Car Brand Names

I don't like it. Most people (like me) have absolutely no clue about cars so anything beyond a general brand and color is not going to enhance the description very much.

Depends on the POV character! If he's a rich playboy or a macho guy or a gearhead then the make and model matter, at least to him.

Having said that, inclusion of such details makes me wonder if the writer actually knew it already or had to look it up. My suspicions always lean toward the latter.

-Derek

It just depends.

For example, in Agatha Christie's Poirot novels, Captain Hastings was a car buff. In that case it made perfect sense for one or another of the characters to mention that some car was a Bentley K-Type 604 (I just made that up; I have no idea whether there was a K-Type).

Another example would be a rich, pretentious character; it would be more in character for him to drive a Mercedes SL than a C-Class. In that case the actual model of car would say someone about the character. Even if the typical reader doesn't know the difference in one model from another, it would still hint that the character drives a very expensive vehicle.

Of course, if it makes absolutely no difference, the writer might as well just say Tom drove his battered old Ford up to Lakehurst.

What would flash in your mind if a good 'ol boy who lives in a run-down double-wide drives a S-class Benz, a Cadillac Escalade, or a BMW 745?

In this case, vehicle specifics can intrigue the reader--let the reader's imagination kick in.

In this way, vehicle specifics can be used as a tool by the writer so the specific stuff is justified.

I'm working on a murder mystery where tire tracks are one piece of evidence. This means I have to account for vehicle types for each of the potential suspects, and I have to make sure the appropriate vehicles use the size of tire that left the tracks. And, or course, I have to make sure there is more than one vehicle that can use that size of tire or the story is over.

I agree, though, if the fine details of a vehicle type are not important for the story, putting in too much that detail can pull the reader from the story. And it can come off as really strange if the writer does provide that detail but slacks in providing a similar level of detail for all of the other things in the story.

The same can be done in wardrobe. If a writer takes the time to identify Manolo Blahnik shoes, why not also give the dress designer, the jewelry maker, and all of the other specifics? Unless those shoes directly play into the story.

It sets a tone. It's the same difference, to me, of saying "Charlie walked along the beach" vs "Charlie trudged through the sand, mocked by the Malibu mansions above him."

"Her boyfriend pulled up in a beater."
vs
"Her boyfriend pulled up in a 1976 Monte Carlo that looked as though the vinyl roof had been removed by rabid squirrels, ragged bits of it hanging from the rear window chrome, large pustules of glue dotting the top with random eruptions of yellow foam spouting from them."

unicornjam said:

OK. I can definitely see why someone would do that in first-person POV and the character is a car/motorcycle/boat buff. But it still feels odd to read in a third-person piece -- the POV I've only seen this done in.

But thanks for the responses.

Click to expand...

We're not really disagreeing with you. Obviously it pulled you out of the story. Either the writer didn't do a good job using the extra detail (such as at least hinting of the meaning of owning a certain car), or possibly you've become sensitive to the subject (that's not meant as a put-down on you; we all have things that bother us in writing as well as real-life).

I've notice that when I read novels written in the 1800s the writers sometimes go into all sorts of details about carriages and horses; sometime I know what they mean, sometimes I don't. Most of the time I just let it go if I don't know what the writer is conveying, but sometimes, if the writer keep giving me all these details, it can pull me slightly out of the story.

It makes a difference to me what kind of name it is. Cadillac Escalade--that doesn't slow me down at all. Something like BMW 745, on the other hand, brings me to a screeching halt. I think it's because one is words, even if I don't have a clear picture in my mind of exactly what kind of car it is; the other is gibberish.

I think it's one of those things that can work differently for different readers. If you get it, it's a great bit of characterization. If you don't -- and I frequently don't -- it's nothing, or worse.

As Alleycat mentioned, when a pretentious character in Jane Austen keeps talking about her brother-in-law's barouche-landau, I don't know what that is (well, I do, but I keep forgetting), but the fact that she's bragging about it is enough for me to think that it's expensive, at least. So in that case, the character illuminates the vehicle, which illuminates the character.

And NeuroFizz mentioned Manolo Blahnik shoes. When I started running across those, I had to look them up. For all I knew, they could have been some kind of orthotic shoe.

I think the most important thing is to give some clue for the clueless of what the danged thing is supposed to mean. Tell us that the car would have cost two years of the main character's salary, or that the shoes would have paid for dowries for five African girls, or kept an addict in crack for X amount of time, or accounted for the victim's empty savings account, or something. Just a clue.

FennelGiraffe said:

It makes a difference to me what kind of name it is. Cadillac Escalade--that doesn't slow me down at all. Something like BMW 745, on the other hand, brings me to a screeching halt. I think it's because one is words, even if I don't have a clear picture in my mind of exactly what kind of car it is; the other is gibberish.

Click to expand...

This is an interesting point, and is worth discussing here (thanks for bringing it out). Should we, then, write for the lowest common denominator or should we provide detail that can add a little extra emphasis for some of the readers even though it is not necessary to get the point across for readers who aren't familiar with the specific details?

Michael Connolly is well known for his detail in relating street names and building names in his mysteries, but I don't know my way around L.A. Yet, it doesn't pull me out of his stories--it lends a little extra realism that is partly lost on me, but may really bring the stories home to those who are familiar with the surroundings. But overall, even to me, it's a level of description that really adds to the suspense and realism of the stories.

NeuroFizz said:

Should we, then, write for the lowest common denominator or should we provide detail that can add a little extra emphasis for some of the readers even though it is not necessary to get the point across for readers who aren't familiar with the specific details?

Click to expand...

I guess the question really is 'what is the lowest common denominator'?

Austen wrote for the LCD in a way, because she gives no real detail about her vehicles (to distinguish between a barouche and a landau is no more than to say 'a car' as opposed to 'a truck'). Dickens certainly wrote for the L.C.D. - he carelessly omits to give any brand names at all!!! Poor old Shakespeare, Chaucer, Dostoevsky, Tolstoy, Camus, Flaubert et al - they so obviously missed the point by writing for people with imagination. OK, it's true their works can be read hundreds of years later when the transitory brand names have gone the way of all flesh, but obviously they wrote for the lowest common denominators of their day - and indeed, ours.

Admittedly it's harder to rely on things like story and characterisation to tell a reader when someone is rich and/or flashy - and why bother if a string of letters or a designer name will do it for you? If your reader can only assess someone's personality by knowing the model number of the car they drive then it's possible you're wasting your time anyway. If you can't find anything more interesting to say about your characters than the car they drive, then maybe you're wasting theirs as well.

Me, I'm clearly a lowest common denominator. I'm totally with Neuro-Fizz in agreeing it's worth sliding in the little nuances and details that maybe only 1% of one's readers will get and enjoy - but the day I need to use a car catalogue or a celebrity blog on fashions to do it is the day I stop taking writing seriously.

Just my opinion and my taste, that's all.

NeuroFizz said:

This is an interesting point, and is worth discussing here (thanks for bringing it out). Should we, then, write for the lowest common denominator or should we provide detail that can add a little extra emphasis for some of the readers even though it is not necessary to get the point across for readers who aren't familiar with the specific details?

Click to expand...

I think there are two different questions here. Should you name specific details even if many readers won't get more than a vague generality? Sure, I think the payoff for the readers who do know is worth it. And even the readers who don't know still get an illusion of specificity.

The second question, though, is whether certain types of details might have a negative effect. If all that needs to be understood is "expensive luxury car", should you insist on a JQ497CX3*? Can you accomplish the same thing with some other car that has an easy-to-read name?

There are certainly stories where the distinction between one specific model and another matters. But the other kind of story--the kind where the car is used for atmosphere or characterization--there I think it's worth thinking about how it reads.

*Made-up example

I, for one, prefer the details. If I come to a screeching halt over a detail, I'll look it up. Can you imagine James Bond without his Aston Martin DB5 or his Walther PPK?

It's similar to vocabulary. Why eschew the correct word for one that's more common but doesn't convey your meaning?

For this, like many details of writing, there is no right or wrong answer. We'll all develop our own personal style. I just find it extremely useful to see the range of answers in threads like this. And it is important to the inclusion of all kinds of specific items, specific places and things like that we put in our stories. Thanks to all for contributing, and keep the opinions coming.

Reading about a BMW 745 wouldn't stop me in my tracks or make me think it's gibberish. It would tell me this is a very expensive, top-of-the-line German luxury car, and not an average car you see everywhere.
I guess it's all about how much one knows about cars. I grew up playing with toy cars, so I certainly wouldn't have to look up what a Cadillac Escalade or a Mercedes SL was.

In a novel, I wouldn't want to find expansive descriptions of cars every other page, but there's nothing wrong with mentioning a model type the first time it appears.

If the writer knows cars and is telling us what it is for a reason, it's a good thing, because that kind of expertise shows through. If the writer doesn't know the first thing about cars and pulls the first thing out of google, it's awful.

Writers do this with guns all the time. Other frequent offenders are martial arts, military equipment, computer hardware and swords (and other early weapons).

I hate, HATE, when someone doesn't do sufficient research to make something believable.

"He pulled his Glock 39 revolver from its kevlar holster and shot the bad guy twenty seven times before changing magazines."

"The M1 Abraham infantry fighting vehicle was a ninety ton armored beast with an eight hundred milimeter cannon that fired incendiary grenades."

"The highwayman pulled out his twenty pound broadsword, it's two handed hilt ending in a giant ruby the size of his brain."

"The BMW S500 convertible off road vehicle glowed in the noon sun, it's 90" tires and 45" lift made it tower above the Mini Cupids and Mercedes gyrocopters that surrounded it."

I'm just going to climb into my gleaming black BMW saloon and glide on out of here.

-Derek

dpaterso said:

I'm just going to climb into my gleaming black BMW saloon and glide on out of here.

-Derek

Click to expand...

Yeah, I've got to hop into my Honda Accord GT and go to work in a little while. Smoke will probably be coming from the rear wheels as I speed away.

The way I've always written this sort of information is to only go up to the car make. If I was writing a well to do character I'd say he/she drove a BMW or a Mercedes. If he was not overly affluent I might write he was driving a beat up Chevy van. I try to avoid brand names entirely in my writing, but if I do use them I keep it pretty basic.

I've always thought of this as a way to show, rather than tell. While I realize it's a subtle difference, to me "he drove a silver luxury car" is telling, but "he drove a black porche" is showing. The details can show us something about the character that otherwise might have to be put into narrative form.

Use car details when they add to the story.

Just don't get them wrong: I still remember one Stephen King story where he made a point of describing a car as an Olds Toronado and later talked about its rear wheels spinning. The only problem was that the Toronado was front wheel drive, and that was the car's biggest selling point.

The error threw me right out of the book.

I'm all for a general "four-door Jeep", "older Dodge pick-up in bright blue" in my descriptions, but I'd probably take my time with descriptions on a Ford SVT Roush Nitemare the mechanic just won in a drawing if he was a main character to the story.
I think how the more in-depth descriptors are told has a lot to do with it. I wouldn't want to read three paragraphs of the Mechanic Character talking about his eyes roving over the sleek lines of the SVT Nitemare, thinking about the gear ratios and axle widths. I would, however, read Mechanic Character sharing his excitement of the sight of his ebony steel monster, and then explain to ANOTHER character (who is likely as car-challenged as I) that it is an SVT Nitemare, and how awesomely cool is it to have one.

Accuracy is another important thing. I don't want to read about import tuner cars off-roading through corn fields, that's just stupid. I also don't want to identify every main character with the vehicle he drives (I hate to make a Twilight reference, but it really bugs me that each main character is identified by mortality, hotness score, and the vehicle they drive. 99 times out of 105 the vehicle really isn't that important).