• Character Description

    From Matthew Graybosch@21:1/5 to Capuchin on Tue Feb 26 12:27:57 2019
    On Tue, 18 Sep 2018 14:07:57 -0500
    Capuchin <NoReplies@jymes.com> wrote:

    My preferred method is no physical descriptions. It always backfires.
    If I try to make a character sexy by saying she's a tall, well-endowed blonde, the readers will all have a fetish for bald dwarves with
    boyish figures.

    I've found that the more specific one gets about a character's physical appearance, the harder it gets for readers to identify with them. But
    you can't please everybody, and all you can really do about it is
    allude to "Death of the Author" and say, "This was how *I* saw the
    character."

    --
    Matthew Graybosch
    https://matthewgraybosch.com
    gopher://asgartech.com

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Dorothy J Heydt@21:1/5 to howdy@matthewgraybosch.com on Tue Feb 26 19:46:56 2019
    In article <20190226122757.129ec40a@asgartech.com>,
    Matthew Graybosch <howdy@matthewgraybosch.com> wrote:
    On Tue, 18 Sep 2018 14:07:57 -0500
    Capuchin <NoReplies@jymes.com> wrote:

    My preferred method is no physical descriptions. It always backfires.
    If I try to make a character sexy by saying she's a tall, well-endowed
    blonde, the readers will all have a fetish for bald dwarves with
    boyish figures.

    I've found that the more specific one gets about a character's physical >appearance, the harder it gets for readers to identify with them. But
    you can't please everybody, and all you can really do about it is
    allude to "Death of the Author" and say, "This was how *I* saw the >character."

    I'll repeat the old tale about Isaac Asimov's work, in the
    off-chance that some may not know it.

    Asimov was never very much into character description, at least
    not about physical appearance. (The one character I can remember
    of his that did get throughly described was the Mule, and he was
    taken from life.) Somebody chided him about that once, and in
    response he turned to all the women in the publisher's office
    where the question was asked, and inquired of them, "What does
    [name of character] look like?"

    Each woman described herself.

    --
    Dorothy J. Heydt
    Vallejo, California
    djheydt at gmail dot com
    www.kithrup.com/~djheydt/

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Matthew Graybosch@21:1/5 to Dorothy J Heydt on Tue Feb 26 15:16:54 2019
    On Tue, 26 Feb 2019 19:46:56 GMT
    djheydt@kithrup.com (Dorothy J Heydt) wrote:

    I'll repeat the old tale about Isaac Asimov's work, in the
    off-chance that some may not know it.

    I don't think I've seen it before. Thanks for sharing it.

    Each woman described herself.

    I wonder if Asimov tried the same experiment with a male character on a
    group of men.

    --
    Matthew Graybosch
    https://matthewgraybosch.com
    gopher://asgartech.com

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Dorothy J Heydt@21:1/5 to howdy@matthewgraybosch.com on Tue Feb 26 22:16:42 2019
    In article <20190226151654.53c6de06@asgartech.com>,
    Matthew Graybosch <howdy@matthewgraybosch.com> wrote:
    On Tue, 26 Feb 2019 19:46:56 GMT
    djheydt@kithrup.com (Dorothy J Heydt) wrote:

    I'll repeat the old tale about Isaac Asimov's work, in the
    off-chance that some may not know it.

    I don't think I've seen it before. Thanks for sharing it.

    Each woman described herself.

    I wonder if Asimov tried the same experiment with a male character on a
    group of men.

    If he did, he never recorded it in his copious autobiography, and
    we can't ask him now.

    --
    Dorothy J. Heydt
    Vallejo, California
    djheydt at gmail dot com
    www.kithrup.com/~djheydt/

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)@21:1/5 to Matthew Graybosch on Tue Feb 26 20:37:20 2019
    On 2/26/19 12:27 PM, Matthew Graybosch wrote:
    On Tue, 18 Sep 2018 14:07:57 -0500
    Capuchin <NoReplies@jymes.com> wrote:

    My preferred method is no physical descriptions. It always backfires.
    If I try to make a character sexy by saying she's a tall, well-endowed
    blonde, the readers will all have a fetish for bald dwarves with
    boyish figures.

    I've found that the more specific one gets about a character's physical appearance, the harder it gets for readers to identify with them. But
    you can't please everybody, and all you can really do about it is
    allude to "Death of the Author" and say, "This was how *I* saw the character."



    I describe them because people actually have bodies and they look a certain way, unless they're Organians or Arisians or something like
    that, so I know what they look like and it's important for me to keep
    that in mind. Their appearance affects how people react; you don't
    respond the same to a 4'1" lavender haired boy that you do to a 6'6"
    woman in fancy plate armor with a gigantic sword.


    --
    Sea Wasp
    /^\
    ;;;
    Website: http://www.grandcentralarena.com Blog:
    http://seawasp.dreamwidth.org

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Brian P.@21:1/5 to Matthew Graybosch on Thu Feb 28 17:38:16 2019
    On Tuesday, February 26, 2019 at 2:16:55 PM UTC-6, Matthew Graybosch wrote:
    On Tue, 26 Feb 2019 19:46:56 GMT
    djheydt@xxx.com (Dorothy J Heydt) wrote:

    I'll repeat the old tale about Isaac Asimov's work, in the
    off-chance that some may not know it.

    I don't think I've seen it before. Thanks for sharing it.

    Each woman described herself.

    I wonder if Asimov tried the same experiment with a male character on a
    group of men.

    --
    Matthew Graybosch
    https://matthewgraybosch.com
    gopher://asgartech.com

    He would have an enormous schwanschtucker.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Anson Carmichael@21:1/5 to Matthew Graybosch on Fri Mar 1 02:05:43 2019
    Matthew Graybosch wrote:
    On Tue, 18 Sep 2018 14:07:57 -0500
    Capuchin <NoReplies@jymes.com> wrote:

    My preferred method is no physical descriptions. It always backfires.
    If I try to make a character sexy by saying she's a tall, well-endowed
    blonde, the readers will all have a fetish for bald dwarves with
    boyish figures.

    I've found that the more specific one gets about a character's physical appearance, the harder it gets for readers to identify with them. But
    you can't please everybody, and all you can really do about it is
    allude to "Death of the Author" and say, "This was how *I* saw the character."


    Has anyone here read "How Fiction Works"? The title is a bit self-explanatory, but there was a chapter where it was noted that a good way to write a character description is by creating a sentence or two that captures the character's most important
    qualities. An example given was something along the lines of "He walked with the demeanor of a man who always first through a door." or something along those lines. It doesn't overburden the reader with details, but also gives the reader the cues needed
    to imagine a character according to the reader's life experience. Don't know if that resonates in any way with the conversation, but it seemed a relevant point...

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Brian P.@21:1/5 to All on Thu Feb 28 17:39:29 2019
    On Tuesday, February 26, 2019 at 7:37:23 PM UTC-6, Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor) wrote:
    you don't
    respond the same to a 4'1" lavender haired boy that you do to a 6'6"
    woman in fancy plate armor with a gigantic sword.


    Laughter is a universal language.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Dorothy J Heydt@21:1/5 to noemailexists@example.com on Fri Mar 1 04:04:37 2019
    In article <q5a41m$1ia1$1@gioia.aioe.org>,
    Anson Carmichael <noemailexists@example.com> wrote:
    Matthew Graybosch wrote:
    On Tue, 18 Sep 2018 14:07:57 -0500
    Capuchin <NoReplies@jymes.com> wrote:

    My preferred method is no physical descriptions. It always backfires.
    If I try to make a character sexy by saying she's a tall, well-endowed
    blonde, the readers will all have a fetish for bald dwarves with
    boyish figures.

    I've found that the more specific one gets about a character's physical
    appearance, the harder it gets for readers to identify with them. But
    you can't please everybody, and all you can really do about it is
    allude to "Death of the Author" and say, "This was how *I* saw the
    character."


    Has anyone here read "How Fiction Works"? The title is a bit >self-explanatory, but there was a chapter where it was noted that a good
    way to write a character description is by creating a sentence or two
    that captures the character's most important qualities. An example given
    was something along the lines of "He walked with the demeanor of a man
    who always first through a door." or something along those lines. It
    doesn't overburden the reader with details, but also gives the reader
    the cues needed to imagine a character according to the reader's life >experience. Don't know if that resonates in any way with the
    conversation, but it seemed a relevant point...

    I tend to do one or two sentences describing a character's
    appearance at the moment s/he makes an appearance, preferably
    as seen by another character (or the camera's eye). I also tend
    to begin a story with what filmmakers call an "establishing
    shot," three or four sentences describing the scene in which the
    characters appear. YMMV.

    --
    Dorothy J. Heydt
    Vallejo, California
    djheydt at gmail dot com
    www.kithrup.com/~djheydt/

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Dorothy J Heydt@21:1/5 to Brian P. on Fri Mar 1 04:00:27 2019
    In article <6dff89c6-15e4-4147-8c70-5ee1fea37cec@googlegroups.com>,
    Brian P. <bobthrollop@gmail.com> wrote:
    On Tuesday, February 26, 2019 at 2:16:55 PM UTC-6, Matthew Graybosch wrote:
    On Tue, 26 Feb 2019 19:46:56 GMT
    djheydt@xxx.com (Dorothy J Heydt) wrote:

    I'll repeat the old tale about Isaac Asimov's work, in the
    off-chance that some may not know it.

    I don't think I've seen it before. Thanks for sharing it.

    Each woman described herself.

    I wonder if Asimov tried the same experiment with a male character on a
    group of men.

    He would have an enormous schwanschtucker.

    Now, I quit reading Asimov when he started doing megamergers of
    all his universes. But I don't *think* he was into describing
    people's naughty bits. I could be wrong.

    --
    Dorothy J. Heydt
    Vallejo, California
    djheydt at gmail dot com
    www.kithrup.com/~djheydt/

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)@21:1/5 to Brian P. on Fri Mar 1 00:09:33 2019
    On 2/28/19 8:39 PM, Brian P. wrote:
    On Tuesday, February 26, 2019 at 7:37:23 PM UTC-6, Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor) wrote:
    you don't
    respond the same to a 4'1" lavender haired boy that you do to a 6'6"
    woman in fancy plate armor with a gigantic sword.


    Laughter is a universal language.


    The 4'1" lavender-haired boy is a professional bodyguard and very, very good at it. Laughing at him is fine; he knows you've underestimated him.


    --
    Sea Wasp
    /^\
    ;;;
    Website: http://www.grandcentralarena.com Blog:
    http://seawasp.dreamwidth.org

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)