Descriptions clashing with rhythm

I'm reading a new author. I'm 11 pages in and all I know abut the narrator/MC is his name is Joe, and he's chief of detectives in a small town. The author did describe the internal organs of a body after an autopsy, but I didn't feel the pace was disrupted, It was interspersed in the dialog with the medical examiner.

I guess what I'm trying to say is, when done well, description doesn't interfere with your rhythm or your pacing.

It sounds like they are having a hard time picturing your characters and where the story is taking place, and this is a very bad thing. If you think the details you're adding right now are slowing it down, then you need to look for different details to add.

I don't know what your writing looks like at the moment, but do you have mostly visual details? Try using the other four senses to make it more interesting. And there's no reason your descriptions can't be funny, especially if your story is supposed to be humorous.

You mention you used description to slow things down in your other works. It's narrative that controls the pace, and most descriptive passages are in the narrative sections, not dialogue sections. Description does many things in a story, but most importantly description realizes the world in which the story takes place. Nothing happens nowhere, is the phrase. I recommend finding some of your favorite funny books and seeing how they handled the description. Writers learn best from other writers.

I agree with RJK and Sevvy. Description doesn't need to slow pace. If you're looking for fast movement then your description simply needs to be succinct and every word evocative. As Sevvy said, involve all the senses. Story does not take place in a vacuum. The reader needs to identify with some kind of location - a coal mine, an open field, a stinky cellar, a space ship - somewhere.

You don't need to "stop" the story and "slow" the pace with descriptions. The trick is to put the details in the right place at the right time so the plot is still moving along. Details such as descriptions and the five senses are there to enhance the reading experience -- to put the readers in the scene -- and not to stop or slow the story movement.

In fact, I fear that your story is moving TOO FAST if all you have is dialogue and not enough description. Perhaps that's what your readers are telling you: slow it down a bit!

one-liners and witty perceptions

On description in general:

The first thing a lot of people think when they hear the word description is that it's boring. It doesn't--and shouldn't--have to be a huge chunk of text that doesn't do anything for the story. It should be interesting and move the story forward.

On setting:

In earlier project, I received comments that I had characters walking through the furniture or the walls. Little details made a big difference here. It wasn't a matter of doing a blow by blow description of a room, but have the character interact with their surroundings:

She navigated between the beds, stepping over a haversack that had spilled into the aisle.


What a lot of writers do is say the characters entered a restaurant, and then stop. They don't do anything else. They might have characters sit down at the table, but they don't sneak in details that would make the setting come to live. Like a kid turning to stare at the MC while he eats desert, the smell of bacon cooking, the character banging his knee under the table. These all filter description into the story, and keep the story moving.

I personally like to spread my descriptions out across a scene in two or three sentence batches, where appropriate. I've even had the characters further the description by talking about the setting. It's one thing to have narrative that says a tunnel is narrow; it's another thing to have a character complain about the tunnel being narrow.

On Character Description:

Use the viewpoint. You said the story is humorous, so what's wrong with doing a humorous description of a character? I still remember from a Sue Grafton novel when the viewpoint character descriptions a characters as "mining the contents of his nose." I have a lot of humor in mine, and while some of the humor is from the characters, some of it comes in the form of description.

One of the key things to remember about any description is that you don't have to paint an exact detail. A couple of unusual details will do the job.

Good advice here about how to add description without slowing. But since I like to be the devil's advocate....

My idea: Thank them for their valuable time and input, and disregard this particular bit of advice.

It sounds like you've thought long and hard about this, and you're not unconscious of the importance of description, nor the role it plays in your particular style. Sometimes beta readers just don't quite get what we're going for, and it's okay to recognize that and take only those parts of their feedback that you know are going to improve the piece.

Why is what a character looks like important to the story? Does it affect the plot at all? (Chances are, the answer is no. It usually is.)

I'm glad I found this thread. I'm actually having a similar worry. Its not so much that I'm lacking description (I do have descriptions, and some fairly good ones, that keep the story progressing too). But my worry is placement. Somehow, descriptions of the other characters, aside from the Narrator, didn't fit into the story anywhere near the beginning, or where they enter the story. In fact, I don't think there's going to be a really decent description of the titular character until one of the last chapters of the novel. Is this alright? I mean, there's a tidbit here and there about her, but it only gives you a general, almost fuzzy idea of what she looks like. Yet she's very much the protagonist, the mover of the story.

Libbie said:

My idea: Thank them for their valuable time and input, and disregard this particular bit of advice.

Click to expand...

Obviously everything is a matter of opinion and the writer shouldn't simply accept everything on face value.

Still, if one beta reader says so, you may chalk it up as just one opinion and choose to disregard it.

But when three or more readers say the same thing, perhaps it's a good idea to reconsider it. Chances are, they're on to something.

maestrowork said:

But when three or more readers say the same thing, perhaps it's a good idea to reconsider it. Chances are, they're on to something.

Click to expand...

That's true. I did say I was just playing devil's advocate.

To further the advocacy for Old Scratch, I'd ask the OP how well he feels these beta readers understand what he's going for. I've had beta readers who really disliked my style of description, and when I asked them to elaborate on that feedback, it became clear that their idea of a good book/good writing style and mine were vastly different. As in, one of them actually suggested I look at Stephenie Meyer as an example of the way to do description and pacing correctly. Let's just say that I am going for a very different feel in my writing than Meyer, and leave it at that.

So I think it's valuable to be aware of where your betas are coming from, what type of literature they enjoy (and write), and how closely that matches your vision for your own work.

Dr. Zoidberg may not be in the same situation I found myself in with these other beta readers, and if he believes these betas have the right idea, then that's wonderful, and he should hang onto such valuable readers.

But just because we have somebody willing to offer feedback on our work doesn't mean it's necessarily the right kind of feedback for our particular style.

Just sayin'.

But if you believe your beta readers have the right idea about the kind of stuff you're writing, then yes, listen to their collective advice!

Libbie said:

Why is what a character looks like important to the story? Does it affect the plot at all? (Chances are, the answer is no. It usually is.)

Click to expand...

If the character's personality and surroundings, you don't need physical description.
Common mistake amongst new writers:
He was good-looking, with blonde hair and blue eyes.

Can you picture the character? No, you just picture a person who has blonde hair and blue eyes and isn't ugly.

Whereas this (or something like it) is a better description:

He looked exactly like an angel; so much so that it was not hard to imagine him with a halo and wings. Yet a strong jawline and a swagger managed to preserve his virility.

You may protest that you don't know what he looks like- true, you don't get much physical description. But you get the sense that this guy is a pretty boy but just manages to save himself from coming off as effeminate- or at least, he wants to come off as virile but is hampered by his pretty-boy looks. There's even a hint of the narrator's opinion- saying that he looked like he should have wings is either a bizarre compliment or mockery.

maestrowork said:

Obviously everything is a matter of opinion and the writer shouldn't simply accept everything on face value.

Still, if one beta reader says so, you may chalk it up as just one opinion and choose to disregard it.

But when three or more readers say the same thing, perhaps it's a good idea to reconsider it. Chances are, they're on to something.

Click to expand...

I know that's the common wisdom, but my experience is just the opposite. If three say to get rid of something, and one says keep it, I've found the one is usually write.

I've found that about 90% of beta readers have no clue what actually makes a story pubishable, and when this 90% agrees, it means nothing. I'm concerned with what the 10% who do know have to say.

My own opinion comes first, of course. I have to assume that most of the readers out there share my taste in how something is written, else I'm going to have no success as a writer. So if I like a scene, it stays in, no matter what a million beta readers may say.

Jamesaritchie said:

So if I like a scene, it stays in, no matter what a million beta readers may say.

Click to expand...

I'd avoid that sort of attitude. If your baby had a massive wart, hooked nose, and a wrinkly forehead, you as a parent would probably still see it as being sweet because you love the baby. But it is ugly- or at least, not a stunner.

Getting too attached to scenes means that your writing can get blocked as a result because you won't omit something which needs to be ommitted. Funny or clever scenes are the most obvious example. They probably are funny scenes- but they don't work as part of the whole.

Dialogue only books remind me of stage plays or TV scripts. They are essentially missing information that as a reader I am used to seeing. However, I can understand the need to experiment. I've also seen nearly all description type novels. They work well also. All I can say is add some beats. Perhaps identify a signifigant narrator MC to supply some beats.

Several things control pace:
It's not the description that affects pace so much as the relevance. If the description is relevant to doing readers will gobble it. If it's relevant to feeling it will be slower, an description relevant to thinking is slower still. (And if it's relevant to none of these things then it's just padding and should be cut.)

When descriptions look bare, it's often because the author is focusing on the meaning or use of the surroundings rather than the feeling or impact. E.g. compare:
To:
The first sentence focuses on what they were doing and where. The second focuses on what they were doing, what was around them and how that made them feel. The first sentence is eight words; the second is around 63. But is it eight times slower than the first? To me, it reads maybe twice as slow (but the walk to the gas-station was hard) and because it's hard, it's far more interesting.

I think you have to keep in mind what the overall effect will be when you make changes -- will it make the book stronger or weaker?

We all want to write the perfect book, but sometimes one does have to compromise. If the strong point of the book is the narrative flow, but the lack of description is a weak point, you can't fix that by just slipping in some descriptions, because that will alter how the book reads. You may gain something, but lose even more. The trick, of course, as always, is to find the balance -- something you can live with.

As a musician, I often use musical analogies. I may come up with an interesting hook or rhythm for a song while playing with my band, but when I put it in, the cohesion of the song suffers -- perhaps it loses its drive, the very thing that makes the song.

Sometimes I can't keep the clever thing I've done, but have to sublimate it to the overall sound. The best songs do both, but like writing, things aren't always perfect.

That said, it's amazing how much minor changes can do to improve a book. A few short descriptions, even one liners, can help give a sense of place without changing the overall flow at all.

Jamesaritchie said:

I know that's the common wisdom, but my experience is just the opposite. If three say to get rid of something, and one says keep it, I've found the one is usually write.

I've found that about 90% of beta readers have no clue what actually makes a story pubishable, and when this 90% agrees, it means nothing. I'm concerned with what the 10% who do know have to say.

My own opinion comes first, of course. I have to assume that most of the readers out there share my taste in how something is written, else I'm going to have no success as a writer. So if I like a scene, it stays in, no matter what a million beta readers may say.

Click to expand...

Not to derail too much, but this is just a vastly interesting (and refreshingly divergent) point of view.

It's possible maybe to rely too heavily on the instincts of others? I do think it's important to develop a strong sense of what works and what doesn't in one's own work, and to note divergent opinions and be reinforced by agreeing ones. But a beta's opinion doesn't have veto on your own, if you have all the knowledge and reason (read: stone-chiseled instinct) to back it.

Knowledge, as they say, is power?

rugcat said:

We all want to write the perfect book, but sometimes one does have to compromise.

Click to expand...

Steve Almond: Writing is making choices. Nothing more, nothing less.

I'll start my reply by saying I'm not a humor writer, but I do like my stories to be funny, usually funny and dire at the same time. The idea with including description is not to stick in lines that describe the surroundings. That's too much like an infodump. Instead, you might include details of your protagonist's reactions to elements of the surroundings, much as Linda Adams said. If your protagonist has a very funny and engaging voice, so much the better. Let the description reveal the character at the same time that it illuminates the surroundings. There are a lot of ways to include little tidbits of information here and there so that they don't interfere with the main action of the story. I have a blog post about hiding information in plain sight, here.

With regards to people's thoughts on the opinions of beta readers, it depends on who those readers are. It's much harder to rely on the opinions of random friends than it is to trust the judgment of people whose writing you deeply respect. I would agree with folks above that it's important to keep your own "compass," so I wouldn't suggest simply doing what every critiquer says. It's valuable to consider others' opinions provided you can re-analyze them in terms of "why." Ask yourself why a reader might have gotten a particular impression. "What in the text might have led them to that opinion, which diverges so much from mine?" You don't necessarily have to fix it the way they tell you, but you might instead change elements of the text that they misunderstood, if you get my meaning.

Anyway, I hope that helps. Good luck.

I am very happy I found this thread, as from my point of view my novel lacks of description. I do well in interactions but the other 4 senses are missing. I need to find a way to have my MC interact with the surroundings.