Douglas Adams had two of my favourites: "Containing a liquid almost, but not entirely unlike, tea." "The ships hung in the sky in much the same way that bricks don't."
I’d say hogwarts or the shire, but I can’t be sure how much those have been influenced by the films. Maybe the city of Jrusar from Critical Role? That could just be chalked up to the 80+ hours of time spent there though.
Oddly enough, Kekon from the Green Bone Saga. Not because of description or anything like that but rather in how the place worked. Its systems, its politics, its history, its folk tales. Out of any setting, it feels the realest out of any I've read before.
Ongoing descriptions are an option too, describe parts of the castle as they become relevant. Emphasize the outer walls and towers as characters approach, back to plot, describe gates and flags as they enter, back to plot, etc... I've seen a few authors divert to describing a castle down to the type of wood used in the lord's dinner table while the characters were still looking at the place on the horizon.
@@syaondri that's more of a way to describe threats via character interaction, which is a good way to do things in situations where the threat is a well documented if niche subject (it's kinda sus when someone knows all the super secret techno whatsits from a different country). Girls Und Panzar is basically "high school paintball tournament with tanks" if I remember it right even if there are several characters that take it way more seriously than they realistically should. Like the MCs family who think "choosing to not die in a high school sport" is cowardly.
@@syaondri In a similar vein, there is a Special Pilot Ability in Battletech and Alpha Strike (tabletop games) called Living TRO (Technical Readout), which means they geek out on mechs, tanks and vehicles so much they can identify units immediately and tell everyone else where the weak points are to take it down...
Neil Gaiman does some excellent descriptions, and one of my favorites is in "Neverwhere", where he describes the villains Croup and Vandemar like this: "They wore black suits, which were slightly greasy, slightly frayed, and even Richard, who counted himself among the sartorially dyslexic, felt there was something odd about the cut of the coats. They were the kind of suits that might have been made by a tailor two hundred years ago who had had a modern suit described to him but had never actually seen one. The lines were wrong, and so were the grace notes."
One of my favorite character descriptions ever came from a prison warden in Gaiman's American Gods - "He had sandy blonde hair and a sandy blonde face and a sandy blonde smile." There's something distinctively bland about that one sentence of description with the repeated use of "sandy blonde". If the prison warden had "sandy blonde hair, leathery skin, and yellow teeth", his description would've been much less evocative and memorable.
Despite the thumbnail there is a lack of Howl's Moving Castle, so... "Sophie put her hands to her face, wondering what the man had stared at. She felt soft leathery wrinkles. She looked at her hands. They were wrinkled too, and skinny, with large veins in the back and knuckles like knobs. She pulled her grey skirt against her legs and looked down at skinny, decrepit ankles and feet which had made her shoes all knobby. They were the legs of someone about ninety and they seemed to be real." Diana Wynne Jones
Love her work. When we first see Scales in Darklord of Derkholm has got to be my favorite ever description both for a dragon and just conveying how massive something is.
I think the best description I've ever heard wasn't even written. It was a college English professor, talking about his life and describing the island he grew up on as follows: "It stuck out into the bay like a crooked finger trying to induce vomiting." Only a single, shortish sentence, but it told me so, so much about this place in an instant and how he felt about it.
I always remember Jon Snow's description when he wakes up beyond the wall and everything is frozen and glittering. And I remember it not because of the details but because of the emotion. That landscape makes him think fondly of how his sisters would react if they were there.
Something along the lines of Sansa would have tears in her eyes and call it enchanted. Arya on the other hand, would want to run around and touch things. I think this was the camp of the Knight's Watch men close to Kraster's Keep.
@@Hoops_Fan yes. I was stupid not to add the description haha. It's so nice, and it makes you feel warm and then sad, knowing that all of them have left that kind of happiness behind.
Thag is a beatiful moment. When he does it well an effective economy of words like this, yes, it smokes. But there are times where he does way too much. Food sometimes, for example. Like dude you just told me and about Winterfells spread im great length and a few pages or so - again hete we are wifh an itemized menu at Renlys. I In doses it creates ambiancd and textutre until it does too much amd makes my eyes heavy.
I’ve learned something very important today… apparently Cthulhu statues capable of summoning the Eldritch god are not in fact a normal thing to keep in one’s Library.
I think you'll notice that Brandon Sanderson's descriptions change depending on which POV character we're following. Kaladin is a soldier, a surgeon. He notices and describes the world around him from the perspective of a practical, to-the-point person. Shallan's POV chapters are more descriptive and less "dry" because she's an artist and scholar who takes interest in things like art, architecture, flora and fauna. I'd still agree that Sanderson's prose isn't where he shines the most as a writer, but I think he has far more range and is far more deliberate with his descriptions than some give him credit for. :)
I've found that his descriptions, no matter the character, are too matter-of-fact and vague. That might sound contradictary, but even if you read his passage in the video you can see it yourself -- he explains everything in a straight forward way, but he's super vague on many details with words like: some, countless, several, etc. It's why I find his writing style uninteresting and hard to paint a picture with. Though, I haven't read all of the Cosmere, just Stormlight, which should be enough to make this judgement. I'd go as far as saying that anyone who is praising his writing style is giving him far too much credit; Brandon is a great storyteller, not a great writer.
I was going to point out the same. 😂 I do think a part of it is that the characters (who live in this world) are seeing it. You can see the shifts in description when Shallan is looking at the tower in Oathbringer, she describes impossible perspectives and frames it within the difficulty of drawing it. It’s brilliant because it shows so much more than just vague impressions.
Sanderson is my favorite author, but I think you're confusing WHAT the characters notice with HOW they notice. Shallan and Kaladin absolutely focuses more on the practical vs Shallan's focus on more whimsical things, but at the end of the day they feel written the same. Just replace "grey stone ramparts ringing the city" with "curling vines climbing the ramparts." The things they notice are different, but the way the information is delivered to us is exactly the same. It's just matter-of-fact descriptions of different things. Contrast that to something like Name of the Wind, which is known for its great prose, where Rothfuss describes everything through the eyes of Kvothe, and you absolutely feel his personality bleed into every description.
I've been trying to do that with my writing. I have seperate POV characters, one of them is a child, so I use descriptions myself form 5 years ago would have used. Another is a teen, so I use Percy Jackson description, another is a sciencey character who uses precise measurements.
What's occurred to me while watching this is that one of the most valuable functions of description is what it can tell you about the character observing whatever is being described. I have a first-person protagonist who *absolutely* would use words like "cerulean" and "vermilion," because he is a young wizard who hasn't yet figured out that knowing a lot of things and having an extensive vocabulary isn't the same thing as being wise. When I heard the Sanderson passage, I remarked to my spouse (a Sanderson fan) that it sounded very businesslike. They said that the character in that passage *is* a businesslike person, and that Sanderson writes more interesting descriptive passages when another character, an artist, is the viewpoint. And of course famously, a case where the environment's description tells you pretty much everything about the character, is The Yellow Wallpaper.
Yes I love that in a book. It makes perfect sense, by a psychological point of view, since different people pay attention to different things and value them differently.
I like that. But, not gonna tell you how to write your book but i would REALLY love that to go down as your protagonist matures. Made take it down a small notch with every humbling experience. Kind of like a piece of candy for your really attentive readers.
I'm definitely going to have to take notes on that I have a story with a lot of different characters and well listening I started to think about it and realize that yes I do know how each of them could describe a room differently which is not something I'd ever planned on because I hadn't thought about it but something I realized that I still know about them each of them and their characters All right character I know how they think one girl who can fly hates being inside so if she walked into a room she'd focus on how large it was how big the windows were how easy to escape from another is a princess and would focus on the materials in a economic sense well another has a plant empathy I would focus on the materials in a nature sense and another have fire and may focus on what flammable but is also a healer and would focus on the comforting feeling or whether or not a room felt lived in or not well another who has a big time power would be able to look back and see memories in the room And now I really wish I could figure out how to actually incorporate that because it'd be harder to notice I don't think anyone would notice if they each focused on different things unless they were deep fans but it'd be pretty cool since now that I thought about it I can't unthink it
It can also be used for juxtaposing. Like: "It wasn't red, of course. It was _vermillion_ or _grarnet_ or any other of those fancy red names that Jenny wasn't rich enough to casually use in a sentence"
Lol I love writing super descriptive stuff, esp with scenery, but sometimes I’m like “wait I’ve spent like two paragraphs talking about a lake I should probably move on”
Write more on that lake. Keep writing til exhaustion on that lake. Cut out parts and *SAVE THEM* outside of the story for later reference if you will, but embrace your inner Tolkien. R. A. Salvatore's Child of A Mad God (Coven series) spends a lot of time talking about the waters of the lake and the shape of the boats that cross it, the shores, the rocks at the edges, the shadows swimming beneath the water's surface.... Its a very, very important piece of the world with it being the literal center of the entire trilogy's setting and stories that transpire in it but still.
... I wrote this comment before finishing the video, and got rightly called at at around 12:20 for why I gave blatantly bad advice. (except hte part about cutting out excess detail, but saving it outSIDE the story itself for reference)
So many of these (especially the "specificity" and "ordinary places" tips) overlap with tips for writing good poetry! (I think prose writers could stand to learn more from poets, but that's a conversation for another time, haha) I also think, as you mention briefly at the end, that the issue with over-describing (or describing when they shouldn't) is one of the side effects of the emphasis on "show, don't tell". "'Show, don't tell?' Okay, so I'll describe EVERYTHING!" Anyway, I loved this video! Always so helpful & clear 💜
I think that there should be alot less distinction between writers and poets. I could not tell you the difference, honestly, although that may be partially due to the fact that I am or have been both.
@@michaelcherokee8906 I think the difference here is that we are specifying poet, but not always specifying prose. Prose writers, or "the kind of writer who specifically writes short stories and novels". There are different skills. For example: flow, especially when read aloud, is very important to poetry. For prose, you will often need to be able to write natural dialogue. If dialogue happens in poetry, it often does not read like normal speech, because normal speech doesn't flow nearly well enough most of the time. I think it's the same as with a play writer or screen writer versus a novel writer. There are definitely similarities, and lots of overlap skills, but they also have some skills that don't overlap, and sometimes you can have someone very good at one be pretty bad at the other.
No. Hell no. Absolutely not. I have enough of every other sentence or phrase or dialogue in chinese web novels being an idiom or poem. Literally every chinese web novel has "frog in the well" or any one of their lld chinese poems on repeat. Some have frog in the well every darn chapter. Some as much as twice a chapter. When you rely heavily on poetry and idioms, it REALLY stunts writing. So...just no. On poems. In fact theres this one very odd song of some genshin impact (i think?) game that has people laughing at the silly sounding stupid english lyrics. Everyone thinks it is poor google translated lyrics. But as it turns out....its word for word edgar allan poe poetry. So for the love of literature. No
I have complicated issues with my love of Harry Potter, but one scene description from a book that really got to me was the description of Harry waiting for his turn to face the dragon in the Goblet of Fire. The sound of the crowd above him, the gut feeling of dread, the nervousness of waiting your turn-dreading it while also wanting to get it over with… as a stage performer I recognized these feelings right away and that recognition made that scene so real for me.
@@PopCultureGian it’s not an issue with the book itself. I love those books. I love the world of Harry Potter. The issue comes when JK Rowling keeps making transphobic comments and many people in the trans community rally against the franchise despite the fact that most everyone involved in the movies have renounced Rowling’s comments on the subject. If i buy some really cool Harry Potter merch, am I just giving more money to a woman who hates me and will continue to use her platform and voice to disparage my community? I mean come on, I’m a magician for crying out loud, Harry Potter has become ingrained as a part of the magic community, but if I bring it up in a show or even a group of my peers, am I, through transitive property, giving credence to the ideals of an out of touch hate monger? And I know eventually it will dissipate, Lovecraft was a racist but everyone loves Cthulhu. So, I don’t know, it’s just so difficult sometimes.
@@DynaStaats Personally, I think it's possible to love something created by somebody you disagree with. Your love for the franchise does not automatically mean you support Rowling's opinions and agree with them, no matter how hateful and painful they may be. These are separate things. Whether you give her money or not, she will continue to use whatever means she can to voice her thoughts, and I doubt she'll change her mind on matters if people stop buying anything Harry Potter related and try to silence her. I think we can speak up about somebody's opinions and strongly disagree with them, but still appreciate the work they've done.
11:05 This suddenly came to me and I had to write it down I stepped into the library and made my way over to the large reading tables at the centre. A handful of other students were there already, leafing through heavy reference books to find the perfect quotes for their essays. Surrounding the tables were rows upon rows of bookshelves. Each one seemed to stretch off into the distance, like the never-ending paths of a maze, with the weight of musty books pressing in from both sides. Even the sunlight, streaming through the large, domed window in the ceiling above couldn’t penetrate much more than a few shelves into a row. Something about them unsettled me, as if there was something lurking in the darkness amongst the stacks, waiting for a lone student to wander unknowingly into it’s section. “Stop it.” I whispered to myself, as I passed by the watchful eyes of the marble Cthulhu statue that stood near the horror section. It had been there for decades, despite the best efforts by multiple librarians to remove it. Every time they took it away, it would reappear the next morning, back on the same shelf staring out across the room. Somebody had graffitied a finger across it’s mouth in a shushing gesture - ‘Shhthulhu demands your silence’.
If you don't mind I'd like to try and put my own spin on that description The library was known for its maze-like paths, and when I entered I was confronted by several musty avenues snaking through the ancient bookshelves. At the centre of the library was a clearing of large study tables. As I attempted to navigate towards them I encountered several students squinting at heavy books to find the right quotes for an essay, with the windows providing little light for seeing much of anything. Turning a corner I suddenly came across a defaced statue of Cthulhu. The dim light obscured its eyesockets, and much of the graffiti, and the effect was like it was pristine again, watching me from the gloom
I know a lot of people don't prefer the landscape descriptions from authors like JRR Tolkien and C.S. Lewis but I find them really interesting. Knowing not only that there are trees around, but the specific kinds is a unique way of picturing a scene.
The excess of description is what in fact gives depth to a fantasy, as in Tolkien it's historical and philological. Yet many failed into writing a good description because they hadn't any depth to suggest. Details must not be there just to make show-off of descriptive abilities (although hellenistic writers made out of it a real literary genre, the hekphrasis wich gave us Keats' "Ode on a grecian urn") but to give us the atmospheres in wich characters move.
They could just.put that in info books, guide books. JK rowling created a whole darn world with history, but she knew that putting it in her stories held very little value to plot, emotion or character. Yet we all know those tidbits from interviews, photos of her notes, extra info books shes created and the website dedicating more wiki like info to the world. You do not need it in a story.
@@LilyUnicorn You don't need a lot of things in a story. The specific style of description is just an author's choice, and I'd argue that Tolkien's choice enhanced the effect of what he wanted to create. JK created a book series for children in the modern age so she kept things simple in the text. Tolkien created a legendarium for adult fantasy readers, so he embellished the writing to mimic the style of the epic poems like the Iliad and Odyssey. He wanted the world to feel complete so by adding in even the small details, it allows the reader to piece together a more cohesive picture of the overall world, such as climate and biodiversity in each region of Middle Earth. The internet didn't really exist either so he kind of had to put it in the books directly as there wasn't really another way to add in those details at the time. I get that readers like you don't really appreciate that kind of thing and just want a barebones plot, but it does add a lot to those who do care.
@@LilyUnicorn her style tends to be less descriptive but her genre is different. Tolkien needs to bring you in a totally different world with a completely unknown geography and history, while she put fantasy in a world that we can relate to in an easier way.
While I don't remember the details (ha), the Brazilian Novel "Vidas Secas" is often praised for its lack of description. Makes the barren and desolate place feel even more so. People were too busy surviving to care about many details. And, apparently, that lack of description made the place feel much more universal for foreign readers, especially from other places with pretty arid and underdeveloped places
I don’t remember either, but “Vidas Secas” is visceral, it’s really interesting, I also like “O Cortiço”, i like the relations between characters and the environment (don’t know if you will agree)
I've found description to be a remarkably strong tool for controlling the pace of a story. If characters are in a hurry or in danger, descriptions can be brief and quick to keep the story's forward momentum. But if there's downtime for introspection or the like, characters can take their time exploring or observing a setting, reflected in longer descriptions.
“People can imagine ordinary places pretty well, often better than you could ever write them.” Thank you, thank you, THANK YOU! I’m tired of hearing “but I want more details!” when the setting of my story is our own world, full of ordinary places. This is one of the best videos I’ve ever encountered on this topic. Thank you.
"I had to image the places I was in". Well, you were in a bedroom, then in another bedroom, then in a nightclub, then a bathroom, lastly, a kitchen. It's very easy to imagine any of those and I cannot be bothered to describe any if it's non consequential to the story at hand lol contemporary settings are so boring and for me, anyways, I'm reading for the characters, not the places.
Perfect example of this; Me and my friends used to have a writing group. We were writing collaborative stories, and I spent the entire first half of my first page of the story describing, in vivid detail, how the protagonist was jumping over a dumpster. Everything, from the type of dumpster to the alley, it was horrible. They still haven’t let me live it down, years later. You don’t need to go overload on detail. We aren’t Edgar Allan Poe, getting paid per word here, we don’t need to be as wordy as possible.
I think that what Tolkien shows is that if you're going to write very long descriptions, you'd better be _extremely_ good at it. Luckily, he is. There're very few paragraphs in LOTR which I find extraneous, simply because the experience of reading his words is always a joy.
The opening paragraph of The Haunting of Hill House is the best description I've ever read. I got goosebumps when I first read it. It is also a good example of the point you made about description and experience. “No live organism can continue for long to exist sanely under conditions of absolute reality; even larks and katydids are supposed, by some, to dream. Hill House, not sane, stood by itself against its hills, holding darkness within; it had stood so for eighty years and might stand for eighty more. Within, walls continued upright, bricks met nearly, floors were firm, and doors were sensibly shut; silence lay steadily against the wood and stone of Hill House, and whatever walked there, walked alone.”
I would like to make a quick rebuttal, as I feel as if the criticism of BrandoSando could have been shown differently. In the context of that excerpt (Kaladin surveying the warcamp), the matter of fact description is being stated by a surgeon and soldier. Someone with a mind so detached they see the world in an efficient but simple manner. This is starkly contrasted by Shallans POV descriptions, which are always colourful and fanciful in nature (they play on that even more with veil in book 3). While BrandoSandos descriptions can be dry at times, that specific paragraph was in character for Kaladin and his mindset. Those were my 2 cents anyway.
A very valid rebuttal, which brings up something Tim didn’t really address in this video (hope he’s got it planned for a future one though). I really like and notice when authors alter descriptions based on which character is making the observations. It does the double duty of telling you more about the character’s personality/intelligence at the same time :)
@@jameswhatsit I'm glad I'm not the only one who thinks this! I would also love a full video discussing adaptive prose when describing things from a character perspective.
You know, it's funny. The most poignant description I remember is not from a published story, it's from a fanfic. I won't describe it here but that description actually changed the way I looked at describing my own characters. I know people always hate on fanfic and consider it lesser writing than published work, but there are a lot of gems in there too.
Yeah (like any genera ) it spans the badly written things, either from amateurs (you do have to learn and I still am and am no pro) or mimicking bad stuff etc and some really well written stuff, which can make it better and depending on topic sometimes worse lmao and everything in between.
a few thoughts on the Stormlight Archive description section: 1. the character whose perspective we are seeing this scene through is from both a military background and currently in an extended state of shock. It's not surprising to see limited emotionality specifically here. 2. I'd agree Sanderson is not known for his prose, this may be part of why his books are known for readability though - less emphasis on flowery (even if brief) descriptions where it is not vital to character development and plot. 3. An establishing shot in an action movie can create the setpeice, an establishing shot in a drama can set the emotional tone. So while I agree that Sanderson's writing especially when establishing setting do not evoke emotion. the intent of the work might have something to do with it. On a completely different note, I thoroughly enjoy how the Stormlight descriptions are at once relatively sparse while giving clear indications that the setting is not a typical "Middle-Earth" type fantasy setting - difficult to balance without over-describing
How in the WORLD have you gone through this whole video without even mentioning the absolute MASTER of description, Bradbury? His descriptions are pure, condensed poetry! He gaves both an emotional feel and tactile sensation that perfectly sets up the plot and immerses you into the story. Hell, he deserves a whole video of his own!
The Dragonbone Chair by Tadd Williams has some of the best descriptions I've ever read. There's a line in the first chapter that immediately hooked me in on how he described the changing of seasons. "Hushed conversations seemed to be taking place in every hallway and dooryard of the great keep It might have been the first day of spring, to judge from the air of breathless anticipation, but the great calendar in Doctor Morgenes’ cluttered chamber showed differently: the month was only Novander. Autumn was holding the door, and Winter was trudging in."
I'll admit that I was probably too young when I read it, as I found the novel quite dull until nearly the end. Its sequels, however, sucked me in despite its sometimes labyrinthine lore dumps.
I am watching the video on Nebula and unfortunately there is no possiblity for comments there, so I am switching back to TH-cam for that: - I love how you make the letters appear individually during the "reading segments", it's very fun to watch - I am all the way with you on your hot take regarding Tolkien's descriptions. I noticed that I started skimming them because with all his talk about north and east etc he usually just disorients my sense of place and I have to guess anyways what the scene could look like. - I've been subscribed a few years now and I really have to mention how much you progressed. Your videos have always been really good but I feel like you have made some more steps recently. Your videos feel very dense and to the point and so very well structured, I can't really see to which you point you will improve (not that you have to, but I have been surprised before, as you see). Such a nice change from so much TH-cam videos that stretch content by force. - And as always, a very insightful and helpful video, thank you!!
i tend to skim over descriptions that are too long since i have aphantasia and details won't help me visualize anything anyway, so the capturing the vibe approach is definitely more helpful for me as a reader. it also makes me wonder what my descriptions would be like if i tried writing. my guess is that i wouldn't describe enough, since i wouldn't have a detailed image in my head and/or i'd forget that other people would want some details on what things look like
@@seven-cats-3 This is actually an interesting thing to point out. Writers and readers who have certain conditions that could affect the stylings of a work could potentially be an untapped market.
My brother has aphantasia and he actually writes really vivid and colourful descriptions. He probably writes them better than most amateur writers, because he only considers that he needs them when they're actually relevant to the narrative. He's very brief with his scene-setting and focusses on form, lighting and colour. I tutored him for his high school English Language exams but I learned quite a bit from him myself.
I have a similar problem where it's hard to picture things in my head so I don't really like descriptions, and I do write books. I noticed that I don't describe things like at all... it's something I'm trying to work on
Ok I have to say my favorite thing description wise I've ever written (which I'm likely not keeping for reasons) has to be this: "There had already been a number of visitors to Bellamoure Hall by the time the rumors had started. Whispers about the state of the family manor, the state of the women residing within its very walls, the truth behind Selina Oliveira's death. Once the sun settled below the horizon, leaving the sky with an almost golden glow to it, all worries and their accompanying echoes of the town gossip died down. Instead, each night since the Oliveira girls had arrived back in town, they had hosted an elegant party. And each night was twirled away through the antique walls of ebony wood and silver embossed mirrors. Like something out of a dream, everyone looked as though they belong among the hallowed halls - all except for the three who had actually inherited the property."
Ooh, I love it! I like how the air of mystery from the gossip kind of feeds in to the imagery of these parties being hosted, this contrast of liveliness and hostility that seems to just match the nature of the manor, and then it ends with "all except for the three who had actually inherited the property." It's a nice way of gently pulling you from the aloof mysteriousness to remind you that there are real people at the center of this scene who matter
Gotta disagree about Tolkien. You were right that he gives extremely vivid descriptions that can be long-winded and difficult to remember, but the point is not to remember them. He always brings the description back to the character's experience making the description even more impactful, because he spent so much time and work building the description up. In the example you use, he describes impenetrable walls that seem built beyond the ability of man. They stand impervious against the most dangerous enemies, and yet, much like the fall of the Numenoreans and Middle Earth itself, even these walls have fallen into decay. This knowledge leaves the reader with a feeling of dread and you realize that Minas Tirith also stands upon the edge of the knife and it hits harder because so much time was devoted to building those walls and everything they represent. He uses grandiose description, not so that the reader memorizes the minute details, but so that the important aspects hit harder and leave you with a feeling.
There’s also the fact that Tolkien had already wrote all this stuff and it seemed like he might never get to publish the Legendarium so he crammed as much of that world as he could into The Lord of the Rings.
Had to laugh when he said "I feel like Tolkien puts too much description in," and immediately followed it up with "Next part: sometimes writers put in a description because they put a lot of work into this place and want to showcase it."
Agreed. Tolkien's description isn't meant to be focussed on and remembered, it's meant to be bathed in. Let the sense of the place wash over you as it immerses the characters experiencing it. It's the difference between being atop a mountain and drinking in the surroundings, compared to trying to pick out the highest peak.
I love the descriptive detail in "The Face in the Frost" by John Bellairs. It begins, "Several centuries (or so) ago, in a country whose name doesn't matter, there was a tall, skinny, straggly-bearded old wizard named Prospero, and not the one you are thinking of, either. He lived in a huge, ridiculous, doodad-covered, trash filled two-story horror of a house that stumbled, staggered, and dribbled right up to the edge of a great shadowy forest of elms and oaks and maples." Inside his house are "such things as trouble antique dealers' dreams", such as "alembics, spiraling copper coils, alcohol lamps-all burping, sputtering, and glurping as red, blue, purple, and green liquids boiled, dripped, or just slurched uncertainly in their containers." I just love that phrase, "slurched uncertainly". There's so much there that just sets the mood right off the bat: whimsical, anachronistic, and unserious, but also with subtle undertones of gothic horror. Things that stagger and slurch aren't always the the safest...
One thing I'll note about Brandon Sanderson's writing: his descriptions are very character based. Here, you've used a description of Kaladin, currently a slave, being led through a war camp to be sold to Highprince Sadeas's army. At this time he's suffering from severe depression after a string of repeated failures. And even when he's not depressed, he's generally a fairly salt-of-the-earth character. Looking at the other major viewpoint characters (of the first book): -Dalinar sees the Alethi camps as not being as disciplined as they should be, so he notes the organization of camps, how tidy men's uniforms are, if they're clean shaven, etc. -Adolin is his foil, seeing things similarly but subtly differently. -Shallan is the most descriptive character. She's a charcoal artist skilled enough to impress kings and princesses, and in her segments, her descriptions are much more vivid. And she's also the most naive of these characters, out experiencing the world for the first time, so we get the kind of descriptions of the vastness of the Palaneum which none of the other characters would really stop to gawk at. (Well, a bit, it's the biggest library in the world, it's kinda impressive.) Fundamentally, Brandon's descriptions aren't describing the world, they're describing how the viewpoint character sees the world. Which works for me, doesn't have to be great for you.
I would say, if you've excessively designed every nook and cranny of your world and really want to share it with everyone then see if there is ways to do so outside of the main story. I have seen some fantasy novels include an appendix with definitions of magical terms and names or extra info that isn't relevant to the main story. I have also seen some mangas with authors who have Tolkien like world building put the random factoids in the two or three pages between chapters or at the end of the manga. And of course you can just do what I would probably do and get a cheap webpage where you can make an encyclopedia and dictionary and timeline with the link printed somewhere in the book for those who are interested in your work. Granted this should be balanced with places where you should leave some wonder and mystery for the reader or to avoid plottwists for later books,
Thanks Tim! I've just started getting back into writing seriously again, and your On Writing series is immensely helpful getting into the right mindset.
As somebody who actively ENJOYS purple prose… this video is helpful. I get enamored but pretty words, and my nature as a visual artist that I have a tendency to get carried away. Also, as someone who writes often from the first person, it is a lot harder to get away with writing poetic detail and still maintain the voice of the perspective character.
Well... Idk... I really love Sanderson's functional descriptions, since they are just precise and to the point, and the story comes out by just being plain good and without unnecesary decorations. You can put in some vivid descriptions when it matters, not everywhere just because :)
Just wanted to say a quick thank you to the universe since like 3 people will see this, I was just writing a couple of descriptions in my book and the first few minutes of this video made me reevaluate, and realise that no, the people wouldn't be what my character notices first. It would be weapons, and military honours, and weaknesses and escape strategies. Thank you!!
I like how you mentioned the Chekhov's Gun for details, if not by name. Having a particular detail payoff in some way is so satisfying to read. And maybe I missed how it was mentioned outright, but I also enjoy the use of "white space", ie writing that implies a description or detail without explicitly stating it, letting imagination fill it in, like how drawn art can imply the a field or continuation of a scene without actually drawing/painting it. Third thing I thought about was how one of my favorite series of all time, Robert Jordan's *The Wheel of Time*, seems to fall similarly to both Brandon Sanderson and Tolkien, in the fact of that workman-like description and excess of description, yet I'm not a fan of either Tolkien or Sando, partially for those exact reasons. Yet one piece of description always stands out in my mind, either from the ending part of book 3 or the beginning part of book 4 of WoT, there's a scene where a character walks into a tavern, and in the tavern's verbose and detailed description an assassin is glossed over, then shortly is revisited as the assassin attacks. Mentioned, but easily missed, which happens to be a supernatural talent of the assassin, to not be noticed by anybody...
@@Avendesora I appreciated what he did, and the books are good, don't get me wrong, but the style change was jarring (kinda can't help that, given the circumstances) and I just could not jive very well with that style.
@@dueling_spectra7270 in this case, it wasn't even foreshadowing... The character scanned the room, paused, the realized "hey! They're not supposed to be there!" Right as he got attacked...
I'm usually against very verbose descriptions, but I forgave Jordan partially because my friend (who I read the series with together) and I could play the game of "Spot the Forsaken" :D Which you can actually do with most of them, just based on descriptions (my favourite was the one you could figure out way earlier than her reveal based on a single minor detail of her clothing).
As far as implied description goes, i never really understood why writers will describe a highschool gymnasium with a full paragraph when something like: "we entered the highschool gym and joined the other students awaiting the teacherbto explain the basics of volleyball for the umpteenth time in our lives." will set a crystal clear image in the readers mind of what the scene looks like as basically the only difference in gyms is the color scheme and the school mascot on the floor, maybe the bleachers. This is also how Tom Clancy managed to get my heart pounding in a boat race, by describing less and less details but giving enough information that you can perfectly picture what happening as John Kelly is getting slowly overtaken by his Coastguard friend as they slowly pass a cargo ship in semirough seas. (He was under arrest for killing like 6 drug dealers in incredibly messed up ways, Without Remorse was such a good book)
Great video, lots of interesting points! For me though what makes 'specific details' so memorable is if they tell us something emotional about the setting or the characters. To me, what makes sense is to think about what your character *feels* about the environment they're in and pull the descriptions from there. Say you have three siblings in a big family with an old, hand-me-down sofa: to one sibling the sofa might be 'well-worn and comfortably shaped by the generations of ancestral bums that came before her', to another it might be 'soft and enveloping- apart from that one spring that allways jabbed him in the hip', and to the third it might simply be 'broken'. All of those descriptions can be good and memorable- but they tell us something different about the character and the environment. The first emphasises the size of the family and a comforting sense of family history and that siblings place within it, the second is still comforting but also slightly cloying and even uncomfortable or boardering on painful (we get the sense that as much as he likes the family, something about the environment is limiting or hurting this character), and the last is flatly negetive- blunt and harsh (this sibling feels something is wrong and isnt interested in excusing or deflecting away from it, at least, not in there own head). The three siblings have different experiences of the family and so have a different perspective on the physical space they live in. I think descriptions are often best when they reflect this. Its one of the reasons i love multiple pov, both to read and to write. Whats weird or familiar to your character and why? What features leap out to them and dominate their perception? What would they ignore? Whats comforting? Unsettling? Upsetting? All of this is naturally interesting to a reader if they are invested in your characters, and i think it can help stop it from becoming overwhelming too- i mean we might notice something once or when we feel a particular way about it, but we dont walk around constantly noticing normal things or our feelings towards them, so it wouldnt make sense to describe them in that scene- at least not beyond the bare basics the reader needs to understand whats happening.
This is a video I've been needing for a long while. Descriptions of the setting is something that I often lack and when going back to edit, I worry about over describing the entire area. What you see What you smell What you hear How you feel when you stand in that place. But I always worry that I would end up describing too much that I end up not describing enough. However, I have been praised for how I take the time to describe things through the eyes of different people. I take the time to use short descriptions of the area, the image people getting being vague because the world feels suffocating when you don't know where you are but when I swap to the view of someone that knows where they are going, they go more in detail, describing the forest they've passed by multiple times before on their job but also the worries they will find when they're made to go in for an important item of interest fell into the forest controlled by creatures known for killing anything that isn't like them.
9:05 HelloFuture, I mean this in the nicest way possible, you have helped me start to enjoy writing again and for that I thank you. But the day you take away Vermillion and Cerulean from my hands is the day either one of us dye.
A favorite bit of my own writing is from a story about a young woman trying to come to terms with a family estrangement. Every few years, when a family milestone passes without that person, she ruminates on the relationship she had with him as a child. This section is meant to highlight the lack of closure and set up the atmosphere of the house to feel like a place not quite devoid of his presence, no matter how hard the others might try to erase or forget him. "The dining room is quiet, more insulated than other rooms she could haunt....She looks up at the family tree, all but one of the faces gazing benignly out at her. A decade of neglect has nearly erased her uncle." And he does eventually find his way back to find the house and the family changed in his absence, like his abandoned room: "He turned the corner and found himself in a barren hollow....like someone had taken a hot spoon and scooped out some of the house's insides."
I love the “I believe that knife is still there,” line from Assassin’s Apprentice. Because that scene is so emotionally intense, and ends on that one note. Every subsequent time a scene is set in that same room (and a lot of scenes are), I think, “oh, and that knife’s still there.” Sensational.
Merphy has such a gorgeous reading voice. It just sucks you into the description. This was a great video, and I love the quotes you chose to represent the thoughts you had on the topic.
I like the idea of say a character who adores birds and flowers and they explain the details of the flowers in the description. It shows how much they care about it.
I think my personal favorite specific quote is from the Great Gatsby, being "The eyes of Dr. TJ Eckleberg" as it's an image BURNED into memory. A similar one is from "The King in Yellow," also focusing on the hateful image of the eyes of an organ player with "a face of pure distain and nothing more" or something. Glorius.
This is a thank you from a D&D dungeon master. These videos on writing help me so much, especially this one. Learning what to describe, and what to leave to your players is very hard, but returning back to the principles of storywriting helped me so very much.
I remember listening to Brian Jacques full cast audioplay of Redwall when I was very young. The building itself is described quite accurately, but didn't understand the wording used. So I had a completely different picture of what Redwall Abbey looked like in my head, rather than what it was intended to look like.
Reading a description and some misunderstanding causing you to imagine part of the setting differently is fun, you ended up reading a version totally different from most people's. And it's even better when you come back to read it later and realize what they actually meant
I don't think I could describe 100% what Redwall LOOKS like, because my brain doesn't really work that way when I'm reading (except for maybe the Joseph Bell tower, could probably describe that). But I could tell you exactly what it feels like to be there. Or the inside of Salamandastron, or the Kingdom of Malkariss. No idea what they LOOK like, but I get impressions of what different parts of it feel like :P
I remember the most immersed I felt when reading a book was when I read the Rowan of Rin series as a child, so I havent read them in a long time, however I can remember being able to connect to the story from its environment, in one of the books they have to go through an evil carnivorous forest and the descriptions are what brought it to life for me, being able to imagine the chill of a city once splended but fallen to ruin, and the fear which would be felt exploring the barren waste, the grey bark which calls upon imagery of illness, roots tough as steel ready to crush you like the hands of a giant, and being isolated, knowing that if you fail, your family would not survive.
I have spent a lot of time critiquing and notice that beginners tend to describe EVERYTHING. from thoughts to setting to backstory ... the list goes on. they will spend pages telling the reader about their story. this is a great video for showing how the use description wisely.
@kshamwhizzle I agree ... fan fic can be great practice from that POV because the world building is kind of done for you lol. I have written my fair share of it so know the feeling :) Its also great practice for staying in character and really getting in the head of a character because the characters are already set in stone.
@kshamwhizzle for sure ... fan fiction definitely has a place and it should never be knocked. Even if just an exercise in how to stay in character. But I like that it pushes a writer to think about how these characters will act in different situations. sometimes you don't have the answers and it forces you to really think through the solutions. I think all beginners should start with fan fiction until they get the swing of it and then move on to original work. its like when an artist starts drawing ... they copy other art to get the feel and study how it was made then once they figure that out move on to their own.
Honestly, the Lord of the Rings is my favorite book in terms of setting description. I'm a very slow reader and pause constantly to ponder or reread what I've just read. As a result, Tolkien's extreme level of detail when describing locations is like candy to me. I find it viscerally exciting to visualize each of his set-pieces (which is probably a large part of why I hated the movies--to me they feel so flat and uninspired compared to the descriptions in the book). However, since most people don't seem to read like this, I understand why these sections drag for many readers (which would also explain why so few people share my reaction to the films--if you've been skimming, or completely skipping, all of that description then a similar degree of detail won't be expected from the film).
Completely agree with you. I'm not a very plot-driven reader, I read to enjoy the experience of reading itself or the atmosphere of the world. Sometimes it takes me an hour to get through five pages if I'm feeling inspired by what im reading and keep putting the book down to daydream or contemplate hahah.
Same here. I think there are plot driven readers and world driven readers. For me, the more rich and immersive the world, the more enveloped and immersed I am in the narrative and characters placed in it. I have a passion for world building, so I suppose that might be it.
The small description that stuck with me is from The Starless Sea by Erin Morgenstern: "This space is a temple. The doors are one set of four that lead to an open atrium. It continues up and up and up in tiers surrounded by wooden stairs and balconies. Fires burn in hanging bowls, their moving light accentuated by the candles placed on every surface in lieu of offerings, dripping wax on carved altars and on the shoulders and open palms of statues..."Are you injured?" Simon asks as Zachary stumbles backward, catching his balance on an altar behind him. Its surface is soft beneath his hand, the stone covered in layers upon layers of dripped wax." I read this book over a year ago and am still astonished by the effectiveness with which the author conveyed the oldness of this space and the kind of solemn chaos that the whole book has.
@@lillianwolfe8314 I loved the Night Circus, and the Starless Sea is a phenomenal second novel, with so much of the same imagination, stunning setting and magical description. I always take every opportunity to recommend it ☺️
Vivid details and sensory experiences and setting being the most memorable part of a book is Erin Morgenstern's books. Both The Nignt Circus and Starless Sea feel more about the setting than.the plot and the details and writing are exquisite
Setting I remember: DUNE. Perhaps it's because I spent so much of my youth wandering the sands of Arrakis that it holds such a powerful grip on my mind and heart. Tolkien: Love his long descriptions. People who complain about his books should read more classical literature. I grew up reading classical literature as a kid. And shied away from Tolkien because people I respected kept telling me it was "encyclopedic". But when I finally did sit down and read it I found it absolutely amazing. It was no more "encyclopedic" than Jules Verne or Charles Dickens, and Tolkien's descriptions flesh out a world that is rich and vibrant and alive and FULL of history. A world that feels *real*. The direction that each gate faced isn't important, but that the gates face different directions, and the general facing of the city itself to the east, these are important, both for setting and for Tolkien's philosophy and metaphor. No, I don't remember the north/south/east/west -ness of his description of the White Tower, but I remember how reading about it filled my mind with a vision of it, and filled my heart with an awe of it. You want an author who DOES write way too much description? Robert Jordan. O.M.G. Talk about a slog! Eugh. But thanks for pointing out Brandon Sanderson's flaws. I think it's good to offer criticism of a writer where criticism is due. (I just feel like Tolkien is unduly criticized by people who never developed an appreciation for classical literature, of which LOTR is an example.) Things that authors should describe more / better: Their characters' behaviors and mannerisms. Things that ground your character in consistency, which you can use later to alert the reader to something. "Character absently pulled a lip balm out of her pocket and spread it across her lower lip - she chewed her lip when she was nervous, leaving it chapped and raw and in constant need of protection." followed chapters later by "New love interest introduced herself and held out a hand. Character chewed her lip as she took the offered hand in hers and quietly replied with a soft 'hey'." Call it "Chekov's character patterns".
I actually like reading most of Tolkien's descriptions. They have a calming effect on me and they let me reflect on things, on words. Injust enjoy how he writed about things, not just the things he wrote about. However, I understand why most people don't: The Lord of the Rings reads more like an epic poem in many aspects, and it clashes with certain expectations readers may have. On the other hand, I dislike Sanderson's writing, even though he's very popular. It feels souless to me, his prose is quite dry. But that's the beauty of having so many different writers who do things differently. We can all find something we enjoy.
The way sanderson describes things feels a lot like how a tabletop dm or gm would describe everything to their players. His entire style feels like you're meant to insert yourself into a specific world as opposed to imagining the world yourself, which makes sense after watching some of his writing classes.
I think overly specific descriptions like in Piranesi can easily backfire. First you get bombarded with numbers and dozens of details. Being overly precise with placements like climbing the "western" wall can confuse because I will try to readjust my mental image of the room. Do this a few times and my immersion is broken. And then you get hit with the "bee on the eye", so memorable that I literally lost the entire earlier description immediately. On the subject of Brando Sando, his writing style makes sure that this never happens. I can understand why some people wouldn't like that but it works for me. In the case of Neil Gaiman and Terry Pratchett they tend to focus more on the characters in the scenes. But if they need to describe something, they make it weird, use partially nonsensical similes or try to evoke a feeling over giving you anything specific to latch on. What I've learned is that I like books where I can let my imagination run wild ^^
I actually always liked Tolkien's descriptions. They were one of my favourite things about his stories. I guess it made his stories more 'real' to me. I could almost see what he was describing. (and I suspect it might have been responsible for me having a greater appreciation of nature ) .
I would love to see a situation where the same setting is described two or more times from the perspective of different characters, with the point of view drastically changing how the scene is described. Maybe it already exists somewhere but I haven't seen it before.
This is very helpful. I often end up getting stuck feeling like I have to describe every single scene, even when it's just a random street or random cafe, or the third patient room that looks virtually the same as the previous two did. So I started slacking and described less and less the more plain/common the space was. I also struggled with setting the scene for the very first chapter, and re-wrote it a billion times until I eventually thought of that I could actually just incorporate the description into character action, just like you bring up in this video, and I ended up very pleased with it! Here's what I came up with: "When Oskar arrived at the broken down house he had grown up in, a few miles outside of the city Emridge, he sped up on the dirt road and force stopped his dented old, gray Ford just outside of the garage. The bumper nudged his older brother Margus’ blue Volvo, which set off a gnarly alarm. Grimacing at the intense sound, he leaned into the car through the open window to turn off the alarm, before stumbling past his younger brother Reigo’s green Jeep on his way to the front door. The old house, which was difficult to find if you didn’t know exactly where to go, and surrounded by pine woods, was located on the east side of USA close to the Canadian border, where crisp cold snow ruled the winters into the early 21st century, and sunshine ruled the summers with an abundance of heat, but this particular spring was unwilling to welcome the promise of a warm summer. On the narrow driveway, haphazardly sprayed with sand still accumulating in the overgrown grass from last winter, the three cars stood parked, one more poorly than the next, as the three adult children had arrived at their parents home."
This video focuses mostly on descriptions of places, but I think this is all super applicable and important for writing sex scenes! Especially the point about how it's more important to describe things the characters are feeling or noticing than just giving info about what's happening. The best sex scenes don't just tell me a list of positions, but focus on the emotions of the characters participating in the sex. I don't write prose (I'm a playwright) but I read a lot of erotica and it's one of my biggest pet peeves when sex scenes feel empty and just like filler, and usually the culprit is this issue- describing what's happening instead of how the character's are feeling about what's happening. Here's an example of really good sex scene writing where the focus is more on the character's feelings than actions from the brilliant Alexis Hall's book Glitterland: "I tumbled off his lap and pulled him to his feet, remembering unexpectedly his body covering mine in a dark room in Brighton and how much I had wanted to see him. And then watching him in my living room, wanting to touch him. I’d turned away from both at the time, and the vulnerability of giving, like the thief I was. Such a fragile thing, wanting to please someone else. Such endless scope for disappointment and failure. How much easier just to take." I love this because even though it pauses the action of telling us about what's happening in the room sexually, it still heightens the momentum of the scene as we better understand what the protagonist is feeling about this moment and why it's special and why it's sexy
In the example you give Tolkien does go a little overkill with his descriptions of archways, and which direction every entrance faced and what overlooked what and how high up certain areas are and so forth. However, I think there is a reason for all of this. Lot's of this information helps us to understand the functionality of the city and makes us appreciate it's design and the battle that follows. The descriptions Tolkien give of the Citadel are rather bland and seemingly useless, however Pippin himself spends much time there, and it helps us to envision this massive city and draws our attention to a important part of the city. Pippin later looks out from the Citadel over the Great Gate and the land beyond, and so this description is sort of setting up a later payoff. Most importantly, I think a lot of this description helps to build this feeling and setting in Minas Tirith. The banner of the stewards illustrates the nobility, power, and history this city has while also reminding us that there is no king in Gondor. It also foreshadows when Aragorn's banner is instead raised up. The area where the bygone kings of old rest is remarkably important. It is a sacred place that i believe plays an special role in the story later on, when Aragorn finds a sapling of the white tree of Gondor, and it also adds even more to the lore and feeling of the city. Of a once great kingdom slowly decaying. It also adds more to the history of Aragorn and is important for him, those are his ancestors resting in those houses, and that is where he will rest one day. The sentence before last when Pippin wonders at the city, seems sort of simple and bland, but tells us a lot about Pippin, he is a young Hobbit, who had never left his home before this adventure, and about Minas Tirith, it is greater than Isengard yet also more beautiful. Overall, this whole description sets up Pippin's wonder and the feeling of decay he notices. Could it have been done better? Yes, for sure. Is this bad description? I don't know. It probably depends on the reader.
The description that hit me most from all I've read so far was actually the dark streets of Paris, as Valjean tries to escape the police, before he climbed over the wall into the convict. Hugo managed to write a raod map of Paris of it's time - exactly enough to follow it through Paris today - in a very interesting and even suspensful way.
half-disagree on the example from Way of Kings. I feel that that description is very much Kaladin looking at the camp. He's an ex-soldier, and he looks at it as a soldier would. Memorizing routes and layout. Identifying strengths and weaknesses. Checking highstorm risks and hiding places. Very methodical. And he has to be, because if he lets himself feel than his depression shows up all grumpy.
What i'd add is that descriptions are a brilliant place to hide some character building. What does your character notice about this thing, what do they find important, or weird, or interesting, what do they ignore altogether? Are they quick to form an opinion on it or are they more factual about it - or do they try to be factual about it, but is their opinion clear when read closely? If they form an opinion quickly, is it a postive or negative one? What associations do they have - do they compare the grimy stains on a sofa to the spots on a cow, or to puddles of rain and oil on a city street? Questions like these make descriptions an absolute GOLDMINE to learn more about a character and how they view the world - literally.
This is mostly because it's the most recent series I've read, but Shadesmar from the stormlight archive is always evocative for me. It's an incredibly alien landscape in just about every way - ground made of obsidian, clouds that all point towards the sun no matter where you are, the true forms of magical beings living their "normal" lives.
Whether fiction or non, understanding a text requires knowing when it was written, by whom it was written and for whom it was intended to be consumed. Tolkein was writing for an audience who had never seen a television, many of whom may never have seen a moving picture, and for whom radio drama was still a riveting entertainment. The length of description is also more apt for its consumption as an entertainment read chapter by chapter, week by week, by one member of the household to the others, in areas where access to radio was yet unavailable or still prohibitively expensive. For someone who had literally no concept of what a dense European forest looked like then significant detail was required to provide a sense of immersion, something modern readers do not require due to the availability of images on the internet. So the response to shut up about the trees would probably have been no, I'm world-building for 'my' audience...
One place that really stands out is Terry Pratchett's city of Ankh-Morpork in his Discworld novels - every description, both the setting paragraphs and the casual mentions of scenery as a character moves through the city or speaks about it, really lets you feel the city as a behemoth both made up of the people within it, and one that swallows them into it and changes them
When I write descriptions I always imagine the writing like a camera on a set, swinging around and cutting to show things as they become relevant. I find it usually helps keep a good flow in the story rather than bogging it down
I have been in suburban houses. All of them are different. One I remember belonged to someone at our church, we were invited for lunch. It was August, but the dishes hanging on the wall told me that guests weren’t expected to arrive until Christmas dinner. Even then, those silver, green, and red wall decorations wouldn’t be used anyway. Paper plates, like the one I had eaten off of were easier to clean up. But the suburban house I remember the most was the house of someone I dated a long time ago. His mother liked clowns, she thought they were cute. So every time a friend or family member gave her a gift, it was clown related. I don’t have anything against clowns, but I did excuse myself to the bathroom and put my head in my hands. As they were normal, and they accepted the living room as normal, I therefore had to make this normal inside my head as well for the time I stayed. It was a room that made me think critically about how gift giving based on surface knowledge effects people.
I can report: Your videos on writing are not only useful for "classical" writing, but I find them also very useful when preparing for any of my Pen&Paper RPG Sessions and even a Discord PlayByPost RPG.
I don't know about 'vivid', but I've had stories LITERALLY COME BACK TO ME months or years after I've read them, even when I wasn't doing anything book-related -The Ashes Trilogy by Ilsa J Bick. I realized it was just SUCH an awesome story (pretty much combining the contemporary 'main character has CANCER' trope with a wilderness/apocalypse survival story) -That, and a scene in the second book of the Graceling Series So, yes, I'd definitely say that emotions last longer than details. EMOTIONS we can understand, related to, far more than trying to piece together those 'beautiful scenes' in books that build off of nothing and are immediately forgotten just like what i watched on youtube the other day (except (ironic because it also involves the Handmaid's Tale), there is a very small scene detailing an egg in that story. I still remember that that description ripped me straight into the book, as if I was right there with our girl looking at the tiny details of this little fecking egg in its little holder. It made the world of the Handmaid's Tale all the more REAL) -- (p.s. boyo, the fact that you're near a million subs is awesome ^.^)
Great video. Something that always sticks with me is in Rand's The Fountainhead where she describes someone's words "like coins that had changed hands many times"
Coming to the defense of my main man Ronald! I personally couldn’t get through the beginning of LOTR when I tried to read it in HS. It wasn’t until the first PJ movie came out that I was motivated enough to buy and read the book immediately. After finishing LOTR, I tried to read The Silmarillion, and the complete gearshift in writing style made a loud grinding noise in my brain and my transmission hit the ground. It wasn’t until I bought and listened the Martin Shaw audiobook that I realized this was a much more surreal and ethereal experience, completely unlike LOTR. Now, after reading an unhealthy amount of Tolkien, my preference is actually for the poetry. It kindles that Brian Froud fey-like quality that I dig.
The point that it's the experience of the characters that matters, I think, really nails the idea home. When the character steps into a new place, what do _they_ specifically notice? For some reason, the best example I have of this actually comes from a movie, not a book, and that is the scene in "Love, Simon" where he arrives at the school for the first time. As he gets out of the car and looks around, the camera jumps to a few very specific things he sees, stuff like iirc, football jocks skylarking and a couple embracing each other on their way into school, and as a gay person myself, I actually cried at that scene; it is hands-down my favorite scene of the entire movie even though it's so mundane. All of those things were what Simon, specifically, noticed when he arrived and communicated something deep about his experience as a character. You can picture that same scene in a book, albeit more descriptive about exactly what Simon feels seeing those specific things. If I'm not mistaken there should actually be a book to "Love, Simon", and I would not be surprised if that scene and those specific images are there. So, all in all, I think the exercise is really, rather than simply describing the scene, you're really recounting what the characters feel entering the scene, which is also highly dependant on the character. Another way to put it is that you're not describing the scene per se, you're describing the character(s) in the context of the scene. Aside: This actually made me just realize why I had so much trouble in English class, back in sec, when we were doing descriptive writing: I just couldn't divorce the scene from a character. I remember in one exercise, we were describing a scene on a hilltop, and I just couldn't help but describe how everything looked and felt, for which I got scolded by the teacher for going off topic, haha 😅
Oh gosh i never thought that I'd find someone else that brought this issue up! I have an active imagination and I hate when the plot gets paused for describing detail that I'm going to forget about. Especially when the description goes on forever my mind starts to clock out. And i hate when i imagine the setting with what's set up with a sentence or a few and then a detail comes up and kills the picture i painted in my mind and forces me to change it over and over, it gives me an actual headache.
Your video on show don't tell is the best instruction I've found on the topic. The best descriptions I've read recently is a short that won the nonfiction prize from the Canadian Broadcasting Company earlier this year. In it, the author is overtly trying to persuade prospective beekeepers to not keep bees, because it's a frustrating, expensive hobby with an incredibly steep learning curve. At the same time she subvertly reveals glimpses of experiences that keep the seasoned apiarists enthralled by the little insects.
I love stories that describe an important things about every place or character to show there constrast. I really like doing this with posture, eyes, and how they speak. Can really show personality without just saying what their personality is
As I watched the video, specifically the sections about vivid details characters would focus on, I realized over the course of my writing in the past four years I naturally began to describe settings based on what my characters would focus on. In my latest beginning of a novel I will eventually come back to, Jules, my protagonist, describes the details of a restaurant he is in, sure, but focuses in on the mathematical patterns in the floor and ceiling and the history of the place. This sneaks in characterization while providing (hopefully) interesting details. I should probably go back and do something similar for my other writing projects.
A specific detail thats memorable to me is the hawk in small gods,always described in relation to the turtle. It’s like a character of its own, with no lines. It both a symbolic representation and a plot device which in the end impacts the story.In my opinion Terry prachet has the most inventive ways of description, it always clever and funny, it’s basically a character in every story.
12:18 on the contrary. You have earned my undying respect. We need to let go of this illusion that Tolkien's work is flawless, there is fair criticism in there, and his overly wordy description is one of them.
One of my favorite descriptions was in the book Spectrum by Samantha Mina, and it was specifically when the main character Scarlet lands in Nuria. For reference Scarlet is from a Nation called Conflagria, and it's like a typical fantasy country set in the desert with a dictatoral government that controls literally everything through mind-controlling the people (okay maybe not typical fantasy land, but in terms of technology and magic, it very much is), whereas Nuria has no magic and is essentially like that world's version of the Modern United States, technology and all. And the Author focused on some very typical details that you would not focus on if you were from there, for example street lamps and Automatic sliding Glass Doors, in such a way that it very clearly communicated how strange this new place was to Scarlet, when the place to the reader was rather typical.
- The place I can picture most vividly is still Middle Earth. I could always draw from memory what a person should be seeing when looking in any direction from any point of the known map. I'm that person that never jumps descriptions. - My favourite detail is in the experience category: the specific nonchalant mention by Cornwell that somebody puked at the round table, which definitely sets the tone of the narrative for people who somehow didn't get it until that point. As a rule of thumb, maybe people should tell themselves "And it's important that the reader knows this because ______________________." And if it takes more than a couple seconds to find something to fill in this blank, you allow yourself to reconsider it.
I think everyone starts out wanting to be as descriptive as possible. Lack of experience translates this into 'lots of words'. Especially if you're a writer who digest more visual than written storytelling. But as you go on writing, you realize that doesn't always mean you need to use more words. Pick the right words, and embed them in the right prose, and you can describe a person or a place without ever taking the reader out of the story.
Very good points here. I definitely have a tendency to focus on my descriptions and have been wanting to reign it in lately. Did this for a WIP after this video inspired me a little. "The Dune Sea was a vast expanse of dust and wind that swallowed most mortals who dared its sandy drifts. The shifting mountains altered ones perception of time as the decomposed forefathers of the Resolute Spine clouded a pale horizon. In such a wasteland, death clung to the soul closer than sweat drenched clothes to the skin. Yet somehow, sequestered amongst the ever roiling dunes, a perfect oasis sprouted forth.'
If I ever finish writing my trilogy, you'll be in the acknowledgments for sure I've been using a third-limited narrator and all we get to access is the protagonist's feelings, thoughts and theories but I NEVER THOUGHT TO INCLUDE THEIR LITERAL SURROUNDINGS from their perspective. Thank you a thousand times ❤️
This might be the best video explaining description, over-description and using description to deepen characterization and expand the experience as opposed to the location.
YES! New video! Love your videos, has been very helpful to me as a writer and make me laugh when I'm feeling down. Thank you Tim, keep rocking it!!😄💕 And...I agree with your hot take. As a Dyslexic, I have lots of trouble reading Lord of the Rings and sometimes feel like I'm missing out on 'true literature' so, thanks for that. Love those books and J.R.R. Tolkien is an amazing writer, but it is much easier for me to watch or audio book the story. It's sometimes just too much. Also, there is a very interesting video that compares Brandon Brandon Sanderson's prose and J.R.R Tolkien's prose and the origins of their words, one being mostly Germanic and the other...I forget what's it call, but I can link the video because it is really agrees with what you said. Also, I agree with your second hot take, love my boy Brandon Sanderson, but it is a thing in his books. Love them both anyways.
The moment you mentioned specificity I instantly imagined Shaelin gleefully talking about it ~ then instantly jumped hearing Polyphonic. It was so unexpected
Regarding the experience and how that ties into the description - I'm proud of an example of that from my own writing. It's not simply a description that this part of the city is under constant construction and gentrification. It's the character seeing new construction where his family home had burned down. And he daydreams, imagining weeks, months, years go by - at first, superstitions about the tragedy here shape the experience. But over time, they forget. The city's like his great-uncle; its memory just isn't what it used to be. We don't just learn that this district is constantly seeing new construction. We see an anxiety that it's losing its own history in the process. And worry that what remains is a superficial memory - the kids making ghost stories and tests of courage out of rumors vaguely inspired by the inspired.
"Click. Tap. Pain. That was the rhythm of his walking." One of my favourite descriptive opening lines of a chapter. Joe Abercrombie introducing Glokta in The blade itself
So (for those that struggle with long videos), *how* we experience (not just our five senses but more abstract ones as well, analogies and mystery being your friends), evocative details, rather than lengthy expositions (description?) and pretentiousness. Staying relevant to the story/character (ideally; You can only guarantee you to be happy, not every reader) POV; .Say more with less but be relatable, exploiting the public's imaginarium. Right? Always being wary of not disrupting the pacing. Among other nuances (if you can, I suggest you watch the video regardless, even if its a few minutes each day) Good video! (and sorry for bad english) . And yeah, ordinary places and situations are the ones on which I struggle the most. The "in betweens" and encompassing mundanity is so damn hard to grasp that doing it correctly to me is sign of a literary genius; Also yeah, I think sanderson is a bit "utilitarian" at times (and I think his weakness is characters and dialogue) but he does good worldbuilding and very movie-like scenes imho. He is what the bottom line of writing should be to me (he is nowhere near that of course)
Oh this has landed at the perfect time. I am doing Nanowrimo next month to edit a manuscript that has been sitting for too long and I am definitely guilty of over describing.
![On Writing: Great Character Descriptions! [ Rowling | Dragon Tattoo | Gatsby | Pratchett ]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/vL0q15Kkews/mqdefault.jpg)
![On Writing: Subtext (and how to use it)! [ Tarantino | Thrones | Gatsby ]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/58FyvzttlIg/mqdefault.jpg)
What's the most VIVID fictional place/world for you?? ☺️☺️ Or your fav bit of your own descriptive writing?? Stay nerdy!
~ Tim
The Belgariad by David Eddings, specifically Vo Mimbre and its castle's throne room 💜
Douglas Adams had two of my favourites:
"Containing a liquid almost, but not entirely unlike, tea."
"The ships hung in the sky in much the same way that bricks don't."
Gormenghast
I’d say hogwarts or the shire, but I can’t be sure how much those have been influenced by the films. Maybe the city of Jrusar from Critical Role? That could just be chalked up to the 80+ hours of time spent there though.
Oddly enough, Kekon from the Green Bone Saga. Not because of description or anything like that but rather in how the place worked. Its systems, its politics, its history, its folk tales. Out of any setting, it feels the realest out of any I've read before.
Ongoing descriptions are an option too, describe parts of the castle as they become relevant. Emphasize the outer walls and towers as characters approach, back to plot, describe gates and flags as they enter, back to plot, etc... I've seen a few authors divert to describing a castle down to the type of wood used in the lord's dinner table while the characters were still looking at the place on the horizon.
Or describe them via this one character who _will not shut up about it_ and play it for comedy.
@@syaondri that's more of a way to describe threats via character interaction, which is a good way to do things in situations where the threat is a well documented if niche subject (it's kinda sus when someone knows all the super secret techno whatsits from a different country). Girls Und Panzar is basically "high school paintball tournament with tanks" if I remember it right even if there are several characters that take it way more seriously than they realistically should. Like the MCs family who think "choosing to not die in a high school sport" is cowardly.
@@syaondri In a similar vein, there is a Special Pilot Ability in Battletech and Alpha Strike (tabletop games) called Living TRO (Technical Readout), which means they geek out on mechs, tanks and vehicles so much they can identify units immediately and tell everyone else where the weak points are to take it down...
*Thats prob a sign for a literary artist to follow their true calling and become an architect. Just like a certain Austrian in Vienna.*
Yeah, that second type you described is mind boggling to me.
Neil Gaiman does some excellent descriptions, and one of my favorites is in "Neverwhere", where he describes the villains Croup and Vandemar like this: "They wore black suits, which were slightly greasy, slightly frayed, and even Richard, who counted himself among the sartorially dyslexic, felt there was something odd about the cut of the coats. They were the kind of suits that might have been made by a tailor two hundred years ago who had had a modern suit described to him but had never actually seen one. The lines were wrong, and so were the grace notes."
Oooh, I love Neverwhere, thank you for bringing it up!
Interestingly *specific* & vivid imagery that is directly connected with the characters *experience* .
Ugh, that's the kind of description I always wish I could come up with
@@rickpgriffin practice makes perfect practice
One of my favorite character descriptions ever came from a prison warden in Gaiman's American Gods - "He had sandy blonde hair and a sandy blonde face and a sandy blonde smile." There's something distinctively bland about that one sentence of description with the repeated use of "sandy blonde". If the prison warden had "sandy blonde hair, leathery skin, and yellow teeth", his description would've been much less evocative and memorable.
Despite the thumbnail there is a lack of Howl's Moving Castle, so...
"Sophie put her hands to her face, wondering what the man had stared at. She felt soft leathery wrinkles. She looked at her hands. They were wrinkled too, and skinny, with large veins in the back and knuckles like knobs. She pulled her grey skirt against her legs and looked down at skinny, decrepit ankles and feet which had made her shoes all knobby. They were the legs of someone about ninety and they seemed to be real."
Diana Wynne Jones
god i love that book
Love her work.
When we first see Scales in Darklord of Derkholm has got to be my favorite ever description both for a dragon and just conveying how massive something is.
@@tyrant-den884 Just started reading Darklord of Derkholm! DWJ is my favorite author
I think the best description I've ever heard wasn't even written. It was a college English professor, talking about his life and describing the island he grew up on as follows:
"It stuck out into the bay like a crooked finger trying to induce vomiting."
Only a single, shortish sentence, but it told me so, so much about this place in an instant and how he felt about it.
Well now it is written 😂
That’s actually really good
Wow, that's legendary.
I always remember Jon Snow's description when he wakes up beyond the wall and everything is frozen and glittering. And I remember it not because of the details but because of the emotion. That landscape makes him think fondly of how his sisters would react if they were there.
Something along the lines of Sansa would have tears in her eyes and call it enchanted. Arya on the other hand, would want to run around and touch things. I think this was the camp of the Knight's Watch men close to Kraster's Keep.
@@Hoops_Fan yes. I was stupid not to add the description haha. It's so nice, and it makes you feel warm and then sad, knowing that all of them have left that kind of happiness behind.
Thag is a beatiful moment. When he does it well an effective economy of words like this, yes, it smokes.
But there are times where he does way too much. Food sometimes, for example. Like dude you just told me and about Winterfells spread im great length and a few pages or so - again hete we are wifh an itemized menu at Renlys. I
In doses it creates ambiancd and textutre until it does too much amd makes my eyes heavy.
I’ve learned something very important today… apparently Cthulhu statues capable of summoning the Eldritch god are not in fact a normal thing to keep in one’s Library.
They're not?!?!
....well...crap... Does that mean I need to get rid of mine?
@@korritaranis672 can have two? I need a even thirteen, for reasons.
Why Cthulu? I would rather have a couple of Ln'eta and Estir statues.
Are statues of the primordial gods normal?
Not? So where i the eldrich being summoning market?! No not big companies, eldrich beings.
But i want to keep yogh sa got
I think you'll notice that Brandon Sanderson's descriptions change depending on which POV character we're following. Kaladin is a soldier, a surgeon. He notices and describes the world around him from the perspective of a practical, to-the-point person. Shallan's POV chapters are more descriptive and less "dry" because she's an artist and scholar who takes interest in things like art, architecture, flora and fauna. I'd still agree that Sanderson's prose isn't where he shines the most as a writer, but I think he has far more range and is far more deliberate with his descriptions than some give him credit for. :)
I've found that his descriptions, no matter the character, are too matter-of-fact and vague. That might sound contradictary, but even if you read his passage in the video you can see it yourself -- he explains everything in a straight forward way, but he's super vague on many details with words like: some, countless, several, etc. It's why I find his writing style uninteresting and hard to paint a picture with. Though, I haven't read all of the Cosmere, just Stormlight, which should be enough to make this judgement. I'd go as far as saying that anyone who is praising his writing style is giving him far too much credit; Brandon is a great storyteller, not a great writer.
I was going to point out the same. 😂
I do think a part of it is that the characters (who live in this world) are seeing it. You can see the shifts in description when Shallan is looking at the tower in Oathbringer, she describes impossible perspectives and frames it within the difficulty of drawing it. It’s brilliant because it shows so much more than just vague impressions.
Sanderson is my favorite author, but I think you're confusing WHAT the characters notice with HOW they notice. Shallan and Kaladin absolutely focuses more on the practical vs Shallan's focus on more whimsical things, but at the end of the day they feel written the same. Just replace "grey stone ramparts ringing the city" with "curling vines climbing the ramparts." The things they notice are different, but the way the information is delivered to us is exactly the same. It's just matter-of-fact descriptions of different things. Contrast that to something like Name of the Wind, which is known for its great prose, where Rothfuss describes everything through the eyes of Kvothe, and you absolutely feel his personality bleed into every description.
I've been trying to do that with my writing. I have seperate POV characters, one of them is a child, so I use descriptions myself form 5 years ago would have used. Another is a teen, so I use Percy Jackson description, another is a sciencey character who uses precise measurements.
While the POV in the first chapter has ALL THE ADHD.
What's occurred to me while watching this is that one of the most valuable functions of description is what it can tell you about the character observing whatever is being described. I have a first-person protagonist who *absolutely* would use words like "cerulean" and "vermilion," because he is a young wizard who hasn't yet figured out that knowing a lot of things and having an extensive vocabulary isn't the same thing as being wise. When I heard the Sanderson passage, I remarked to my spouse (a Sanderson fan) that it sounded very businesslike. They said that the character in that passage *is* a businesslike person, and that Sanderson writes more interesting descriptive passages when another character, an artist, is the viewpoint. And of course famously, a case where the environment's description tells you pretty much everything about the character, is The Yellow Wallpaper.
I read the yellow wall paper last year for school; it was rather interesting.
Yes I love that in a book. It makes perfect sense, by a psychological point of view, since different people pay attention to different things and value them differently.
I like that. But, not gonna tell you how to write your book but i would REALLY love that to go down as your protagonist matures. Made take it down a small notch with every humbling experience. Kind of like a piece of candy for your really attentive readers.
I'm definitely going to have to take notes on that I have a story with a lot of different characters and well listening I started to think about it and realize that yes I do know how each of them could describe a room differently which is not something I'd ever planned on because I hadn't thought about it but something I realized that I still know about them each of them and their characters
All right character I know how they think one girl who can fly hates being inside so if she walked into a room she'd focus on how large it was how big the windows were how easy to escape from another is a princess and would focus on the materials in a economic sense well another has a plant empathy I would focus on the materials in a nature sense and another have fire and may focus on what flammable but is also a healer and would focus on the comforting feeling or whether or not a room felt lived in or not well another who has a big time power would be able to look back and see memories in the room
And now I really wish I could figure out how to actually incorporate that because it'd be harder to notice I don't think anyone would notice if they each focused on different things unless they were deep fans but it'd be pretty cool since now that I thought about it I can't unthink it
It can also be used for juxtaposing. Like: "It wasn't red, of course. It was _vermillion_ or _grarnet_ or any other of those fancy red names that Jenny wasn't rich enough to casually use in a sentence"
Lol I love writing super descriptive stuff, esp with scenery, but sometimes I’m like “wait I’ve spent like two paragraphs talking about a lake I should probably move on”
The story is defenceless. Take your pen. Write more down with all of your hatred and your journey towards the dark side will be complete!
I'll be honest, as a reader, I love reading in-depth descriptions of the environment
Yeah, same. One sin a world-builder should never cross is prioritizing the theme & setting over the narrative and/or characters.
Write more on that lake. Keep writing til exhaustion on that lake.
Cut out parts and *SAVE THEM* outside of the story for later reference if you will, but embrace your inner Tolkien.
R. A. Salvatore's Child of A Mad God (Coven series) spends a lot of time talking about the waters of the lake and the shape of the boats that cross it, the shores, the rocks at the edges, the shadows swimming beneath the water's surface....
Its a very, very important piece of the world with it being the literal center of the entire trilogy's setting and stories that transpire in it but still.
... I wrote this comment before finishing the video, and got rightly called at at around 12:20 for why I gave blatantly bad advice. (except hte part about cutting out excess detail, but saving it outSIDE the story itself for reference)
So many of these (especially the "specificity" and "ordinary places" tips) overlap with tips for writing good poetry! (I think prose writers could stand to learn more from poets, but that's a conversation for another time, haha)
I also think, as you mention briefly at the end, that the issue with over-describing (or describing when they shouldn't) is one of the side effects of the emphasis on "show, don't tell". "'Show, don't tell?' Okay, so I'll describe EVERYTHING!"
Anyway, I loved this video! Always so helpful & clear 💜
And I always appreciate yours! I totally agree prose writers can learn more poets. Been trying to learn more myself.
~ Tim
I think that there should be alot less distinction between writers and poets. I could not tell you the difference, honestly, although that may be partially due to the fact that I am or have been both.
@@michaelcherokee8906 I think the difference here is that we are specifying poet, but not always specifying prose. Prose writers, or "the kind of writer who specifically writes short stories and novels". There are different skills. For example: flow, especially when read aloud, is very important to poetry. For prose, you will often need to be able to write natural dialogue. If dialogue happens in poetry, it often does not read like normal speech, because normal speech doesn't flow nearly well enough most of the time.
I think it's the same as with a play writer or screen writer versus a novel writer. There are definitely similarities, and lots of overlap skills, but they also have some skills that don't overlap, and sometimes you can have someone very good at one be pretty bad at the other.
No. Hell no. Absolutely not. I have enough of every other sentence or phrase or dialogue in chinese web novels being an idiom or poem. Literally every chinese web novel has "frog in the well" or any one of their lld chinese poems on repeat. Some have frog in the well every darn chapter. Some as much as twice a chapter.
When you rely heavily on poetry and idioms, it REALLY stunts writing.
So...just no. On poems.
In fact theres this one very odd song of some genshin impact (i think?) game that has people laughing at the silly sounding stupid english lyrics. Everyone thinks it is poor google translated lyrics. But as it turns out....its word for word edgar allan poe poetry.
So for the love of literature. No
@@LilyUnicorn What is this "frog in the well" that you speak of?
I have complicated issues with my love of Harry Potter, but one scene description from a book that really got to me was the description of Harry waiting for his turn to face the dragon in the Goblet of Fire. The sound of the crowd above him, the gut feeling of dread, the nervousness of waiting your turn-dreading it while also wanting to get it over with… as a stage performer I recognized these feelings right away and that recognition made that scene so real for me.
And he knew he'd be facing the Hungarian Horntail, the nastiest of the dragons.
"Did you put your name in the goblet of fire?" Dumbledore asked calmly.
What’s your issue with the book ?
@@PopCultureGian it’s not an issue with the book itself. I love those books. I love the world of Harry Potter. The issue comes when JK Rowling keeps making transphobic comments and many people in the trans community rally against the franchise despite the fact that most everyone involved in the movies have renounced Rowling’s comments on the subject. If i buy some really cool Harry Potter merch, am I just giving more money to a woman who hates me and will continue to use her platform and voice to disparage my community? I mean come on, I’m a magician for crying out loud, Harry Potter has become ingrained as a part of the magic community, but if I bring it up in a show or even a group of my peers, am I, through transitive property, giving credence to the ideals of an out of touch hate monger? And I know eventually it will dissipate, Lovecraft was a racist but everyone loves Cthulhu. So, I don’t know, it’s just so difficult sometimes.
@@DynaStaats Personally, I think it's possible to love something created by somebody you disagree with. Your love for the franchise does not automatically mean you support Rowling's opinions and agree with them, no matter how hateful and painful they may be. These are separate things. Whether you give her money or not, she will continue to use whatever means she can to voice her thoughts, and I doubt she'll change her mind on matters if people stop buying anything Harry Potter related and try to silence her. I think we can speak up about somebody's opinions and strongly disagree with them, but still appreciate the work they've done.
11:05 This suddenly came to me and I had to write it down
I stepped into the library and made my way over to the large reading tables at the centre. A handful of other students were there already, leafing through heavy reference books to find the perfect quotes for their essays.
Surrounding the tables were rows upon rows of bookshelves. Each one seemed to stretch off into the distance, like the never-ending paths of a maze, with the weight of musty books pressing in from both sides. Even the sunlight, streaming through the large, domed window in the ceiling above couldn’t penetrate much more than a few shelves into a row. Something about them unsettled me, as if there was something lurking in the darkness amongst the stacks, waiting for a lone student to wander unknowingly into it’s section.
“Stop it.” I whispered to myself, as I passed by the watchful eyes of the marble Cthulhu statue that stood near the horror section. It had been there for decades, despite the best efforts by multiple librarians to remove it. Every time they took it away, it would reappear the next morning, back on the same shelf staring out across the room. Somebody had graffitied a finger across it’s mouth in a shushing gesture - ‘Shhthulhu demands your silence’.
I love it! Especially the graffiti bit.
I'm hooked! 🙃 Where's the rest of the story?
If you don't mind I'd like to try and put my own spin on that description
The library was known for its maze-like paths, and when I entered I was confronted by several musty avenues snaking through the ancient bookshelves.
At the centre of the library was a clearing of large study tables. As I attempted to navigate towards them I encountered several students squinting at heavy books to find the right quotes for an essay, with the windows providing little light for seeing much of anything.
Turning a corner I suddenly came across a defaced statue of Cthulhu. The dim light obscured its eyesockets, and much of the graffiti, and the effect was like it was pristine again, watching me from the gloom
@@edenmckinley3472 nah, that was too much. Took me out of it. Suddenly the ominous statue is the butt of a cheap joke.
I know a lot of people don't prefer the landscape descriptions from authors like JRR Tolkien and C.S. Lewis but I find them really interesting. Knowing not only that there are trees around, but the specific kinds is a unique way of picturing a scene.
Me as well :)
The excess of description is what in fact gives depth to a fantasy, as in Tolkien it's historical and philological. Yet many failed into writing a good description because they hadn't any depth to suggest. Details must not be there just to make show-off of descriptive abilities (although hellenistic writers made out of it a real literary genre, the hekphrasis wich gave us Keats' "Ode on a grecian urn") but to give us the atmospheres in wich characters move.
They could just.put that in info books, guide books. JK rowling created a whole darn world with history, but she knew that putting it in her stories held very little value to plot, emotion or character. Yet we all know those tidbits from interviews, photos of her notes, extra info books shes created and the website dedicating more wiki like info to the world. You do not need it in a story.
@@LilyUnicorn You don't need a lot of things in a story. The specific style of description is just an author's choice, and I'd argue that Tolkien's choice enhanced the effect of what he wanted to create. JK created a book series for children in the modern age so she kept things simple in the text. Tolkien created a legendarium for adult fantasy readers, so he embellished the writing to mimic the style of the epic poems like the Iliad and Odyssey. He wanted the world to feel complete so by adding in even the small details, it allows the reader to piece together a more cohesive picture of the overall world, such as climate and biodiversity in each region of Middle Earth. The internet didn't really exist either so he kind of had to put it in the books directly as there wasn't really another way to add in those details at the time. I get that readers like you don't really appreciate that kind of thing and just want a barebones plot, but it does add a lot to those who do care.
@@LilyUnicorn her style tends to be less descriptive but her genre is different. Tolkien needs to bring you in a totally different world with a completely unknown geography and history, while she put fantasy in a world that we can relate to in an easier way.
While I don't remember the details (ha), the Brazilian Novel "Vidas Secas" is often praised for its lack of description. Makes the barren and desolate place feel even more so. People were too busy surviving to care about many details. And, apparently, that lack of description made the place feel much more universal for foreign readers, especially from other places with pretty arid and underdeveloped places
I don’t remember either, but “Vidas Secas” is visceral, it’s really interesting, I also like “O Cortiço”, i like the relations between characters and the environment (don’t know if you will agree)
I've found description to be a remarkably strong tool for controlling the pace of a story.
If characters are in a hurry or in danger, descriptions can be brief and quick to keep the story's forward momentum.
But if there's downtime for introspection or the like, characters can take their time exploring or observing a setting, reflected in longer descriptions.
“People can imagine ordinary places pretty well, often better than you could ever write them.” Thank you, thank you, THANK YOU!
I’m tired of hearing “but I want more details!” when the setting of my story is our own world, full of ordinary places. This is one of the best videos I’ve ever encountered on this topic. Thank you.
"I had to image the places I was in". Well, you were in a bedroom, then in another bedroom, then in a nightclub, then a bathroom, lastly, a kitchen. It's very easy to imagine any of those and I cannot be bothered to describe any if it's non consequential to the story at hand lol contemporary settings are so boring and for me, anyways, I'm reading for the characters, not the places.
But I always want my readers to see the exact image I have of a room in my mind. Sometimes I wanna draw it so I can give it for reference hahaha
Perfect example of this; Me and my friends used to have a writing group. We were writing collaborative stories, and I spent the entire first half of my first page of the story describing, in vivid detail, how the protagonist was jumping over a dumpster. Everything, from the type of dumpster to the alley, it was horrible.
They still haven’t let me live it down, years later. You don’t need to go overload on detail. We aren’t Edgar Allan Poe, getting paid per word here, we don’t need to be as wordy as possible.
Holy CRAP, why would you even describe that to start with?
@@michaelcherokee8906 clearly you’ve never actually been a writer.
@@michaelcherokee8906 it just a classic beginner mistake, its fine, lesson learned
OK, now I want to read it. Care to grace us with a small sample of this 'jumping'?
😂😂😂
I think that what Tolkien shows is that if you're going to write very long descriptions, you'd better be _extremely_ good at it. Luckily, he is. There're very few paragraphs in LOTR which I find extraneous, simply because the experience of reading his words is always a joy.
I hated reading lotr, not gonna lie. It felt like a chore. I saw the movies before reading de books, that added to the fact.
The opening paragraph of The Haunting of Hill House is the best description I've ever read. I got goosebumps when I first read it. It is also a good example of the point you made about description and experience.
“No live organism can continue for long to exist sanely under conditions of absolute reality; even larks and katydids are supposed, by some, to dream. Hill House, not sane, stood by itself against its hills, holding darkness within; it had stood so for eighty years and might stand for eighty more. Within, walls continued upright, bricks met nearly, floors were firm, and doors were sensibly shut; silence lay steadily against the wood and stone of Hill House, and whatever walked there, walked alone.”
I would like to make a quick rebuttal, as I feel as if the criticism of BrandoSando could have been shown differently. In the context of that excerpt (Kaladin surveying the warcamp), the matter of fact description is being stated by a surgeon and soldier. Someone with a mind so detached they see the world in an efficient but simple manner. This is starkly contrasted by Shallans POV descriptions, which are always colourful and fanciful in nature (they play on that even more with veil in book 3). While BrandoSandos descriptions can be dry at times, that specific paragraph was in character for Kaladin and his mindset.
Those were my 2 cents anyway.
A very valid rebuttal, which brings up something Tim didn’t really address in this video (hope he’s got it planned for a future one though). I really like and notice when authors alter descriptions based on which character is making the observations. It does the double duty of telling you more about the character’s personality/intelligence at the same time :)
@@jameswhatsit I'm glad I'm not the only one who thinks this! I would also love a full video discussing adaptive prose when describing things from a character perspective.
You know, it's funny. The most poignant description I remember is not from a published story, it's from a fanfic. I won't describe it here but that description actually changed the way I looked at describing my own characters. I know people always hate on fanfic and consider it lesser writing than published work, but there are a lot of gems in there too.
There are
Yeah (like any genera ) it spans the badly written things, either from amateurs (you do have to learn and I still am and am no pro) or mimicking bad stuff etc and some really well written stuff, which can make it better and depending on topic sometimes worse lmao and everything in between.
Please do describe it! It may help writers like myself
a few thoughts on the Stormlight Archive description section:
1. the character whose perspective we are seeing this scene through is from both a military background and currently in an extended state of shock. It's not surprising to see limited emotionality specifically here.
2. I'd agree Sanderson is not known for his prose, this may be part of why his books are known for readability though - less emphasis on flowery (even if brief) descriptions where it is not vital to character development and plot.
3. An establishing shot in an action movie can create the setpeice, an establishing shot in a drama can set the emotional tone.
So while I agree that Sanderson's writing especially when establishing setting do not evoke emotion. the intent of the work might have something to do with it.
On a completely different note, I thoroughly enjoy how the Stormlight descriptions are at once relatively sparse while giving clear indications that the setting is not a typical "Middle-Earth" type fantasy setting - difficult to balance without over-describing
Great points! His stormlight archive books are huge, how many thousands of pages would they be with flowery descriptions?!
How in the WORLD have you gone through this whole video without even mentioning the absolute MASTER of description, Bradbury? His descriptions are pure, condensed poetry! He gaves both an emotional feel and tactile sensation that perfectly sets up the plot and immerses you into the story. Hell, he deserves a whole video of his own!
The Dragonbone Chair by Tadd Williams has some of the best descriptions I've ever read. There's a line in the first chapter that immediately hooked me in on how he described the changing of seasons.
"Hushed conversations seemed to be taking place in every hallway and dooryard of the great keep It might have been the first day of spring, to judge from the air of breathless anticipation, but the great calendar in Doctor Morgenes’ cluttered chamber showed differently: the month was only Novander. Autumn was holding the door, and Winter was trudging in."
I'll admit that I was probably too young when I read it, as I found the novel quite dull until nearly the end. Its sequels, however, sucked me in despite its sometimes labyrinthine lore dumps.
Brilliant line. I love this series.
@@Tuaron it’s because the first book was a setup for the rest of the series but Tad really took his sweet time.
I am watching the video on Nebula and unfortunately there is no possiblity for comments there, so I am switching back to TH-cam for that:
- I love how you make the letters appear individually during the "reading segments", it's very fun to watch
- I am all the way with you on your hot take regarding Tolkien's descriptions. I noticed that I started skimming them because with all his talk about north and east etc he usually just disorients my sense of place and I have to guess anyways what the scene could look like.
- I've been subscribed a few years now and I really have to mention how much you progressed. Your videos have always been really good but I feel like you have made some more steps recently. Your videos feel very dense and to the point and so very well structured, I can't really see to which you point you will improve (not that you have to, but I have been surprised before, as you see). Such a nice change from so much TH-cam videos that stretch content by force.
- And as always, a very insightful and helpful video, thank you!!
i tend to skim over descriptions that are too long since i have aphantasia and details won't help me visualize anything anyway, so the capturing the vibe approach is definitely more helpful for me as a reader.
it also makes me wonder what my descriptions would be like if i tried writing. my guess is that i wouldn't describe enough, since i wouldn't have a detailed image in my head and/or i'd forget that other people would want some details on what things look like
You could try and see. :) And if the first draft lacks description, that's fine. That's what beta-readers and rewrites are for.
@@andreashort310 that's a very good point, thank you :)
@@seven-cats-3 This is actually an interesting thing to point out. Writers and readers who have certain conditions that could affect the stylings of a work could potentially be an untapped market.
My brother has aphantasia and he actually writes really vivid and colourful descriptions. He probably writes them better than most amateur writers, because he only considers that he needs them when they're actually relevant to the narrative. He's very brief with his scene-setting and focusses on form, lighting and colour. I tutored him for his high school English Language exams but I learned quite a bit from him myself.
I have a similar problem where it's hard to picture things in my head so I don't really like descriptions, and I do write books. I noticed that I don't describe things like at all... it's something I'm trying to work on
Ok I have to say my favorite thing description wise I've ever written (which I'm likely not keeping for reasons) has to be this:
"There had already been a number of visitors to Bellamoure Hall by the time the rumors had started. Whispers about the state of the family manor, the state of the women residing within its very walls, the truth behind Selina Oliveira's death. Once the sun settled below the horizon, leaving the sky with an almost golden glow to it, all worries and their accompanying echoes of the town gossip died down. Instead, each night since the Oliveira girls had arrived back in town, they had hosted an elegant party. And each night was twirled away through the antique walls of ebony wood and silver embossed mirrors. Like something out of a dream, everyone looked as though they belong among the hallowed halls - all except for the three who had actually inherited the property."
Quite nice
Oooo. Very nice
Ooh, I love it! I like how the air of mystery from the gossip kind of feeds in to the imagery of these parties being hosted, this contrast of liveliness and hostility that seems to just match the nature of the manor, and then it ends with "all except for the three who had actually inherited the property." It's a nice way of gently pulling you from the aloof mysteriousness to remind you that there are real people at the center of this scene who matter
@@TheRoseFrontier Nice analysis.
The last sentence took it to the next level.
Gotta disagree about Tolkien. You were right that he gives extremely vivid descriptions that can be long-winded and difficult to remember, but the point is not to remember them. He always brings the description back to the character's experience making the description even more impactful, because he spent so much time and work building the description up. In the example you use, he describes impenetrable walls that seem built beyond the ability of man. They stand impervious against the most dangerous enemies, and yet, much like the fall of the Numenoreans and Middle Earth itself, even these walls have fallen into decay. This knowledge leaves the reader with a feeling of dread and you realize that Minas Tirith also stands upon the edge of the knife and it hits harder because so much time was devoted to building those walls and everything they represent.
He uses grandiose description, not so that the reader memorizes the minute details, but so that the important aspects hit harder and leave you with a feeling.
Great observation.
There’s also the fact that Tolkien had already wrote all this stuff and it seemed like he might never get to publish the Legendarium so he crammed as much of that world as he could into The Lord of the Rings.
Yeah but that doesn't change the fact that it does make it more difficult to read, though it probably depends on personal taste
Had to laugh when he said "I feel like Tolkien puts too much description in," and immediately followed it up with "Next part: sometimes writers put in a description because they put a lot of work into this place and want to showcase it."
Agreed. Tolkien's description isn't meant to be focussed on and remembered, it's meant to be bathed in. Let the sense of the place wash over you as it immerses the characters experiencing it. It's the difference between being atop a mountain and drinking in the surroundings, compared to trying to pick out the highest peak.
I love the descriptive detail in "The Face in the Frost" by John Bellairs. It begins, "Several centuries (or so) ago, in a country whose name doesn't matter, there was a tall, skinny, straggly-bearded old wizard named Prospero, and not the one you are thinking of, either. He lived in a huge, ridiculous, doodad-covered, trash filled two-story horror of a house that stumbled, staggered, and dribbled right up to the edge of a great shadowy forest of elms and oaks and maples."
Inside his house are "such things as trouble antique dealers' dreams", such as "alembics, spiraling copper coils, alcohol lamps-all burping, sputtering, and glurping as red, blue, purple, and green liquids boiled, dripped, or just slurched uncertainly in their containers."
I just love that phrase, "slurched uncertainly". There's so much there that just sets the mood right off the bat: whimsical, anachronistic, and unserious, but also with subtle undertones of gothic horror. Things that stagger and slurch aren't always the the safest...
One thing I'll note about Brandon Sanderson's writing: his descriptions are very character based. Here, you've used a description of Kaladin, currently a slave, being led through a war camp to be sold to Highprince Sadeas's army. At this time he's suffering from severe depression after a string of repeated failures. And even when he's not depressed, he's generally a fairly salt-of-the-earth character.
Looking at the other major viewpoint characters (of the first book):
-Dalinar sees the Alethi camps as not being as disciplined as they should be, so he notes the organization of camps, how tidy men's uniforms are, if they're clean shaven, etc.
-Adolin is his foil, seeing things similarly but subtly differently.
-Shallan is the most descriptive character. She's a charcoal artist skilled enough to impress kings and princesses, and in her segments, her descriptions are much more vivid. And she's also the most naive of these characters, out experiencing the world for the first time, so we get the kind of descriptions of the vastness of the Palaneum which none of the other characters would really stop to gawk at. (Well, a bit, it's the biggest library in the world, it's kinda impressive.)
Fundamentally, Brandon's descriptions aren't describing the world, they're describing how the viewpoint character sees the world. Which works for me, doesn't have to be great for you.
I like that you explain the positives and negatives of Brando Sando without attacking/fanboying. Like anyone, he has strengths and weaknesses
I would say, if you've excessively designed every nook and cranny of your world and really want to share it with everyone then see if there is ways to do so outside of the main story. I have seen some fantasy novels include an appendix with definitions of magical terms and names or extra info that isn't relevant to the main story. I have also seen some mangas with authors who have Tolkien like world building put the random factoids in the two or three pages between chapters or at the end of the manga.
And of course you can just do what I would probably do and get a cheap webpage where you can make an encyclopedia and dictionary and timeline with the link printed somewhere in the book for those who are interested in your work.
Granted this should be balanced with places where you should leave some wonder and mystery for the reader or to avoid plottwists for later books,
Thanks Tim! I've just started getting back into writing seriously again, and your On Writing series is immensely helpful getting into the right mindset.
As somebody who actively ENJOYS purple prose… this video is helpful. I get enamored but pretty words, and my nature as a visual artist that I have a tendency to get carried away.
Also, as someone who writes often from the first person, it is a lot harder to get away with writing poetic detail and still maintain the voice of the perspective character.
Well... Idk... I really love Sanderson's functional descriptions, since they are just precise and to the point, and the story comes out by just being plain good and without unnecesary decorations. You can put in some vivid descriptions when it matters, not everywhere just because :)
Just wanted to say a quick thank you to the universe since like 3 people will see this, I was just writing a couple of descriptions in my book and the first few minutes of this video made me reevaluate, and realise that no, the people wouldn't be what my character notices first.
It would be weapons, and military honours, and weaknesses and escape strategies.
Thank you!!
I like how you mentioned the Chekhov's Gun for details, if not by name. Having a particular detail payoff in some way is so satisfying to read.
And maybe I missed how it was mentioned outright, but I also enjoy the use of "white space", ie writing that implies a description or detail without explicitly stating it, letting imagination fill it in, like how drawn art can imply the a field or continuation of a scene without actually drawing/painting it.
Third thing I thought about was how one of my favorite series of all time, Robert Jordan's *The Wheel of Time*, seems to fall similarly to both Brandon Sanderson and Tolkien, in the fact of that workman-like description and excess of description, yet I'm not a fan of either Tolkien or Sando, partially for those exact reasons.
Yet one piece of description always stands out in my mind, either from the ending part of book 3 or the beginning part of book 4 of WoT, there's a scene where a character walks into a tavern, and in the tavern's verbose and detailed description an assassin is glossed over, then shortly is revisited as the assassin attacks. Mentioned, but easily missed, which happens to be a supernatural talent of the assassin, to not be noticed by anybody...
@@Avendesora I appreciated what he did, and the books are good, don't get me wrong, but the style change was jarring (kinda can't help that, given the circumstances) and I just could not jive very well with that style.
Burying foreshadowing in a sea of details? Oooh! I'll have to try.
@@dueling_spectra7270 in this case, it wasn't even foreshadowing... The character scanned the room, paused, the realized "hey! They're not supposed to be there!" Right as he got attacked...
I'm usually against very verbose descriptions, but I forgave Jordan partially because my friend (who I read the series with together) and I could play the game of "Spot the Forsaken" :D Which you can actually do with most of them, just based on descriptions (my favourite was the one you could figure out way earlier than her reveal based on a single minor detail of her clothing).
As far as implied description goes, i never really understood why writers will describe a highschool gymnasium with a full paragraph when something like: "we entered the highschool gym and joined the other students awaiting the teacherbto explain the basics of volleyball for the umpteenth time in our lives." will set a crystal clear image in the readers mind of what the scene looks like as basically the only difference in gyms is the color scheme and the school mascot on the floor, maybe the bleachers.
This is also how Tom Clancy managed to get my heart pounding in a boat race, by describing less and less details but giving enough information that you can perfectly picture what happening as John Kelly is getting slowly overtaken by his Coastguard friend as they slowly pass a cargo ship in semirough seas. (He was under arrest for killing like 6 drug dealers in incredibly messed up ways, Without Remorse was such a good book)
Great video, lots of interesting points! For me though what makes 'specific details' so memorable is if they tell us something emotional about the setting or the characters. To me, what makes sense is to think about what your character *feels* about the environment they're in and pull the descriptions from there.
Say you have three siblings in a big family with an old, hand-me-down sofa: to one sibling the sofa might be 'well-worn and comfortably shaped by the generations of ancestral bums that came before her', to another it might be 'soft and enveloping- apart from that one spring that allways jabbed him in the hip', and to the third it might simply be 'broken'. All of those descriptions can be good and memorable- but they tell us something different about the character and the environment. The first emphasises the size of the family and a comforting sense of family history and that siblings place within it, the second is still comforting but also slightly cloying and even uncomfortable or boardering on painful (we get the sense that as much as he likes the family, something about the environment is limiting or hurting this character), and the last is flatly negetive- blunt and harsh (this sibling feels something is wrong and isnt interested in excusing or deflecting away from it, at least, not in there own head). The three siblings have different experiences of the family and so have a different perspective on the physical space they live in. I think descriptions are often best when they reflect this. Its one of the reasons i love multiple pov, both to read and to write.
Whats weird or familiar to your character and why? What features leap out to them and dominate their perception? What would they ignore? Whats comforting? Unsettling? Upsetting? All of this is naturally interesting to a reader if they are invested in your characters, and i think it can help stop it from becoming overwhelming too- i mean we might notice something once or when we feel a particular way about it, but we dont walk around constantly noticing normal things or our feelings towards them, so it wouldnt make sense to describe them in that scene- at least not beyond the bare basics the reader needs to understand whats happening.
This is a video I've been needing for a long while. Descriptions of the setting is something that I often lack and when going back to edit, I worry about over describing the entire area.
What you see
What you smell
What you hear
How you feel when you stand in that place.
But I always worry that I would end up describing too much that I end up not describing enough. However, I have been praised for how I take the time to describe things through the eyes of different people. I take the time to use short descriptions of the area, the image people getting being vague because the world feels suffocating when you don't know where you are but when I swap to the view of someone that knows where they are going, they go more in detail, describing the forest they've passed by multiple times before on their job but also the worries they will find when they're made to go in for an important item of interest fell into the forest controlled by creatures known for killing anything that isn't like them.
9:05 HelloFuture, I mean this in the nicest way possible, you have helped me start to enjoy writing again and for that I thank you. But the day you take away Vermillion and Cerulean from my hands is the day either one of us dye.
A favorite bit of my own writing is from a story about a young woman trying to come to terms with a family estrangement. Every few years, when a family milestone passes without that person, she ruminates on the relationship she had with him as a child. This section is meant to highlight the lack of closure and set up the atmosphere of the house to feel like a place not quite devoid of his presence, no matter how hard the others might try to erase or forget him.
"The dining room is quiet, more insulated than other rooms she could haunt....She looks up at the family tree, all but one of the faces gazing benignly out at her. A decade of neglect has nearly erased her uncle."
And he does eventually find his way back to find the house and the family changed in his absence, like his abandoned room: "He turned the corner and found himself in a barren hollow....like someone had taken a hot spoon and scooped out some of the house's insides."
I love the “I believe that knife is still there,” line from Assassin’s Apprentice. Because that scene is so emotionally intense, and ends on that one note. Every subsequent time a scene is set in that same room (and a lot of scenes are), I think, “oh, and that knife’s still there.” Sensational.
Merphy has such a gorgeous reading voice. It just sucks you into the description. This was a great video, and I love the quotes you chose to represent the thoughts you had on the topic.
I like the idea of say a character who adores birds and flowers and they explain the details of the flowers in the description. It shows how much they care about it.
I think my personal favorite specific quote is from the Great Gatsby, being "The eyes of Dr. TJ Eckleberg" as it's an image BURNED into memory.
A similar one is from "The King in Yellow," also focusing on the hateful image of the eyes of an organ player with "a face of pure distain and nothing more" or something. Glorius.
This is a thank you from a D&D dungeon master. These videos on writing help me so much, especially this one. Learning what to describe, and what to leave to your players is very hard, but returning back to the principles of storywriting helped me so very much.
I remember listening to Brian Jacques full cast audioplay of Redwall when I was very young. The building itself is described quite accurately, but didn't understand the wording used. So I had a completely different picture of what Redwall Abbey looked like in my head, rather than what it was intended to look like.
Reading a description and some misunderstanding causing you to imagine part of the setting differently is fun, you ended up reading a version totally different from most people's. And it's even better when you come back to read it later and realize what they actually meant
I don't think I could describe 100% what Redwall LOOKS like, because my brain doesn't really work that way when I'm reading (except for maybe the Joseph Bell tower, could probably describe that). But I could tell you exactly what it feels like to be there. Or the inside of Salamandastron, or the Kingdom of Malkariss. No idea what they LOOK like, but I get impressions of what different parts of it feel like :P
I love encountering other redwall fans on the internet
I remember the most immersed I felt when reading a book was when I read the Rowan of Rin series as a child, so I havent read them in a long time, however I can remember being able to connect to the story from its environment, in one of the books they have to go through an evil carnivorous forest and the descriptions are what brought it to life for me, being able to imagine the chill of a city once splended but fallen to ruin, and the fear which would be felt exploring the barren waste, the grey bark which calls upon imagery of illness, roots tough as steel ready to crush you like the hands of a giant, and being isolated, knowing that if you fail, your family would not survive.
Emily Rodda is really good at creating vivid settings, and Rowan of Rin has especially good descriptions.
I have spent a lot of time critiquing and notice that beginners tend to describe EVERYTHING. from thoughts to setting to backstory ... the list goes on. they will spend pages telling the reader about their story. this is a great video for showing how the use description wisely.
@kshamwhizzle I agree ... fan fic can be great practice from that POV because the world building is kind of done for you lol. I have written my fair share of it so know the feeling :) Its also great practice for staying in character and really getting in the head of a character because the characters are already set in stone.
@kshamwhizzle for sure ... fan fiction definitely has a place and it should never be knocked. Even if just an exercise in how to stay in character. But I like that it pushes a writer to think about how these characters will act in different situations. sometimes you don't have the answers and it forces you to really think through the solutions. I think all beginners should start with fan fiction until they get the swing of it and then move on to original work. its like when an artist starts drawing ... they copy other art to get the feel and study how it was made then once they figure that out move on to their own.
Honestly, the Lord of the Rings is my favorite book in terms of setting description. I'm a very slow reader and pause constantly to ponder or reread what I've just read. As a result, Tolkien's extreme level of detail when describing locations is like candy to me. I find it viscerally exciting to visualize each of his set-pieces (which is probably a large part of why I hated the movies--to me they feel so flat and uninspired compared to the descriptions in the book). However, since most people don't seem to read like this, I understand why these sections drag for many readers (which would also explain why so few people share my reaction to the films--if you've been skimming, or completely skipping, all of that description then a similar degree of detail won't be expected from the film).
Completely agree with you. I'm not a very plot-driven reader, I read to enjoy the experience of reading itself or the atmosphere of the world. Sometimes it takes me an hour to get through five pages if I'm feeling inspired by what im reading and keep putting the book down to daydream or contemplate hahah.
The scene where Gimli describes The Glittering Caves is brilliant
Same here. I think there are plot driven readers and world driven readers. For me, the more rich and immersive the world, the more enveloped and immersed I am in the narrative and characters placed in it. I have a passion for world building, so I suppose that might be it.
20:19 I can feel the resignation to put your hand although the disgust you felt. You are right, Tim! The specificity makes it more relatable
The small description that stuck with me is from The Starless Sea by Erin Morgenstern: "This space is a temple. The doors are one set of four that lead to an open atrium. It continues up and up and up in tiers surrounded by wooden stairs and balconies. Fires burn in hanging bowls, their moving light accentuated by the candles placed on every surface in lieu of offerings, dripping wax on carved altars and on the shoulders and open palms of statues..."Are you injured?" Simon asks as Zachary stumbles backward, catching his balance on an altar behind him. Its surface is soft beneath his hand, the stone covered in layers upon layers of dripped wax."
I read this book over a year ago and am still astonished by the effectiveness with which the author conveyed the oldness of this space and the kind of solemn chaos that the whole book has.
Man, Morgenstern's The Night Circus is beautiful~ Her descriptions are one of her strongest writing qualities!
@@lillianwolfe8314 I loved the Night Circus, and the Starless Sea is a phenomenal second novel, with so much of the same imagination, stunning setting and magical description. I always take every opportunity to recommend it ☺️
Vivid details and sensory experiences and setting being the most memorable part of a book is Erin Morgenstern's books. Both The Nignt Circus and Starless Sea feel more about the setting than.the plot and the details and writing are exquisite
Setting I remember: DUNE.
Perhaps it's because I spent so much of my youth wandering the sands of Arrakis that it holds such a powerful grip on my mind and heart.
Tolkien:
Love his long descriptions. People who complain about his books should read more classical literature. I grew up reading classical literature as a kid. And shied away from Tolkien because people I respected kept telling me it was "encyclopedic". But when I finally did sit down and read it I found it absolutely amazing. It was no more "encyclopedic" than Jules Verne or Charles Dickens, and Tolkien's descriptions flesh out a world that is rich and vibrant and alive and FULL of history. A world that feels *real*.
The direction that each gate faced isn't important, but that the gates face different directions, and the general facing of the city itself to the east, these are important, both for setting and for Tolkien's philosophy and metaphor. No, I don't remember the north/south/east/west -ness of his description of the White Tower, but I remember how reading about it filled my mind with a vision of it, and filled my heart with an awe of it.
You want an author who DOES write way too much description? Robert Jordan. O.M.G. Talk about a slog! Eugh.
But thanks for pointing out Brandon Sanderson's flaws. I think it's good to offer criticism of a writer where criticism is due. (I just feel like Tolkien is unduly criticized by people who never developed an appreciation for classical literature, of which LOTR is an example.)
Things that authors should describe more / better:
Their characters' behaviors and mannerisms. Things that ground your character in consistency, which you can use later to alert the reader to something. "Character absently pulled a lip balm out of her pocket and spread it across her lower lip - she chewed her lip when she was nervous, leaving it chapped and raw and in constant need of protection." followed chapters later by "New love interest introduced herself and held out a hand. Character chewed her lip as she took the offered hand in hers and quietly replied with a soft 'hey'."
Call it "Chekov's character patterns".
I actually like reading most of Tolkien's descriptions. They have a calming effect on me and they let me reflect on things, on words. Injust enjoy how he writed about things, not just the things he wrote about.
However, I understand why most people don't: The Lord of the Rings reads more like an epic poem in many aspects, and it clashes with certain expectations readers may have.
On the other hand, I dislike Sanderson's writing, even though he's very popular. It feels souless to me, his prose is quite dry. But that's the beauty of having so many different writers who do things differently. We can all find something we enjoy.
The way sanderson describes things feels a lot like how a tabletop dm or gm would describe everything to their players. His entire style feels like you're meant to insert yourself into a specific world as opposed to imagining the world yourself, which makes sense after watching some of his writing classes.
I think overly specific descriptions like in Piranesi can easily backfire. First you get bombarded with numbers and dozens of details. Being overly precise with placements like climbing the "western" wall can confuse because I will try to readjust my mental image of the room. Do this a few times and my immersion is broken. And then you get hit with the "bee on the eye", so memorable that I literally lost the entire earlier description immediately.
On the subject of Brando Sando, his writing style makes sure that this never happens. I can understand why some people wouldn't like that but it works for me. In the case of Neil Gaiman and Terry Pratchett they tend to focus more on the characters in the scenes. But if they need to describe something, they make it weird, use partially nonsensical similes or try to evoke a feeling over giving you anything specific to latch on.
What I've learned is that I like books where I can let my imagination run wild ^^
I actually always liked Tolkien's descriptions. They were one of my favourite things about his stories. I guess it made his stories more 'real' to me. I could almost see what he was describing. (and I suspect it might have been responsible for me having a greater appreciation of nature ) .
I would love to see a situation where the same setting is described two or more times from the perspective of different characters, with the point of view drastically changing how the scene is described. Maybe it already exists somewhere but I haven't seen it before.
This is very helpful. I often end up getting stuck feeling like I have to describe every single scene, even when it's just a random street or random cafe, or the third patient room that looks virtually the same as the previous two did. So I started slacking and described less and less the more plain/common the space was. I also struggled with setting the scene for the very first chapter, and re-wrote it a billion times until I eventually thought of that I could actually just incorporate the description into character action, just like you bring up in this video, and I ended up very pleased with it! Here's what I came up with:
"When Oskar arrived at the broken down house he had grown up in, a few miles outside of the city Emridge, he sped up on the dirt road and force stopped his dented old, gray Ford just outside of the garage. The bumper nudged his older brother Margus’ blue Volvo, which set off a gnarly alarm. Grimacing at the intense sound, he leaned into the car through the open window to turn off the alarm, before stumbling past his younger brother Reigo’s green Jeep on his way to the front door. The old house, which was difficult to find if you didn’t know exactly where to go, and surrounded by pine woods, was located on the east side of USA close to the Canadian border, where crisp cold snow ruled the winters into the early 21st century, and sunshine ruled the summers with an abundance of heat, but this particular spring was unwilling to welcome the promise of a warm summer. On the narrow driveway, haphazardly sprayed with sand still accumulating in the overgrown grass from last winter, the three cars stood parked, one more poorly than the next, as the three adult children had arrived at their parents home."
This video focuses mostly on descriptions of places, but I think this is all super applicable and important for writing sex scenes! Especially the point about how it's more important to describe things the characters are feeling or noticing than just giving info about what's happening. The best sex scenes don't just tell me a list of positions, but focus on the emotions of the characters participating in the sex. I don't write prose (I'm a playwright) but I read a lot of erotica and it's one of my biggest pet peeves when sex scenes feel empty and just like filler, and usually the culprit is this issue- describing what's happening instead of how the character's are feeling about what's happening. Here's an example of really good sex scene writing where the focus is more on the character's feelings than actions from the brilliant Alexis Hall's book Glitterland: "I tumbled off his lap and pulled him to his feet, remembering unexpectedly his body covering mine in a dark room in Brighton and how much I had wanted to see him. And then watching him in my living room, wanting to touch him. I’d turned away from both at the time, and the vulnerability of giving, like the thief I was. Such a fragile thing, wanting to please someone else. Such endless scope for disappointment and failure. How much easier just to take." I love this because even though it pauses the action of telling us about what's happening in the room sexually, it still heightens the momentum of the scene as we better understand what the protagonist is feeling about this moment and why it's special and why it's sexy
In the example you give Tolkien does go a little overkill with his descriptions of archways, and which direction every entrance faced and what overlooked what and how high up certain areas are and so forth. However, I think there is a reason for all of this. Lot's of this information helps us to understand the functionality of the city and makes us appreciate it's design and the battle that follows. The descriptions Tolkien give of the Citadel are rather bland and seemingly useless, however Pippin himself spends much time there, and it helps us to envision this massive city and draws our attention to a important part of the city. Pippin later looks out from the Citadel over the Great Gate and the land beyond, and so this description is sort of setting up a later payoff. Most importantly, I think a lot of this description helps to build this feeling and setting in Minas Tirith. The banner of the stewards illustrates the nobility, power, and history this city has while also reminding us that there is no king in Gondor. It also foreshadows when Aragorn's banner is instead raised up. The area where the bygone kings of old rest is remarkably important. It is a sacred place that i believe plays an special role in the story later on, when Aragorn finds a sapling of the white tree of Gondor, and it also adds even more to the lore and feeling of the city. Of a once great kingdom slowly decaying. It also adds more to the history of Aragorn and is important for him, those are his ancestors resting in those houses, and that is where he will rest one day. The sentence before last when Pippin wonders at the city, seems sort of simple and bland, but tells us a lot about Pippin, he is a young Hobbit, who had never left his home before this adventure, and about Minas Tirith, it is greater than Isengard yet also more beautiful. Overall, this whole description sets up Pippin's wonder and the feeling of decay he notices. Could it have been done better? Yes, for sure. Is this bad description? I don't know. It probably depends on the reader.
The description that hit me most from all I've read so far was actually the dark streets of Paris, as Valjean tries to escape the police, before he climbed over the wall into the convict. Hugo managed to write a raod map of Paris of it's time - exactly enough to follow it through Paris today - in a very interesting and even suspensful way.
half-disagree on the example from Way of Kings. I feel that that description is very much Kaladin looking at the camp. He's an ex-soldier, and he looks at it as a soldier would. Memorizing routes and layout. Identifying strengths and weaknesses. Checking highstorm risks and hiding places. Very methodical. And he has to be, because if he lets himself feel than his depression shows up all grumpy.
What i'd add is that descriptions are a brilliant place to hide some character building. What does your character notice about this thing, what do they find important, or weird, or interesting, what do they ignore altogether? Are they quick to form an opinion on it or are they more factual about it - or do they try to be factual about it, but is their opinion clear when read closely? If they form an opinion quickly, is it a postive or negative one? What associations do they have - do they compare the grimy stains on a sofa to the spots on a cow, or to puddles of rain and oil on a city street?
Questions like these make descriptions an absolute GOLDMINE to learn more about a character and how they view the world - literally.
I was literally just thinking that I needed to brush up on my descriptions. Stay out of my head Tim!
This is mostly because it's the most recent series I've read, but Shadesmar from the stormlight archive is always evocative for me. It's an incredibly alien landscape in just about every way - ground made of obsidian, clouds that all point towards the sun no matter where you are, the true forms of magical beings living their "normal" lives.
Whether fiction or non, understanding a text requires knowing when it was written, by whom it was written and for whom it was intended to be consumed. Tolkein was writing for an audience who had never seen a television, many of whom may never have seen a moving picture, and for whom radio drama was still a riveting entertainment. The length of description is also more apt for its consumption as an entertainment read chapter by chapter, week by week, by one member of the household to the others, in areas where access to radio was yet unavailable or still prohibitively expensive. For someone who had literally no concept of what a dense European forest looked like then significant detail was required to provide a sense of immersion, something modern readers do not require due to the availability of images on the internet. So the response to shut up about the trees would probably have been no, I'm world-building for 'my' audience...
One place that really stands out is Terry Pratchett's city of Ankh-Morpork in his Discworld novels - every description, both the setting paragraphs and the casual mentions of scenery as a character moves through the city or speaks about it, really lets you feel the city as a behemoth both made up of the people within it, and one that swallows them into it and changes them
Right when I was thinking about how much my writing needed this, BOOM! New Hello Future Me video!
When I write descriptions I always imagine the writing like a camera on a set, swinging around and cutting to show things as they become relevant. I find it usually helps keep a good flow in the story rather than bogging it down
I have been in suburban houses. All of them are different. One I remember belonged to someone at our church, we were invited for lunch. It was August, but the dishes hanging on the wall told me that guests weren’t expected to arrive until Christmas dinner. Even then, those silver, green, and red wall decorations wouldn’t be used anyway. Paper plates, like the one I had eaten off of were easier to clean up.
But the suburban house I remember the most was the house of someone I dated a long time ago. His mother liked clowns, she thought they were cute. So every time a friend or family member gave her a gift, it was clown related. I don’t have anything against clowns, but I did excuse myself to the bathroom and put my head in my hands. As they were normal, and they accepted the living room as normal, I therefore had to make this normal inside my head as well for the time I stayed. It was a room that made me think critically about how gift giving based on surface knowledge effects people.
I can report: Your videos on writing are not only useful for "classical" writing, but I find them also very useful when preparing for any of my Pen&Paper RPG Sessions and even a Discord PlayByPost RPG.
The way I almost happy cried when you started discussing Vandermeer’s works! His descriptions of environment have impacted me most 💕
I don't know about 'vivid', but I've had stories LITERALLY COME BACK TO ME months or years after I've read them, even when I wasn't doing anything book-related
-The Ashes Trilogy by Ilsa J Bick. I realized it was just SUCH an awesome story (pretty much combining the contemporary 'main character has CANCER' trope with a wilderness/apocalypse survival story)
-That, and a scene in the second book of the Graceling Series
So, yes, I'd definitely say that emotions last longer than details. EMOTIONS we can understand, related to, far more than trying to piece together those 'beautiful scenes' in books that build off of nothing and are immediately forgotten just like what i watched on youtube the other day
(except (ironic because it also involves the Handmaid's Tale), there is a very small scene detailing an egg in that story. I still remember that that description ripped me straight into the book, as if I was right there with our girl looking at the tiny details of this little fecking egg in its little holder. It made the world of the Handmaid's Tale all the more REAL)
--
(p.s. boyo, the fact that you're near a million subs is awesome ^.^)
Great video. Something that always sticks with me is in Rand's The Fountainhead where she describes someone's words "like coins that had changed hands many times"
Coming to the defense of my main man Ronald! I personally couldn’t get through the beginning of LOTR when I tried to read it in HS. It wasn’t until the first PJ movie came out that I was motivated enough to buy and read the book immediately. After finishing LOTR, I tried to read The Silmarillion, and the complete gearshift in writing style made a loud grinding noise in my brain and my transmission hit the ground. It wasn’t until I bought and listened the Martin Shaw audiobook that I realized this was a much more surreal and ethereal experience, completely unlike LOTR. Now, after reading an unhealthy amount of Tolkien, my preference is actually for the poetry. It kindles that Brian Froud fey-like quality that I dig.
The point that it's the experience of the characters that matters, I think, really nails the idea home. When the character steps into a new place, what do _they_ specifically notice?
For some reason, the best example I have of this actually comes from a movie, not a book, and that is the scene in "Love, Simon" where he arrives at the school for the first time. As he gets out of the car and looks around, the camera jumps to a few very specific things he sees, stuff like iirc, football jocks skylarking and a couple embracing each other on their way into school, and as a gay person myself, I actually cried at that scene; it is hands-down my favorite scene of the entire movie even though it's so mundane. All of those things were what Simon, specifically, noticed when he arrived and communicated something deep about his experience as a character.
You can picture that same scene in a book, albeit more descriptive about exactly what Simon feels seeing those specific things. If I'm not mistaken there should actually be a book to "Love, Simon", and I would not be surprised if that scene and those specific images are there.
So, all in all, I think the exercise is really, rather than simply describing the scene, you're really recounting what the characters feel entering the scene, which is also highly dependant on the character. Another way to put it is that you're not describing the scene per se, you're describing the character(s) in the context of the scene.
Aside: This actually made me just realize why I had so much trouble in English class, back in sec, when we were doing descriptive writing: I just couldn't divorce the scene from a character. I remember in one exercise, we were describing a scene on a hilltop, and I just couldn't help but describe how everything looked and felt, for which I got scolded by the teacher for going off topic, haha 😅
I really needed this. Thank you
Edit: Aw, I miss the old thumbnail
Edit 2: Yayyy the old thumbnail is back
Oh gosh i never thought that I'd find someone else that brought this issue up! I have an active imagination and I hate when the plot gets paused for describing detail that I'm going to forget about. Especially when the description goes on forever my mind starts to clock out.
And i hate when i imagine the setting with what's set up with a sentence or a few and then a detail comes up and kills the picture i painted in my mind and forces me to change it over and over, it gives me an actual headache.
“Wdym I can’t describe every piece of food on the table as vividly as possible??? >:(“
- GRRM. (probably)
Your video on show don't tell is the best instruction I've found on the topic.
The best descriptions I've read recently is a short that won the nonfiction prize from the Canadian Broadcasting Company earlier this year. In it, the author is overtly trying to persuade prospective beekeepers to not keep bees, because it's a frustrating, expensive hobby with an incredibly steep learning curve. At the same time she subvertly reveals glimpses of experiences that keep the seasoned apiarists enthralled by the little insects.
I love stories that describe an important things about every place or character to show there constrast. I really like doing this with posture, eyes, and how they speak. Can really show personality without just saying what their personality is
As I watched the video, specifically the sections about vivid details characters would focus on, I realized over the course of my writing in the past four years I naturally began to describe settings based on what my characters would focus on. In my latest beginning of a novel I will eventually come back to, Jules, my protagonist, describes the details of a restaurant he is in, sure, but focuses in on the mathematical patterns in the floor and ceiling and the history of the place. This sneaks in characterization while providing (hopefully) interesting details. I should probably go back and do something similar for my other writing projects.
A specific detail thats memorable to me is the hawk in small gods,always described in relation to the turtle. It’s like a character of its own, with no lines. It both a symbolic representation and a plot device which in the end impacts the story.In my opinion Terry prachet has the most inventive ways of description, it always clever and funny, it’s basically a character in every story.
12:18 on the contrary. You have earned my undying respect. We need to let go of this illusion that Tolkien's work is flawless, there is fair criticism in there, and his overly wordy description is one of them.
One of my favorite descriptions was in the book Spectrum by Samantha Mina, and it was specifically when the main character Scarlet lands in Nuria. For reference Scarlet is from a Nation called Conflagria, and it's like a typical fantasy country set in the desert with a dictatoral government that controls literally everything through mind-controlling the people (okay maybe not typical fantasy land, but in terms of technology and magic, it very much is), whereas Nuria has no magic and is essentially like that world's version of the Modern United States, technology and all. And the Author focused on some very typical details that you would not focus on if you were from there, for example street lamps and Automatic sliding Glass Doors, in such a way that it very clearly communicated how strange this new place was to Scarlet, when the place to the reader was rather typical.
- The place I can picture most vividly is still Middle Earth. I could always draw from memory what a person should be seeing when looking in any direction from any point of the known map. I'm that person that never jumps descriptions.
- My favourite detail is in the experience category: the specific nonchalant mention by Cornwell that somebody puked at the round table, which definitely sets the tone of the narrative for people who somehow didn't get it until that point.
As a rule of thumb, maybe people should tell themselves "And it's important that the reader knows this because ______________________." And if it takes more than a couple seconds to find something to fill in this blank, you allow yourself to reconsider it.
I think everyone starts out wanting to be as descriptive as possible. Lack of experience translates this into 'lots of words'. Especially if you're a writer who digest more visual than written storytelling.
But as you go on writing, you realize that doesn't always mean you need to use more words. Pick the right words, and embed them in the right prose, and you can describe a person or a place without ever taking the reader out of the story.
Very good points here. I definitely have a tendency to focus on my descriptions and have been wanting to reign it in lately. Did this for a WIP after this video inspired me a little.
"The Dune Sea was a vast expanse of dust and wind that swallowed most mortals who dared its sandy drifts. The shifting mountains altered ones perception of time as the decomposed forefathers of the Resolute Spine clouded a pale horizon. In such a wasteland, death clung to the soul closer than sweat drenched clothes to the skin. Yet somehow, sequestered amongst the ever roiling dunes, a perfect oasis sprouted forth.'
If I ever finish writing my trilogy, you'll be in the acknowledgments for sure
I've been using a third-limited narrator and all we get to access is the protagonist's feelings, thoughts and theories but I NEVER THOUGHT TO INCLUDE THEIR LITERAL SURROUNDINGS from their perspective.
Thank you a thousand times ❤️
Yes! That's a great idea. This video helped me so much. If I myself ever finish writing my novel he'll be in the acknowledgments for sure. :)
@@pippa8414 may the muses bless you
@@lenaeospeixinhos Thanks for the love! I wish you luck. 😄
This might be the best video explaining description, over-description and using description to deepen characterization and expand the experience as opposed to the location.
YES! New video! Love your videos, has been very helpful to me as a writer and make me laugh when I'm feeling down. Thank you Tim, keep rocking it!!😄💕
And...I agree with your hot take. As a Dyslexic, I have lots of trouble reading Lord of the Rings and sometimes feel like I'm missing out on 'true literature' so, thanks for that. Love those books and J.R.R. Tolkien is an amazing writer, but it is much easier for me to watch or audio book the story. It's sometimes just too much.
Also, there is a very interesting video that compares Brandon Brandon Sanderson's prose and J.R.R Tolkien's prose and the origins of their words, one being mostly Germanic and the other...I forget what's it call, but I can link the video because it is really agrees with what you said.
Also, I agree with your second hot take, love my boy Brandon Sanderson, but it is a thing in his books. Love them both anyways.
The moment you mentioned specificity I instantly imagined Shaelin gleefully talking about it ~ then instantly jumped hearing Polyphonic. It was so unexpected
Regarding the experience and how that ties into the description - I'm proud of an example of that from my own writing. It's not simply a description that this part of the city is under constant construction and gentrification. It's the character seeing new construction where his family home had burned down. And he daydreams, imagining weeks, months, years go by - at first, superstitions about the tragedy here shape the experience. But over time, they forget. The city's like his great-uncle; its memory just isn't what it used to be.
We don't just learn that this district is constantly seeing new construction. We see an anxiety that it's losing its own history in the process. And worry that what remains is a superficial memory - the kids making ghost stories and tests of courage out of rumors vaguely inspired by the inspired.
Thx for making this video, 3 days before my finally to my 3 year long dnd campaign and not after.
Genuinely tough great video as always
"Click. Tap. Pain. That was the rhythm of his walking."
One of my favourite descriptive opening lines of a chapter. Joe Abercrombie introducing Glokta in The blade itself
So (for those that struggle with long videos), *how* we experience (not just our five senses but more abstract ones as well, analogies and mystery being your friends), evocative details, rather than lengthy expositions (description?) and pretentiousness. Staying relevant to the story/character (ideally; You can only guarantee you to be happy, not every reader) POV; .Say more with less but be relatable, exploiting the public's imaginarium. Right? Always being wary of not disrupting the pacing. Among other nuances (if you can, I suggest you watch the video regardless, even if its a few minutes each day)
Good video! (and sorry for bad english) . And yeah, ordinary places and situations are the ones on which I struggle the most. The "in betweens" and encompassing mundanity is so damn hard to grasp that doing it correctly to me is sign of a literary genius; Also yeah, I think sanderson is a bit "utilitarian" at times (and I think his weakness is characters and dialogue) but he does good worldbuilding and very movie-like scenes imho. He is what the bottom line of writing should be to me (he is nowhere near that of course)
Oh this has landed at the perfect time. I am doing Nanowrimo next month to edit a manuscript that has been sitting for too long and I am definitely guilty of over describing.