Physical Descriptions of (Main) Characters.

[Cia]

I don't think having a character without describing them works in long novels, but sometimes readers don't even realize authors are doing it. You may be giving subtle clues already, but readers do want more when they are getting to know a character over time. There's so much being left out of the image for the reader if you don't at least give some description.

 

For example:

 

 A character wakes up to his mom shouting at him and pats his hand over his nightstand looking for his glasses. He throws on a pair of jeans and a t-shirt hanging off his desk chair. During breakfast he picks at his breakfast. His mom nags, again, at him to eat more than a small bowl of sugary cereal. He borrows his dad's coat, bending over a little to reach the bottom of the zipper and pushing the sleeves up to bunch around his wrists. He grabs his keys and backpack before hurrying out the door.   

 

What I get from all that is that a kid is probably skinny and short and wears thick glasses. He's wearing his dad's coat, and wasn't picky about clothes, so he's not worrying about his appearance/vain. He lives at home with his parents, so under 18 likely but he drives so over 16. Classic nerd comes to mind.

 

Hair color, skin tone, actual height, and features; none of these are absolutely necessary to give the picture I was going for. If I'm writing a novel, I'd flesh him out more through further scenes to maybe give hints of those elements like him trying to scrub out blue slushie a jock dumped on him that is staining his hair (indicating light color) or showing a red cut that splits his narrow bottom lip as his blood stains his eye from a broken vessel close to his pale blue pupil as a black eye slowly forms. 

 

I can describe a character in my very first scene without ever giving actual details of his appearance, I even prefer to do that, but adding to the image over time creates the sort of story needed to draw a reader in. The layers of subtle elements throughout the story ties everything together. Using sub-context to create a complex visual throughout the story, with details to put the reader IN the scene, is something all authors should strive to accomplish, especially if they're limited for words.

[Mann Ramblings]

There's nothing wrong with describing characters, but if you just throw out height, weight, eye color; etc. details, your story will read like a personals ad. I suppose that's fine if you're just write masturbatory tales, but I think most of us are striving for more. Working around the literal details make for a far more sophisticated read. Lugh's example earlier was great.

[The Pecman]

But sometimes readers won't let you get away with no description.

 

Screw 'em. What the author thinks is more important, since they're the ones who created the characters in the first place. I'll provide enough clues to provide the gist of what every character looks like, but I'll be damned if I give them a laundry list, like height, hair color, eye color, and all that crap. It's not necessary as long as the reader feels like they know the character, especially the story leads. The secondary characters can always have a brief description, like they have a beady eyes, a pinched face, and a mouth that looks like they suck lemons. We know exactly what that person would look like without any more details. 

 

What's surprising to me is when readers will come back to me and say, "I think so-and-so [famous actor] would be great at playing this character, if you ever did this as a movie." And I'm often taken aback, because I think, "wow, that's completely the opposite of anything I ever imagined for the character."

 

One thing I think is a bit overdone in gay stories is when everybody looks like they stepped out of an Abercrombie & Fitch ad: everybody's hot, everybody's ripped, everybody's blond, everybody's great-looking. I think it takes more courage to bring in characters who are misfits, too fat, too thin, have body issues, or otherwise are just regular, ordinary people. One hopes their personalities make up for any physical issues. 

 

I always find a way to slip in somebody who is drop-dead good-looking... but I also give them some flaws to go with it. In some cases, the flaws are pretty deadly; in others, the flaws just give them character and make them more human.

Edited June 8, 2013 by The Pecman

[Palantir]

'Screw 'em.'   I agree with The Pecman.

I think there is a special magic when an author can portray a character  with just enough information to fire the imagination of the reader.

 

I personally think it's one of the drawbacks of making great stories/novels into movies because that particular exercise in imagination is taken away.

It's almost worse when the movie is well done as the characters'  physical appearance tends to become set in stone.

I remember when I first saw Lord Of The Rings. I thought - that's not what gollum looks like. That's not what Gandalf looks like, and so on for the other characters. Now I can't remember how I imagined them. Peter Jackson has captured and in a way limited them.

Thank goodness he didn't portray Tom Bombadil. I've still got my own (magical) image of him.

[The Pecman]

I personally think it's one of the drawbacks of making great stories/novels into movies because that particular exercise in imagination is taken away.

 

Although... there are those authors powerful enough to exercise casting approval. Famously, J.K. Rowling did this on the Harry Potter films, and I can't read the books now without seeing those actors in my mind's eye. I think the casting on those films was damn near perfect.

 

And then there's Tom Cruise as the Vampire Lestat. We need a 6'3" strikingly tall, good-looking blond French guy with pale skin and piercing blue eyes. Yikes...  

 

In that case, Anne Rice had been fairly specific in how Lestat looked, and I don't think Cruise was right for the part. I also think Brad Pitt was much too attractive as Louis. But I concede, sometimes compromises have to be made when the book moves to film, and even Anne Rice eventually decided the casting was OK (after the film was released). 

 

As to fiction: I think there's a way to stir in a little character detail every so often but not start reciting the laundry list. I'll mention another character's "shaggy hair" or "bangs in the eyes," that kind of thing, so we sort of get specific clues here and there. And even if a the lead character doesn't think of themselves as attractive, if they get hit on once in awhile by somebody good-looking, then we get the impression that maybe they are actually more attractive than they think, but perhaps have a low self image for some reason.