can you have too much description in stories? i was curious as to what everyone else thinks about it.
Sometimes, you can. Especially if it results in making your sentences so long that no one still follows.
Yes, you can - as well as too long sentences, there's also something called 'purple prose' where the author uses the most flowery and long-winded language possible... which makes the rest of us want to tear our hair out.
Ever heard of Nathaniel Hawthorne?
That's your answer.
Another one worth mentioning ic Catherine Coulter. I skip whole pages of her books. She's just as bad with the dialogue.
I have to agree, too much description kills the mood of the story. No matter what I'm reading be it a novel or fanfic, if there's too much description I skip it.
Yeah, purple prose is what turned me off from Twilight. Too much Edward, not enough of...everything else.
Although it may be long and kinda boring, To Kill a Mockingbird is a really good example on how to properly use imagery. It's long, but not too long, and gets pretty creative too.
Yes, To Kill a Mockingbird was one of the few books I had to read for school that I actually liked.
As for Jane Eyre, that's a good example of something with too much discription. I skipped sections because she spent forever describing things that seemed rather insignificant. So yes, certainly it is possible.
Yes of course, unless it's interesting and well-written, like Charles Dickens' descriptions. But I've more commonly come across fan fictions with not enough description and too much dialogue.
Dude, description rules! I rarely see fanfiction with too much description, probably because the writers are attention-deficit readers in the first place.
A good description is important in a story, without it the story seems hasty and sometimes it can be hard to imagine what the writer was intending without proper description.
However, too long or too detailed discriptions, especially without any good reason, tend to lead away from the plot and the actual story, thus disrupting the flow.
Prism0467,
You are right that not many writer are very descriptive, many are even too low on discription. part of the reason is of course that they exactly know what they intent with a particular line and assume the readers do as well.
Yes you can get too much description, but there is such a thing as too little as well. You must find a happy medium for each part of a piece that you write. Another factor to consider is 'is the description interesting?'. A variety of words whilst not getting too flowery and poetic is always a good way to go. Just keep it flowing and if you run out of things to say then move onto the next part.
Remember ladies and gentlemen, a happy medium makes everyone happy.
One of the many reasons I do not like Stephanie Meyer. She had a pretty good plot (apart from the MASSIVE plot holes), but then she ruined it by calling Edward beautiful seven times a page. It ruined it for me.
i seriously dont think a writer can put too much description...look at victorian novels, they're incredible, and no expense spared descriptionwise! but for the taste of modern readers...maybe. especially on fanfiction, people want a quick easily readable story i guess, not a huge novel, if they wanted that they'd go and buy one.
i personally adore description...prefer it to writing action!! i so i dont think you can write too much...
While it's possible to have too much, most fanfic writers have too little. It's much harder to add enough then to take away when you have too much.
Description is a vital part of any story and it's probably one of my weakest points. But then, I used to write scripts, so... Too much description is a turn off. Just look at Gormenghast. Five pages just to describe one gargoyle? No wonder I couldn't get past the third chapter!
When you spend more than one page describing a table in the corner, I'm sorry but you've gone too far.
Ohh! pouts But it was uch a GOOD table!
an author describing somebody's appearance down to the last stitch and hair (for everyday wear of main/popular/already-known characters) makes me want to pull my hair out. especially when they start a new sentnce for every body part (eg. Ranma: He was a dark-haired boy. He wore his hair in a pigtail. He wore a red, chinese-style shirt. His shirt had a dragon pattern on it... etcetera, etcetera ad nauseum).
@Judaphine:I have to agree, that is quite annoying.
it sounds like everyone has the same idea, or close to it. you can have too much descriptions for the most part. i think Manty was right about you can't have too much in some cases, but i think that is mostly the old classical stuff.
@Kennie: description is my biggest weakness too. i skim over a lot of things i should really describe for the reader to know what's going on in my head. you're not the only one with that problem. :D
i think that's what everyone's basically been saying, if i'm not mistaken.
^ I hope I did that right...
Pretty much any 19th century novel or classic British writer (and a few modern Brit writers) include too much description.
Brontë sisters, Bram Stoker, JRR Tolkien - all on the list offenders. Granted the novel was born in the 1800s so I can't very well blame Victorian-age authors, who had very little else to compare with. And I don't mean to say that every 19th century novel sucks - I really liked Emily Brontë's 'Wuthering Heights,' for instance. The description just gets a little much in those old novels.
+
And I think that description is always the hardest. The biggest asset a writer can have is to be able to let her audience infer much of the description. But this takes a lot of practice; in fact, I'm not convinced anyone masters it. I have a feeling it's something every single writer has to tinker a lot with. Just remember that your goal is to relay the essence of a character, not to write a lab report of her.
Exceedingly flowery writing never does any good. I have allergies.
Oh yes, especially if the sentances get so long that you can't understand their meaning any more. I like to be very descriptive but if I can't read it out loud without running out of breath or dying of boredom then I delete it.
I always thought that Stepanie Meyer's puke inducing descriptions of Edward's beauty five times a page were what turned me to fanfiction. I hate Edward and enjoy reading things where they don't end up together. Anything so that we don't have to hear about how lovely he is.
Haven't read anything of Stephenie Mayer yet. I keep meaning to but i got put off when my best mate read them. I'll try to read them eventually though, i jusy keep forgetting. The 'Edward is beautiful' thing does seem to happen a lot. Me and my mate talk about whatever we're reading at the time so i know the basic story. We're both biblophiles.
Homer uses some good descriptions in the Odyssey surprisingly. Virgil goes on a bit with his lists of warriors though. About two pages just describing the people in the battles. Annoying because it's not even decent description, just lists of people you never hear about agan.
I like description but if it's too descriptive then you can sometimes lose track of what you're reading and forget what's gong on lol.
Yes, you can get too much, but you can also get too little. I never write enough description because I used to be afraid of writing too muh. Now it's just habit ^^
The technical term is 'purple prose', in which the story itself is choked under the weight of description. It's a common pitfall for fanfic writers, though the rarer problem of 'beige prose' (tediously minimalist writing sucking out a story's emotional impact) can be just as bad.
I love descriptions, and I never feel I have enough. I try not to go overboard with what I do though.
>>21, I think the way JRR Tolkien describes his work is fantastic. I absolutely love his world and the way he talks of it. But I suppose not every one can be happy.
I stop at describing clothes. At least past what they're wearing. In my new one I say that Draco is wearing a jeans and polo shirt combo and looks impeccable, and that GInny feels she pales in comparison in her own vest and worn jeans combo.
But thats it, I dont care what colors they are! And I'm sure my reader doesn't either!
YES!!!!! A thousand times yes!!!
Overly descriptive narrative slows the plot to the point of immobility! Include description of in the action of the scene rather than just listing them.
hehe I think I have problems with description. You can definitely have too much. On my very first fic I got a review telling me that I wrote too much description.
So then I tried to correct it in my next story but then I immediately got reviews telling me that I had too little. There has to be a balance.
Xx..xX
You definitely can. It's a real problem with fan fics. If I have to read about some OCs cerulean orbs, floor length, wavy, dark brown, caramel tinted, should length-banged hair, I'll be one step closer to hiring Chuck Norris to punch out the entire internet.
I tend to over-describe in my first drafts, which is why I have to edit rigorously. I have whole pages of description that will never be published, but that I couldn't bear to throw away... overdescrition is more acceptable in oneshots than in stories, IMO.
The general consensus: use description wisely and not too well.
>>30 I find it a good rule of thumb to assume that 'cerulean orbs' refers to the condsition of certain parts of the writer's own anatomy when they were scribbling down the description in question.
It's called 'costume porn' for a reason.
I nearly used an emoticon again.
So then...
What of 'glittering orbs'? One may not mention Edward Cullen in one's response.
The trick with description, as with everything, is to do it for a reason. Every word should have a point other than 'look at how I can dazzle you with my extensive vocabulary and unusual imagery'. I am generally guilty of using too little description and too much dialogue, so I have to add it in afterwards, in the places where the pace needs slowing, or time needs to pass. Remember, description ALWAYS slows things down. Always. So cut it from action scenes and draw it out when you're creating tension (but don't overdo it, or you'll end up with boredom).
When I write fanfic I try to keep description to a minimum as, being about an already established subject, people already have a clear picture in there minds of what they want there charactures/places to look like. If Im writing new fic I will include some description, but not too much...I think it can spoil the flow of a good story. The hard bit is to balance flow with the need to fill in important detail.
Bah!
I've had many reviews about description and I really really REALLY can't get it right. I think its just because some people love description and some hate it.
In my first story I got reviews telling me I didnt have enough description so in my second and third I tried to put more in, but that made people tell me I had too much...then some people say they enjoyed all the description in my second and third. Its uber confusing :/
And I mean trying to read the book: The Picture Of Dorian Gray kinda confusing.
As everyone said, you can have too much of it. After that, it depends on the kind of story, one's writing style and the actual need - or not - for a description.
@BloodWhiteWolf > It all depends on the reader, really. Just write how you want and re-read it - or ask for someone else to do so.
After that, there are parts in descptions that just kill me... sometimes. And I think I did it - though most of my stories are kind of introspective and I am much more interested in what a character feels than how he looks. I tend to make it sound 'good' - it has to make sense alright, though.
(And as for Tolkien, you like or you don't. But he actually had the plot and the characters to support the descriptions. Also, original work is very different from fanfictions.)
I think Jean M Auel with the Earths children series uses WAY to much descriptive narrative...even though the stories are good, it could be told in a 3rd of the size that they are. She constantly repeats descriptions and earlier plot incidences as though she is both trying to 'educate by repition' the reader, and prove how clever she is to remember all the factual stuff. If anyone has read her books you'll know what I mean.....
Ah, you mean the series that was once summarised as "Mary Sue walks across prehistoric Europe, slowly"?
Oh...what a great description! Now THAT ones classic..and just right! Hehehehehe
Ever since she was young, she had been imprisoned behind walls. She was a slave, and hers was the barest of existences: an endless cycle of drudgery, exhaustion and dull fear. Freedom was a fantasy she gnawed obsessively in her few moments of leisure, like a bone with just a trace of meat; and like all illusions, it left her hungrier than before, only more keenly aware of how her soul starved within her, its wings wasting with the despair of disuse.
She leaned back and breathed in hard, gazing up at the distant stars, tiny points of frosty fire high over the smoking volcano. Autumn was beginning to flirt with winter brining lingering frosts.
I think I put in a lot of description but no one has complained so far.
I think some novels do well with a lot of description- I have a work friend who cannot stand Stephen King for his descriptions, whereas I find them haunting and interesting. Same with the Gormenghast books by Mervyn Peake, some people cannot stand how slowly it goes, but I thought it was good. So its just a matter of taste I suppose...
Think that's some metaphor overkill in the first paragraph - seems to be going in three directions at once, and 'gnawing a fantasy' is a weird and hilarious notion that brings to mind somebody chewing at thin air.
Seen much worse, though.
Omnomnom, the sweet taste... OF FREEDOM!
As for Stephen King, while I am a fan, his descriptions are sometimes silly. The pilings in Misery. The bees/wasps in EVERY SINGLE BOOK.
(... And the self-inserts, but that's another matter.)
For those who know him: Christian Jacq! He wrote piles of books set in Ancient Egypt and while the stories and characters are nice - I was so in love with the Ramses serie when I was 9... too much description.
I never read Auel - my mother did - but both are the same. Every chapter, you get a description of Ramses, Nefertari, Acha and so on. And even though I was kinda in love with Acha (aka bishie of the serie), I just couldn't handle the description. It was like... 2-3 pages just for ONE character! (I'm exaggerating a bit but you get the point) Drives me crazy.
Still, it didn't prevent me from reading the 5 books over and over again for several years.
@ ...
yeah I noticed the self inserts. I always feel a bit let down by them. My fave one (just for it being so obvious) is probably Bill from IT, the ugly kid who gets the most beautiful girls, and grows up to be a writer, etc, etc...
The lead in The Shining was the most irritating for me (possibly because that was the first of his books that I read). 'Paul Sheldon' in Misery was fine, because of the nature of/messages in the book, but in King's other works, it does cause an eyebrow of mine to rise. As he can write good characters that he has little in common with (Carrie White, Sue Snell, Blaze), the self-inserts seem odd.
Oh, and if you haven't read Blaze, I strongly suggest that you do. I have a feeling that it was heavily influenced by Truman Capote's 'In Cold Blood' (also a good read), but even if you read ICB shortly beforehand (as I did), it doesn't feel dull or predictable. It IS melodramatic in places, but then this is King we're talking about; that's to be expected. And it makes up for this with a wonderful blend of sadness, tension and dark humour.
I feel as if no one can quite get the balence of just how much desription they should use
Sometimes i find people just won't shut up about the smallest little things such as what clothes a charater is wearing, but when i comes to important sence such as fight sence/ serious plot changes there is not detail and us reader are left completly counfused on what has just happened.