Thread: Characters' physical descriptions: necessary?

I'm on chapter 5 of my book and going back I noticed that I've left barren almost entirely all physical descriptions of my characters. I hadn't given that aspect much consideration.

Where are you on this little part of writing as it would apply to a novel-length manuscript?

I don't think they're necessary. As a reader they often bore me unless they're very well done or are actually relevant somehow to the character's personality (which they almost always aren't, or if they are, they're done so in a way that's just a stereotype, like someone who has a temper because they're a redhead and all redheads are fiery).

If you want to include them, I'd make them short, and early in the book.

But if you don't feel like including them (which is what it sounds like judging by your post), I think that's fine.

I make up my own picture of the characters when I start reading the book. I don't do it consciously, it just happens.

This is a quote from 'Sweet Thursday.'
"I like a lot of talk in a book and I don't like to have nobody tell me what the guy that's talking looks like. I want to figure out what he looks like from the way he talks."

I've seen similar things stated over and over by writers. I think it also depends on the genre. I'm sure Sillouette wouldn't publish a romance with no physical description in it.
For me, as a reader physical descriptions add nothing to the experience. Unless the person looks strange or has, say, a scar or some such thing.

A reader will, more often than not, paint their own picture of a character. You can drop in a vague description to give them an idea, but don't describe the outline of the freckles on his/her face.

It depends on who you're writing as, at least that's my opinion. If I'm doing a close third person narrative and someone new just pops into that characters life I'd imagine my character to react to them by noticing their appearance. Obviously it wouldn't be anything too long, but things that stand out to her/him would be more noticeable and described in a little more detail. However the character whose point of view I'm writing from wont have an appearance sketched out.

I expect my readers to know what I'm thinking and match it exactly! >.<

Wow! I went through some of my novels in my library and was surprised how sparse such descriptions really are. Somehow I had the recollection built in my mind as if the authors did describe their characters' appearances. But that was all me, actually. Kinda says something about the quality of their writing, and how the reader works with the writer. Interesting relationship there.

The nice thing about reading books is you can create your own image of the characters, you don't need to know what the writer sees. I have read some books where lots of description is added, but unless there's a reason for doing so, I think it's pointless.

In my favorite book, the main character isn't described at all. I didn't even notice it until the author pointed it out.

I have been criticized for not putting any description to my characters before. I think that their personality shows so much more about them then the physical description. Although sometimes the description will add to the character. I think that for a novel length there is probably going to be some description. But like most said as a reader you paint your own pictures.

Carson McCullers wrote fairly detailed physical descriptions of her characters in her wonderful, classic novel, The Heart is a Lonely Hunter. I didn't really think about it until I considered this thread and tried to think of examples.

It's really hard to say if it was necessary, but the descriptions were unique and very well written and they certainly seemed to add something. Perhaps it worked because many of the characters were different or outsiders and how they were perceived by others, including physical appearance, was an important part of the story.

So I think the answer is -- as it so often is to questions like this -- it depends. If it comes naturally and isn't gratuitous, it can work. It shouldn't be dismissed simply because you don't often see it.

Two examples of authors who tell you right at (or at least near) the beginning what the main character looks like are Dick Francis and Janet Evanovich.

Dick Francis usually has his protagonist look into a mirror and narrate something like, 'I saw [speaking of himself] a regular looking guy, brownish hair, about six feet, tired eyes, unremarkable'. I noticed that he used that a lot to tell the reader what the character looked like but I didn't realize it was a somewhat cliched way to do it until I began writing and discussing writing.

Janet Evanovich generally does a quick setup right off the bat where Stephanie Plum describes herself (always in humorous terms, always a bit differently right at the beginning of the book. You don't just get the physical description but also some of her outlook on life, such as the fact that she was the kind of kid who tried to jump off of the garage roof to fly and that things haven't changed a lot since. Stephanie will also narrate a brief rundown of each character looks like as she meets them (and it's always different and funny).

I think what you really want to avoid is the dossier style of description (unless you begin with a dossier!) where you say something like, "Edna was 5'5" and 160 lbs and was a C-cup. She had blue eyes, shoulder-length blond hair, and tiny pouty lips. Edna always wears designer clothing." C'mon, either be brief or be creative...better yet be both but if you're going to describe what the character LOOKS like use that to tell what they ARE like (or at least what they SEEM like if you're being misleading).
Using the little bit about Edna above, I can write Edna in different ways if i go a bit further:

'Edna's Gucci handbag clashed with her Manolo Blahnik shoes and even her habitual pouty blue-eyed stare could hide the fact that the Calvin Klein suit that she'd bragged on in such glowing terms made her look rather like a blonde potato.'

'Edna had a habit of looking down her nose at any woman of less than model height, her blue eyes cold, her mouth a pout of distaste. Her handbag was Gucci, her blond hair in perfect French twist, and her manicure doubtless cost almost as much as her designer suit did.'

'The twinkle in Edna's blue eyes made a delightful joke of everything; even her own flaxen-haired good looks and carefully tended body on which she wore a designer suit like a good dose of irony.'

'Edna's limpid blue gaze betrayed no indication that she'd understood the blond joke. In fact, behind the Gucci handbag and the tiny pout of concentration, her thoughts appeared to be lost in a lonely atmosphere.'

'I'm typically Scandinavian, tall enough that men who address comments to my breasts don't have far to look and my wrists always extend too far from even the nicest designer jacket which, as my friend Sandy says, isn't a reason not to wear one if it was on sale.'

That said, the when and how of the physical description depends on your style and the story you're writing.

I'm not so sure about your choice of character.

I have included descriptions of my characters early on, I can picture them in my head. But I recall being puzzled halfway through a novel when a character was re-introduced in a new situation by a physical description. They had been described earlier, but I had skimmed over that bit and made my own picture so I did not recognise them. For some readers, however, the description is important and makes the character come alive. I would say include a description by all means, but if some aspect of it is important later, bring it up more than once to make sure it is not overlaid by the readers own creation.

Originally Posted by The Backward OX

I'm not so sure about your choice of character.

Write what you know Ox, or have you not met Foxee; tall, blonde, designer clothes, gucci handbag, "c" cup, twinkling blue eyes, sexy little pout and all the rest