Writers: How Descriptive Are You?

[The Sum of Awe]

I am a writer, but I, for some reason, think that my writing skills are dull, but maybe that's just because I already know where my book is going, I'm not sure. I have good ideas for a plot, in my opinion, but I feel that the way I write is boring, in the sense that I can't read my own writing but others who have said they enjoyed it.

The primary reason I'm thinking is because I limit the imagination, I'm describing every bit of what I'm imagining - I detail how each character looks, and their personality, and stuff like that. Do you think that could be a problem? Should I write down exactly as I imagine it or should I just some details open to imagination of the reader?

If someone is interested in reading some of my writing and see what I can change in my style of writing to make it better, I'd much appreciate it

 

[Me Myself]

It depends on style. I tend to get bored with large descriptions when I am reading while other people need them so the place/person can be painted in their minds.

If I am writting, I generally describe the least and most necessary when it comes to people`s appeareance, but I need to work on not overdescribing gestures and body language sometimes.

 

[Kilgore Trout]

The current general style tends toward a less is more approach. Years ago, it was in fashion to inundate readers with long, flowery descriptions and pages of colorful, detailed prose, but modern readers tend to want to get to the action and dialogue. Description is good, and at least some is necessary, but it's good to avoid using too many adjectives and adverbs, and to only include description that is relevant to plot, theme, or mood. Working description into action or dialogue is usually the best way to keep it tight.

 

[The Sum of Awe]

The current general style tends toward a less is more approach. Years ago, it was in fashion to inundate readers with long, flowery descriptions and pages of colorful, detailed prose, but modern readers tend to want to get to the action and dialogue. Description is good, and at least some is necessary, but it's good to avoid using too many adjectives and adverbs, and to only include description that is relevant to plot, theme, or mood. Working description into action or dialogue is usually the best way to keep it tight.

What if I describe it exactly as I'm imagining it, but not go into a whole paragraph of detail at the same time. Example;

He walked outside with his brown, trench coat becoming a darker brown from the rain, the straps hung down and was left untied. It revealed the plaid shirt beneath it. -end description-

Should I have left, in this example, the color of his trench coat open to imagination, or whether it was tied or not. It's not really important but if that's how I saw it as I wrote it?

 

[Vinayaka]

What is the genre and target audience?

 

[Kilgore Trout]

It depends on whether the color of the coat, the straps hanging down, and the plaid shirt are important. Do they communicate something important about the character? Do they foreshadow something in the plot or represent something relevant to the current action? Will they be used as recurring thematic elements? Is this the first time the character is introduced (you can be more descriptive when introducting a character to establish them)?

Essentially, description should never be used for its own sake.

 

[Me Myself]

What is the genre and target audience?

I study social communication, how is it you asked this and I didnt?

 

[Vinayaka]

I study social communication, how is it you asked this and I didnt?

I write. I would help someone with a particular genre (because it interests me) or target (if I know anything about that target audience).

 

[Sha'irullah]

Proper eloquent writing is highly descriptive and the only way to increase this is your vocabulary which I have done so well over the years. Very tricky but useful in the long run.

 

[Kilgore Trout]

Proper eloquent writing is highly descriptive and the only way to increase this is your vocabulary which I have done so well over the years. Very tricky but useful int he long run.

This is awesome.

 

[xkatz]

"Detail is very important", said xkatz while cooking pancakes, which were turning crispy brown and smelled like old, greasy gym socks. You could hear the pancakes sizzling, and xkatz began to drool like one of Pavlov's mutts after hearing the chiming of a silver bell. He then proceeded to grab a shiny, white plate, which reminded him of his mother's skin complexion and then slowly and gracefully put the pancakes on the vintage white Star Wars plate that he got some years ago at a Comicon convention.

He then whispered like a creepy old man, "It adds so much to the story".

He then looked outside. It was raining and the color of the sky made the walls of bedroom appear to be a blue. A sad blue, a blue that made him feel like laying in his quaint olive green bed and stare at the dull ceiling, watching the fan spin, spin, and spin like his alcoholic evil twin, Revoltingest, who was an ugly Scotsman. Like uglier than the narrator can even describe.

"Without details, how can you have AWESOME metaphors?!", xkatz said to the reader as he seductively ate his awful pancakes in his depressing room on his semi-comfortable bed in a pretentious manner.

 

[Sha'irullah]

This is awesome.

No having good vocabulary is not awesome unlike your kick@$$ avatar

 

[Kilgore Trout]

"Detail is very important", said xkatz while cooking pancakes, which were turning crispy brown and smelled like old, greasy gym socks. You could hear the pancakes sizzling, and xkatz began to drool like one of Pavlov's mutts after hearing the chiming of a silver bell. He then proceeded to grab a shiny, white plate, which reminded him of his mother's skin complexion and then slowly and gracefully put the pancakes on a vintage Star Wars plate that he got some years ago at a Comicon convention.

He then whispered like a creepy old man, "It adds so much to the story".

He then looked outside. It was raining and the color of the sky made the walls of bedroom appear to be a blue. A sad blue, a blue that made him feel like laying in his quaint olive green bed and stare at the dull ceiling, watching the fan spin, spin, and spin like his alcoholic evil twin, Revoltingest, who was an ugly Scotsman. Like uglier than the narrator can even describe.

"Without details, how can you have AWESOME metaphors?!", xkatz said to the reader as he seductively ate his awful pancakes in his depressing room on his semi-comfortable bed in a pretentious manner.

The dashing and heroic editor quickly and expertly scanned the manuscript and gasped in amazement at the incredibly excessive use of extraneous description and towering mountains of over-the-top purple prose, and within mere moments had tossed it with zeal into the sad pile of rejected stories.

 

[xkatz]

The dashing and heroic editor quickly and expertly scanned the manuscript and gasped in amazement at the incredibly excessive use of extraneous description and towering mountains of over-the-top purple prose, and within mere moments had tossed it with zeal into the sad pile of rejected stories.

That pile is higher than the state of Colorado.

 

[Vinayaka]

The dashing and heroic editor quickly and expertly scanned the manuscript and gasped in amazement at the incredibly excessive use of extraneous description and towering mountains of over-the-top purple prose, and within mere moments had tossed it with zeal into the sad pile of rejected stories.

"More crap," he mumbled, before chucking it.

Writing is tough, to be sure.

 

[Erebus]

There's no easy way to tell how descriptive you should or shouldn't be as a writer, since so much of it boils down to personal taste.
Having said that, I personally prefer small descriptions interspersed within the action of a story than a huge chunk of explanation. Neither is necessarily better than the other, it's purely preference.
Another important thing to consider is what genre you're writing and where the story takes place. People tend to think along the lines of "as normal, unless otherwise specified" when they read. This means that a modern, realistic setting needs far less description than a fantasy or sci fi world simply because the reader fills in the blanks themselves. One trick available to you if you don't want to spend too long on description is to use names and words that people associate with a particular time/place/genre as this can radically change the image a sentence conjures. For example:

"Andrew walked to the shops."

"Alaric rode into the market."

"Zorbex slithered to the Cred-Store."

none of those sentences use much in the way of description, but each conjures a different image.

 

[xkatz]

There's no easy way to tell how descriptive you should or shouldn't be as a writer, since so much of it boils down to personal taste.

I think it depends on the nature of the writing. Something philosophical or scientific in nature needs pretty much no descriptive language. With novels I would say it varies with the content of the story and the writing style. Some people can write well with minimal details while with others details help to craft the world their writing about.

"Zorbex slithered to the Cred-Store."

Such a beautiful name!

 

[dust1n]

The current general style tends toward a less is more approach. Years ago, it was in fashion to inundate readers with long, flowery descriptions and pages of colorful, detailed prose, but modern readers tend to want to get to the action and dialogue. Description is good, and at least some is necessary, but it's good to avoid using too many adjectives and adverbs, and to only include description that is relevant to plot, theme, or mood. Working description into action or dialogue is usually the best way to keep it tight.

It's coming back, in some ways... I think David Foster Wallace and Roberto Bolano are relatively big in literary circles (in America at least) and they basically write like Dostoyevsky's.

Some are good in being wordy and not so much at brevity, while for some, the opposite holds truth. I think it can be exciting either way, if it is done well.

 

[dust1n]

Oh man, this is the funnest thread I've read in a bit. Kilgore and katz dialogue is a fun way of exploring the literary concepts via the literary concepts... you guys are pretty good!

 

[Quagmire]

The dashing and heroic editor quickly and expertly scanned the manuscript and gasped in amazement at the incredibly excessive use of extraneous description and towering mountains of over-the-top purple prose, and within mere moments had tossed it with zeal into the sad pile of rejected stories.

That was actually pretty good.

Except for the dashing/heroic part.

Someone who can make mundane actions sound meaningful, should.