He/She looks like...

[Barbarique]

*

[reenkam]

Well, it dates the work if you use people from a different era. Saying someone looks like Santa Claus is probably fine...because he generally looks the same all the time. I personally don't know what Kenny Rogers looks like and I don't know who Jessica Walter is...so those descriptions don't mean much to me, but they might to other people. Though, if you're saying it from the point of view of your MC, or even another character, then it could work, just because it'd be something they'd say.

[Rosamund]

My only concern with this method of description is that what is well-known to the author may be obscure to someone else.

For example, I have no idea who Kenny Rogers or Jessica Walters are, let alone what they look like, and I have never seen Play Misty for Me. So for me, as a reader, the descriptions you mentioned tell me nothing at all about what the person looks like.

Even with a well-known figure such as Santa Claus, I would be wondering if the author meant the American depiction of him, or the Dutch equivalent, or the Finnish one, or ...

Personally, I would rather have a description of the hair colour/facial features/height etc of the character and have the other connotations emerge from his/her actions, but that's just me. Others may feel differently.

[Jo]

I wouldn't do it unless the comparison was to someone ultra well known. E.g. if I used a comparison to Jeanne Little (daaaahhhling), you probably wouldn't know who she was, even though she's famous in Australia (not so for the younger generation, though). I might get by with a comparison to Elle Macpherson or Olivia Newton-John--but which era? The comparison would also have to be to someone who doesn't change their looks, or age, unless the comparison was to do with how much that person changes, or the look of that person at a certain age. It can get tricky, and perhaps doesn't allow the reader to form a unique picture for themselves.

[EriRae]

I went to school with a Jessica Walter...I doubt that's who you mean. I'm not familiar with Play Misty for Me either. Is it a well-known movie in the states? Knife-wielding Mom reminds me of Psycho.

You know what your characters look like. The trick is to let each reader form her own opinion; we don't have to see exactly what you see. You can only do so much with dress, looks, mannerisms. The rest is in the mind of the reader, and each of us thinks a different way.

[Siddow]

You might try using something like: People often remarked that her mother looked like a movie star. If you put a knife in her hand and dark circles beneath her eyes, I could see it.

Or something like that. That way, the reader could inject any knife-wielding psychopath from any slasher movie into the description, not just the ones familiar to you. You could still get across that the mother is a)attractive and b)crazy without naming someone specifically.

[Jo]

Just a thought, but if the reader has to put the book down to research who the reference refers to, you've probably lost the reader. It yanks them out of the story they've been immersed in.

[ccarver30]

All of my characters have a real life counterpart.
<-- that hottie is my main MC, Clayton Carver. :) It just helps me when I picture scenes in my head about my characters.

[NeuroFizz]

If a period-specific person reference is used, it should come from a character, not the narrator, in my opinion. Even then, though, it is no substitute for good writing--conveying the appearance of a character through original words or some kind of literary comparison technique (such as simile). Also, it might be wise to write as if the work will be marketed internationally, where even reference to Santa Claus might not stir much in some readers. In many cases, it's best to avoid giving too much description of a character's physical appearance. Give enough to be important for the story and let the reader fill in the blanks.

[Danger Jane]

I wouldn't do it. It can date your book and I hate seeing references that I don't get in books...because it makes me feel stupid. You don't want your readers to feel stupid, do you?

[jhtatroe]

I love references and I do often look them up. I wouldn't want to see every character described that way, but I find they give me insight in the character's world and their mindset.

And I wouldn't worry about it dating your work. Should you find yourself reprinted in the 2107 edition of the Norton Anthology, they'll be sure to explain "Kenny Rogers" with a footnote.

[maestrowork]

I wouldn't do it unless it's a reference by the character him/herself. Otherwise, the narrator (I assume this is 3rd person) is making a judgment -- who is saying he or she looks like that person? Besides, like everyone said, if the readers don't know the person, you've lost them. I have no idea who Jessica Walter is, for example. Everyone knows Santa Claus, I guess, but that's just so cliched as well -- what does it really mean anyway? A big, chubby guy with a white beard? Why not just say so and describe him in a creative way and have the image of Santa Claus pop up in the readers' minds instead? That's more effective (back to the show vs. tell).

[aadams73]

I hate it when an author stoops to comparing their character to an actor/celebrity. It's weak writing.

[larocca]

I'm stunned that we have someone here who's never heard of Kenny Rogers (are you having us on?), and even MORE stunned that we have an author who never puts down a book unread no matter how bad it is. There are more great books on this planet than anybody can read in a lifetime, the Janet Evanovich/Charlotte whatever collaboration REALLY isn't worth finishing. Or beginning.

[JoNightshade]

I only did this once in my completed novel, and it was through the eyes of my title character, who thought that a man she'd met resembled a cross between Kenny Rogers and Santa Claus.

Waaaaaaaaait a minute here... Are you saying that Kenny Rogers is NOT Santa Claus?!?!?! ;)

I think it's a bad idea. I love Play Misty but I can't at all remember what that actress looks like. Unless we're talking about comparing someone to Santa or Jesus Christ (the two most well-known "timeless" figures I can think of), leave names out of it. Most everyone else has explained why.

[maestrowork]

I hate it when an author stoops to comparing their character to an actor/celebrity. It's weak writing.

Not if it makes sense, though. In my novel there's one very short line saying a character reminds the protagonist of Audrey Hepburn. It wasn't a throwaway line to describe the character. It has meaning, coming from the protagonist's perception, who happens to adore the actress. It doesn't matter if the readers don't know who Audrey Hepburn is -- what matters is that the character thinks so.

So to me, such blatant comparison needs to come from the right place and have meaning to it. If it's just an easy "tell" of what the character looks like, then it is lazy writing.

[Devil Ledbetter]

It's a grating shortcut, much worse than mentioning a song title that may be unfamiliar. If the "famous" person is unknown to the reader, she is now drawing a blank when she should have a picture of your character.

Worse, famous people have a way being too human and screwing up. A writer who compared a male character to Alec Baldwin fifteen years ago is going to have a major problem when her handsome, well-built character is pictured as pig-eyed, pot-bellied and belligerent. Likewise for comparisons to Mel Gibson, Michael Jackson, Britney Spears or any other celebs whose images have gone down the toilet.

Today's celebs are just descriptive disasters waiting to happen.

[aadams73]

Not if it makes sense, though. In my novel there's one very short line saying a character reminds the protagonist of Audrey Hepburn. It wasn't a throwaway line to describe the character. It has meaning, coming from the protagonist's perception, who happens to adore the actress. It doesn't matter if the readers don't know who Audrey Hepburn is -- what matters is that the character thinks so.


See, that seems different to me than what the OP is talking about. The OP sounds like she/he(not trying to be rude, I just have no idea if you're a man or a woman) is relying on a character comparison from a movie to do all the heavy-lifting.

The Kenny Rodgers(I just vomited in my mouth a little) Santa Claus comparison doesn't both me the same way.

Maybe I just need another nap :)

[NeuroFizz]

I'm stunned that we have someone here who's never heard of Kenny Rogers (are you having us on?)
AW draws a broad international audience, probably way more so than Kenny Rogers ever did. AW also has many younger members and lurkers, so young Kenny Rogers is in the age group of their grandfathers. These people read. These people buy books. Kenny Rogers will likely draw no sense of familiarity from them. And the situation will only get worse, like in the two years or more it will take for a book (being written now) to come out--and that's provided it earns an immediate contract when it is finished.

[blacbird]

The reference to Jessica Walter is time-specific to 1974, when pretty much everyone was familiar with 1971's Play Misty for Me. (Incidentally, the movie was Clint Eastwood's directorial debut, and IMO makes the much later Fatal Attraction seem like an uninspired rip-off.)

I do see your point, however. :)

I'm old enough to remember the movie, even have watched it a couple of times on TV, and I know the name Jessica Walter. But I don't have the vaguest clue what she looks like. The reference would be entirely lost on me, and constitute a reader annoyance, accordingly.

caw

[NeuroFizz]

She had the largest nostrils in the business. That is, until Judd Nelson came on the scene...

[blacbird]

I personally don't know what Kenny Rogers looks like.

He's a 40-something-year-old left-handed starting pitcher for the Detroit Tigers, and one of the few pitchers in baseball history to have pitched a perfect game. He's about 6'4', kind of lean and bony, and wears this black baseball cap.

caw

[Jamesaritchie]

I think most writers worry way the heck too much about dating their fiction. Just about all good fiction is dated in every way possible. Pick up pretty much any novel, and you can almost tell the exact year it was written. This even holds true for the classics, and people still read them all.

Besides, the odds of a book being around long enough for anyone to think it's dated are slim and slimmer.

And, no, all readers won't get a reference. So what? Who cares? When you start trying to please everyone, you usually please no one.

[Devil Ledbetter]

And, no, all readers won't get a reference. So what? Who cares? When you start trying to please everyone, you usually please no one.I don't expect readers to get every cultural reference. But I sure don't want to take a cheap shortcut on a character description that leaves them drawing a blank.

[RLB]

I can see this sort of thing working for, say, first person chicklit, or any genre that dates itself with consistent references to fashions, trends, etc. That wouldn't make me blink. Of course, it'd be coming from the POV of your MC if it were first person.

But coming into a third person narrative from the author as a means to describe the character, that'd probably bother me.

[blacbird]

Um... I think we may be referring to disparate Kenny Rogers. I'm talking about the singer:


I know. Which exactly makes my point.

If someone's physical appearance is important enough to the story that it needs to be described, describe it. It isn't an issue of "dating" your story. Comparing to some public figure's appearance is generally lame and lazy writing. And if you do that, it really does need to be someone very familiar (Jessica Walter doesn't make the grade, I don't think). Even then, if you say, "He looked like Elvis," you need to specify which one, the young pretty one or the old fat grotesque one.

caw

[blacbird]

If the comparison is done by the author to avoid having to make an independent description, I'd be inclined to agree. (Example: "Mr. Studly Hero looked like Peter O'Toole.") But when the resemblance is something remarked upon by characters in the story, it's quite a different matter. (Example: "Miss Bo-Peep was enchanted by Mr. Studly Hero's astonishing resemblance to Peter O'Toole.")


To some extent I agree, although it would be much better to do that in dialog than in narrated thought. I can easily relate to somebody saying something like that. Again, however, I'd caution about assuming common knowledge in your reading audience. And the Peter O'Toole of today is hardly the image of a studly hero. The one of Lawrence of Arabia works better, and you can be specific about that reference.

caw

[imagegod]

I wouldn't do it. It can date your book and I hate seeing references that I don't get in books...because it makes me feel stupid. You don't want your readers to feel stupid, do you?
Reading this thread makes me feel like a strange being from a different planet...how in the world can a reference make you feel stupid in a world of Google?

Moreoever, nobody makes anyone feel anything...unless you're being physically insulted.

A good artist creates a powerful cloud of meaning...a great artist creates this cloud using a broad, superset (this is a Math term) of references...a good reader wants to be lead through this cloud by a someone with access to this superset, to this multitude of references...we want a book to lead us as far as we can follow.

Or else, what is a heaven for?*

To quote 'Jo': "...if the reader has to put the book down to research who the reference refers to, you've probably lost the reader. It yanks them out of the story they've been immersed in."

My God, should we write to the lowest common denominator? Was Einstein worried about his audience not appreciating him? Beethoven? Kubrick?

They didn't worry...nor shall I. Of course, freedom affords you (plural) to do and feel whatever the heck you want...so long as it doesn't limit my ability to do the same.

*"Ah, but a man's reach should exceed his grasp, or what's a heaven for?” Robert Browning

[Devil Ledbetter]

To quote 'Jo': "...if the reader has to put the book down to research who the reference refers to, you've probably lost the reader. It yanks them out of the story they've been immersed in."

My God, should we write to the lowest common denominator?
Of course not. But we shouldn't take shortcuts that leave the reader in the dark either, especially when those shortcuts have the 3-month shelf-life of modern celebrity.

My WIP has cultural references aplenty. But when I include them, I am careful that the reader isn't required to know them in order to follow the story. However, those readers who are familiar with the references will find the story that much richer of an experience.

[imagegod]

But we shouldn't take shortcuts that leave the reader in the dark either, especially when those shortcuts have the 3-month shelf-life of modern celebrity.

My WIP has cultural references aplenty. But when I include them, I am careful that the reader isn't required to know them in order to follow the story. However, those readers who are familiar with the references will find the story that much richer of an experience.
Absolutely...a good writer understands the difference between references with integrity...and references without.

And a great writer understands how to used the most powerful references while still keep their words (and works) accessible.

(See Beethoven's 9th Symphony...See Schiller...See Die Hard...See Bruce Willis...See that the potential references are potentially...endless...)

[Jamesaritchie]

Of course not. But we shouldn't take shortcuts that leave the reader in the dark either, especially when those shortcuts have the 3-month shelf-life of modern celebrity.

My WIP has cultural references aplenty. But when I include them, I am careful that the reader isn't required to know them in order to follow the story. However, those readers who are familiar with the references will find the story that much richer of an experience.

True enough. Pick the celebrities with care, but I don't think it's necessary for anything like all the readers to get the reference. Most readers are not going to stop reading to go look something like this up, or stop reading because they didn't get the reference.

If you do it right, you can use the reference in a manner that also gives enough description for those who don't get it.

[lfraser]

Why not engage the reader's imagination, instead, and come up with your own description?

[Danger Jane]

Definitely not; but then, I don't equate a lack of familiarity with stupidity.

Yeah, that was probably the wrong word...maybe I'm weird, I just hate not knowing references like that. It really wasn't meant as a condescending comment or anything...sorry.

[joetrain]

i follow celebrities less than the average american, and if i came upon a reference to one i did not know, as a likeness or otherwise, i would not necessarily dimiss it as a flaw in the writing. if the book was selling a sharp cultural awareness then, by all means, reference the figures of said culture, and i'll look them up if i feel like it. but if i suspect a writer of being lazy or showing off some pop trivia crap, then i will be a bitter, reproachful reader.

[newmod]

I find my arse works quite well. Normally but on occasion, no. So there you go.

[maddythemad]

Ooh, it is so funny you brought this up, because I was just thinking about how much I don't like this technique. Of course it can be used effectively, but the reason why I would never say "he looked like Orlando Bloom" or whatever is because a) Johnny Depp is so much hotter ;) and b) I really want to let the reader picture my character for themselves. And if I say, "he had brown hair and brown eyes," then they get the general gist of my guy, but they can have his face look however they want. Which is, in my opinion, the advantage of books over movies. So saying "he was the spitting image of Michael Jackson" (besides being scary) kind of takes the fun out of the use-your-imagination aspect of books. (All of this is JUST MY OPINION, of course. Not wishing any offense to anyone... especially one who might make an unflattering comparison about who I look like. :tongue)

One of the silliest examples of this technique, though, was when I saw "He looked like Harry Potter" in a non-HP book (I can't remember which it was). I mean, Harry Potter is a fictional character! Why not say he had green eyes and black hair and not get into which boy wizard he resembles? (Unless the author meant Daniel Radcliffe, in which case they should have said so...)

[JEP]

I described a newborn baby as "a cross between Winston Churchill and former sumo wrestling superstar Akebono".

[joetrain]

i think newborns are free game

[Scrawler]

I But I sure don't want to take a cheap shortcut on a character description that leaves them drawing a blank.

I agree. Isn't one of the joys of writing creating and developing your own characters? Simply stating "he looks like Clint Eastwood" seems amateurish or lazy or both.

BTW- I looked up Jessica Walter's photo-- no idea who she is. But she looks a little like a young Mary Hart lol
:Shrug:

[blacbird]

BTW- I looked up Jessica Walter's photo-- no idea who she is. But she looks a little like a young Mary Hart

And Mary Hart is . . .?

caw

[blacbird]

Well, that's certainly true. I was thinking more along the lines of how he looked in 1967's The Night of the Generals. Absolutely stone bonkers, but... wow! ;)

Never seen it. Which says something, either about it, or me, or the technique in question. You make the decision, but don't say you haven't been warned.

caw

[Jo]

Just a thought, but if the reader has to put the book down to research who the reference refers to, you've probably lost the reader. It yanks them out of the story they've been immersed in.

Y'think?

Hmm... interesting. Whenever I run across an unfamiliar reference (which happens frequently because I'm unabashedly behind the times) I either skip it entirely or look it up if I'm interested. But I've yet to abandon a book because of it. (Well, I never abandon books, period. Even if it's awful, I forge through until the end. I'm currently having the Devil's own time with Stephen King's Lisey's Story, but no way will I quit.) :)

Just to clarify: I didn't say you've lost the reader for good. You've lost the reader in that part of the story. They don't get it. They've been yanked out. The illusion of the story has been smashed as the reader is left wondering (or researching) what the reference was to. It doesn't help the flow of the story.

To quote 'Jo': "...if the reader has to put the book down to research who the reference refers to, you've probably lost the reader. It yanks them out of the story they've been immersed in."

My God, should we write to the lowest common denominator? Was Einstein worried about his audience not appreciating him? Beethoven? Kubrick?

They didn't worry...nor shall I. Of course, freedom affords you (plural) to do and feel whatever the heck you want...so long as it doesn't limit my ability to do the same.

*"Ah, but a man's reach should exceed his grasp, or what's a heaven for?” Robert Browning

I write for children. I use words and phrases they may not know. Things that make them stop and ask questions. I also "dumb" my writing down to suit them. I think you have to communicate what you need to, as best as you can, in a way that suits your audience. I'm an Aussie, and know full well my writing won't be understood the world over. It will be coloured with my culture and experiences. However, I will endeavour to make it as clear and concise as possible for the enjoyment of my readers.