Random writing thought: no description vs too much description

[locker_monster]

I'm reading Old Man's War right now by John Scalzi. It's not a bad book; has a interesting premise for a sci-fi. It was Scalzi's first book so maybe that has something to do with it, but I'm finding he does very little description or too much, somehow at the same time. He often has the main character telling the fate of his friends so it's not seen first hand but it's a giant info dump at the beginning of a chapter. I don't find this too annoying but I have noticed he doesn't bother going into too much detail about people's appearances or the places they visit. Halfway through the book and it feels like most of it has been huge chunks of dialogue.

It only bothers me because it's something I struggle with in my own writing. How much detail and description should you give the reader? Scalzi doesn't reveal much about the main character John Perry except that he has brown hair. No description of what he looks like, how tall he is, etc. But is it really necessary to give all that? Is it worth it to give an entire paragraph describing what a character is wearing? I find it depends on the character. Like, if I'm writing Inara, she'll notice what someone is wearing because it's in her character, but if it's someone else or something original, it becomes boring. It's always hard to find that balance.

So it lack of description: lazy writing or effective writing?

Comments

[sl-podcast.livejournal.com]

I always say as long as it's in character. As long as you have some kind of purpose (even if it's an instinctual one).

[locker-monster.livejournal.com]

I agree with the description having purpose, but naming stuff in a room or over-doing on someone's looks always bothers me. Maybe it's because over description of a character usually means it's a Mary Sue. ;-)

But how about description in the narrative. Is it boring when authors going into detail about the weather? One author I like, he does that.

[sl-podcast.livejournal.com]

Agatha Christie... describes things to death, but I love her novels. I guess it just depends on how well your story is and what the purpose is. Her novels are mysteries in the past in England. So she deals with culture and rich people and the lifestyle of those times. It works (and I can skim if she bores me too much).

I think people today really under-describe things. I want to be able to see/hear/touch what they are, but the mindset is to be "your interpretation". So who knows.

[locker-monster.livejournal.com]

Huh, my dad's got a bunch of Agatha Christies hanging out on his bookshelf. I should check them out and see what you mean.

Under-describing is the thing bugging me the most about Old Man's War. The characters are just names; I've got no clue what they look like. It's hard to care about them when you can't picture them doing any of the things the author is writing about.

[sl-podcast.livejournal.com]

Yep, Agatha Christie is awesome... but I'm a huge mystery buff.


If you're not going to describe as an author at least give your characters distinctive voices to follow.