted forest and I often describe "the bitter taste in the air" or "the biting cold" just before the enemy strikes. I should probably change that up a bit.😅
He was standing at the window, looking at the world crumbling under his sight, the wind piercing through his ears like blinging blades, the blood made an aura of shame and guilt around him.
That's the best I could think of in 10 minutes, and I am a beginner.
This is less of a descriptive issue and more of an internal monologue issue. I've read books where a character is asked a question, and the character starts thinking a lot before answering, such that I think, "Hey dude. If this is happening in real time this person is probably wondering what's taking so long for you to answer them and why you suddenly zoned out. Is this a me problem or a real thing to be avoided when writing?
Seems like very slow pacing. But I could see it working for some books. My advice would be to keep the thoughts relatively shortish.
@@Bookfox Okay. Thanks👌
This should be called "The Wonder Years Syndrome." If you watched it, you know.
In my humble opinion it can be executed nicely, especially during a scene where a character is stupefied or stunned and has these thoughts on the matter, but doing it a couple of times during the book only - they will have an impact. But doing it all the time is an overkill.
I remember a scene in Haikyuu!!, when the character needs to decide on his next play (volleyball) and to whom to set the ball. It takes about 30 seconds for us to watch it, but animators added timer and for the character it took 0.8 seconds. I love this scene because it depicted the process of thinking so accurately - we think much faster, than we speak, especially under pressure.
@@Fauntleroy. I'll check it out
I have a question. I have been reading Stephen King’s On Writing, and he says to not use the word ‘felt’. I’m like, okay, makes sense, don’t say thing like “I felt so angry that morning”. But what if you are using felt in the sense of some thing like - “I felt like I was puking up my guts”? Would that be acceptable?
I've never bought a novel for the quality of the writing. I buy because it seems an interesting story. For me, really flowery description can be a distraction. But for college English majors, the quality of writing might well be far more enticing that the story itself. To each, his own. This may be why publishers put out more than 1 book at a time.
I got you. "Something."
All this are things that are simple and natural, things you can agree but won't easily come 2 mind if you don't hear
Personally I like descriptions in books that give my imagination room to interpret and create. That is also what I try to write.
Here's a good example: "It's raining."
One mistake I've seen is writers describing mundane details, but not showing the reader the details that would catch the POV character's attention. A character in a setting they know well may not notice much, but one entering an unfamiliar area (especially a potentially dangerous one) will notice a LOT of details.
Oh, I got the quiz right! I actually found myself annoyed with a book I was reading recently because it did something like this. It actually annoyed me so much that it has stuck with me for over a month. Basically in the scene, the narrator is describing someone's expression, and compares the harshness of said expression to a specific feature on a piece of furniture - a desk leg, to be specific. It was so jarring because, instead of focusing on the other character's expression and how that made the narrator feel, I found myself forced to notice the furniture in the room, which added nothing of value to the scene or characters.
Here's a good example of a short story that uses all senses.
My friend and I were walking down the street, right? Suddenly I saw something suspicious right in front of us. I stopped my friend and said, "watch out, don't step on the shit." My friend looked at it and said, "no man, that's not shit." I was confused, "dude, it looks like shit," I said. He disagreed. We got closer to have a better look but the smell caught me off guard. "Dude, it smells like shit, ugh!" But my friend was irreducible. "No, you're wrong, man, my shit doesn't smell like that." We each grabbed a little piece of it and in my hands it really felt like shit, but again my friend didn't seem to agree that it felt like shit to the touch. So in a last attempt to verify the thing I put it in my mouth. "Dude, it tastes like shit. It IS shit." He proceeded to put some of it in his own mouth. After some tasting he finally answered, "oh yeah, you're right it is definitely shit!"
Thanks 🎉
I’ve used a sensory deprivation tank 3 times (It was a package). I found it to be interesting, but far, far, far from amazing. I think it might be more helpful for people who suffer from sensory overload. For me, it was worthless. One star. Do not recommend.
Great very educative,
👍
6:48 how would you say the personal taste of an author affects these emotions towards the things described? I couldn't help but wonder when you talked about seaweed being a somehow nasty smell, as I take it as a dear smell of my childhood and the sea town in which I grew up. In your example, such thing was only possible when the soldiers were borderline high on smiles.
Characters are the ones talking, but the narrator (author), even in a 1st POV, is the one looking at things. Ultimately, characters are our vessels, right? A writer from Morocco would have a special inclination towards some smells, colours and sounds that a pacific islander would describe in a whole different way. Even through their characters.
This adds another question. How can we "fake" these to create a more realistic character? Say you're writing a character who is a 20 y/o girl from Taiwan: your "author" senses should adapt to the senses and taste that girl would have, but based on another culture that you have not experienced in that way... Lots of subtleties, but they definitely make or break a character
❤❤
Great point. yes, I agree their perception of senses should be dependent on their background.
I mean…tears of Olympian deities kinda goes hard tho. 😅
look i don't care about how fancy you are being with language. if i can't understand what is even happening anymore, i stop reading. if you want to awe me, do good character writing and intricate plots, not with an overly fancy description of a sunset. i don't read a book for any of that stuff and neither does anyone else (hopefully).
Rather than "paint a picture with words" use a few words evocative enough for the reader to paint the picture in their own head. Instead of endless detail, one detail in extreme focus that evokes the rest of the setting.
Kinda difficult to pause when the screen changes the moment the last word is mentioned 😕
@bookfox. Sooo. I have a question regarding a scene I wrote weeks ago. It’s describing the stalker climbing a stair case and using the edges of the staircase with soft feet to avoid creaking. Well, I was reading the Butcher and the Wren yesterday and she described the same thing, using the feet on the edges and explaining why. Now I feel like readers will think I stole that idea 🤣. What are your thoughts on something like that, should I just leave it as is and hope people don’t see the resemblance? 😬. When I read it, I stopped and said aloud “ah crap”.
As long as you use different language, it isn't stealing. It's an idea anyone could come to without reading that book.
Keep it but make it your own, meaning: give the character a weird memory or mental image while he does it. Or add tension by making the footing slippery. Or maybe there's a sound nearby that's totally discordant with what's happening, like a TV playing an old sitcom with a laugh track. Lesson: don't abandon your idea, personalize it.
Try another approach - he put his feet like a ballet dancer, his toes first, then impeccably placing the middle part on the hard surface of the step and as if making the decicive swirl at the end of writing his name - he set his heel firmly, as if he did not do anything else in his life. he was like a cat, steadily but silently putting his toes first, then gliding to putting some weight on the middle part, perfectly balancing his stance, ending it with a beautiful, dance like placing of the heel on the steps, that would normally crack but he made the floor his dancing partner and the floor gracefully responded to his leading steps.
If you want inspiration, read Liam Hearn's Across The Nightingale Floor - which highlights the technique of walking on a squeaky floor.
@@Bookfox Thanks! I appreciate the input.
@@marikothecheetah9342 thank you. I actually do write about where she got the idea and all that, but I like your idea on making it a bit more “flowery” for the lack of a better term.
I disagree with your character description order. The first "wrong" one follows the eye of the person watching. If you see a person for the first time, you usually look at the face first, then look at the feet, and then on the rest of the body. The rule to describe in order is a trap which makes your writing boring and predictable. Also makes you fall into a trap of needing to describe everything from top to bottom creating monstrously big paragraph, while usually one or two details are more than enough.
I agree. It should be based on what the observer sees first and next
It was actually bottom to top. Which is worse IMO unless the person describing it is looking from a vantage point where they would see in that order. I didn't keep them straight in my head well enough to realize the first wasn't top to bottom, but it still instinctively felt better because the face is the first thing you're going to notice the vast majority of the time. I'd prefer top to bottom though, but maybe it's because I basically never look at the feet, let alone second. Clothing is easier to notice than feet.
I'm confused. You said in another video to put what you want the reader to remember, last in a sentence. Here around 13:00 you say to put things in order. I'll give it some more thought, interesting concepts.
Well, the 2/3/1 principle means that people tend to remember what you mention last. The order in which you describe someone isn't really a sentence principle -- it's just about having an organized way to order description.
@@Bookfox thanks for replying! That makes sense.
Anyone afraid of publishing their book, and later finding it as one of the bad examples in a Bookfox video?? 😭😭
I'd be honored because at that point my crappy book is probably a best seller and my next one can be better.
I'm currently editing my book the problem is i have so many characters i don't know if I'm supposed to describe all of them
If a character isn't that important, don't take too much time. Just broad strokes.
I may be guilty of the exhaustive type. Lol
I disagree somewhat with your last point. For your example with the old truck, having it unspecific indicates the POV doesn't know or care about cars. If you add the year and make I am going to assume something about your POV. The same thing applies to specific measurements.
I'd agree with that.
I cannot agree with the 1st description.
Almost no one notices anyone by shoes first, than ankles, etc etc.
The first thing we notice is someone's eyes or tattoos
Sure, then go by importance rather than from bottom to top. Just have a strategy for the order.
It would indicate to me the observer has a habit of looking down or difficulty meeting eyes, due to anxiety, etc. For whatever reason, they were already looking down when this person approached and their instinct is not to immediately dart to eye contact.
The overarching point is to present your description in a logical order the reader will find easily digestible.
ngl, I thought this was going to be about BOOK descriptions, as in that little elevator pitch you make when you're trying to sell the book. Little disappointed.
I have a video on that! ruclips.net/video/Zl9nPbJug48/видео.html
I have a scene where the protagonist is trying to get to work, but he is stuck because he can't get this girl out of his head. Her hair is dark, almost black, which is funny because he prefers blonds. Her eyes were dark too. He couldn't remember their color, only how caring they were. She had a mustache. It looked soft, and he found himself wanting to touch it, but that wasn't important. Her voice was pleasant, but it was the content of what she said that set her apart and erased all her flaws.
I'm glad I found your channel..
You got some typos in the scents page:
Purity-in block: ...Pip a change to smell fruit rotting and things dying and be approached by the sellers of oranges and friend things who’d install the speed bumps in the first place …
Virgin Suicides -your description: And this smell is someone an answer to the mystery of why the girls killed themselves, but it’s also exceptionally mysterious in itself:
Didn't find any others
I love these videos but "drownding" is not a word. neither is "mis-chee-vee-us"
In the alpha version of the book I'm writing, I had zero, flat out zero, description. In the beta, I added mostly frontloading of a paragraph or two and some sprinkles here and there. Even though I cut a lot of scenes, it went from 109k to 140k. My issue, as I see it, is that I don't care as much as what appears, but what happens, and the ideas behind them. so most of the book is like that, as (what I hope ia an inetersting) chess game, rather than a visual or audiotary experience.
Still added those descriptions where I thought it mattered to the characters emotional state, but describing how each one they meet look? Who cares?
Your reader cares. Are you writing for them or for you?
@@Fauntleroy. 🤷♂ just saying what makes it hard for me to add descriptions. What's fun is easy, what's not is not.
I think it matters to the degree that each point of description also has some impact on the story or tells something deeper about your characters. Such as the watery blue of someone's eyes appearing diluted, the pink folds of his eyes bringing to mind a newborn runt. Your POV character, by observing someone as such, might be showing they consider themselves superior.
A stooped posture combined with sunken eyes, or someone wearing rumpled clothes with food on them can be indicative of deeper trouble in this person's life, to be expanded upon later.
A woman with a habit of touching her blonde hairdo could be conscientious and tidy, or nervous, or she could be trying to make sure everyone notices a new ring. If we describe her shade of blonde as 'synthetic' or 'golden' or 'dirty' this can hint at something more about her as well as the observer, who might be judgmental, or attracted to her or repulsed.
These are far more interesting and telling than saying she was 'blonde with blue eyes' or he was 'tall but of average looks.'
You don't need a whole rundown of exact height, weight, posture, hair/eye colour, clothing style and complexion for every single character, (sounds exhausting to read!) but picking a few notable traits that MATTER for some reason or other can both deepen your story on a human level and make each character memorable.
If your descriptions are easily slapped on after the book is written or your characters remain interchangeable, I would be concerned the characters themselves are underdeveloped.
@@HH-wq6se I understand, and thank you for the long explantion. I tried to add those type of things, but it does run contrary to my way of thought. For me, the charcter's main difference comes from their actions, behavior (reserved vs expressive, funny vs serious etc.), ways of thought (some are more logical, some more emotional, each concern themselves with different things, and approach life by different assumptions and set of beliefs etc.), and relationship to other characters.
I tried to add some physical descriptors, and thinking what those might tell people of the pov over the situation, but it diesn't come naturally.
This is the first book I'm writing, so I understand it needs work, or maybe it just different styles. Some examples- if I want to have someone who's snarky and competitive, it's very easy to have them act and speak this way- smirking while quipping, one-upping what was told to them etc., but if they are tall or short, have a sharp nose or bushy eyebrows, it doesn't matter much to me.
Scenarios I was abke to add more description (at first it was where they were, but in the second iteration I added a lot of the ambiance and descripting hints to how the pov character interacts and feel about where they were).
Describing action beyond what it is, is also a bit messy for me- if you turn around and a barrel of a gun pops out to be few inches of your face, the last thing you care for is the model of the gun, or how silvery or black it is. It's a f&ing gun in your f&ing face.
It doesn't matter what anyone writes. Unless you're wealthy, powerful, influential, and popular, no one's going to read your work. No exceptions.
🐲✨🐲✨🐲✨
Drownding?