Is it Wrong to Expect Readers to be Active Participants in the Story?

Happy Thursday! Today, we're gonna talk about description, how it might impact the reader, and what authors might or might not expect from the consumer. Ready? Grab your coffee or tea, and let's get going!

So, I'm on the phone yesterday with an author friend of mine, and we got into talking about what we expect from our readers. Both of us agreed that we write with the assumption that the person picking up the book has a brain and understands the basics of the world they live in.

For example: If you say someone walks into a bedroom, do you need to write out to the reader that there's a bed, or is that something you can expect them to infer by telling them it's a bedroom?

Several writers will go into great detail about the room's furniture, but those machinations are usually reserved for the times that it matters, right? Say, if there's something "off" about the decor, or if the bed is an antique and should be admired for a moment. Even if the scene calls for a description to tell the reader it's a male's room or a sex cave, that's okay. But if the character is just walking into a bedroom, is it really necessary to bog the reader down with minute details right off the bat?

Here are some other ways to work those details into the story without having an information dump--again, unless the character is actively admiring, or scrutinizing, the decor:

• As the person is active in the room, they run their hands over things like the brocade on the chaise lounge.
• When they tell someone else to sit, it could be noted they made the choice of where to place the person based on potential comfort level.
• If the character lies on the bed naked, the satin sheets could feel cool on the skin.
• While they're being made to wait, they can then notice one thing about the room and scrutinize it to give their brain a distraction.

There are several ways of describing a room's contents without going into infodump mode, as you can see above. Unless you're actively trying to slow the story down, is it really necessary to tell the reader everything that's in a common room (bedroom, bathroom, living room, kitchen, etc...)?

I think, perhaps, we should give our readers a little credit and assume they have brains in their heads. If I read that someone is sitting at the bar in the kitchen, I have a pretty good idea of what that room will look like.

I've gone into description and when it's useful in this post, and I went into how to paint the scene in this post. If you're looking to heighten tension with description, here's a post I wrote a while back that breaks it down (this post also compares showing and telling).

What do you think? Do you expect a more active participation from your readers, or do you spoon feed them all the things?

Well, that's all for today, folks! Until next time, WRITE ON!

Jo

Painting with Words

Happy Wednesday, everyone! Today, I'm gonna be talking about art. Not with colors on canvas, but with words on paper. I know you've all heard me go on and on about too much description. Well, today I'm gonna talk about imagery. You can still give great description without going into minute details. Wanna know how? Grab your pens and notebooks and let's get going!

Look at the image above. See how it's all over the place? What works for art, doesn't necessarily work for a book. You could write long passages about the image, but what will your reader see in their mind? How do you describe something so chaotic so the person devouring your text gets a good idea of what the scene looks like? You don't. They can decide for themselves. I bet you're scratching your head, huh? Keep reading!

Let's go for an example or two, shall we?

Using description:
On white canvas that covered an entire 8'x14' wall, splatters and thin lines of black, pink, magenta, yellow, orange, green, purple, blue, brown, peach, teal, cerulean, hunter, and ocher overlapped. In the top left corner, pink, hunter, and magenta were deeply concentrated, set off by large spatters of black. In the center, only thin lines were present, drawing the eye in and allowing for a central concentration of the viewer's mind.

Now, I took an art class (okay, I took many art classes) in college, and that's what they want you to write when you're describing a painting. Note that word: "describe."

If I came across a passage like this in a book, I'd become bored as the writer went into every detail of the scenery. Did you read every color word? Probably not. Rather than tell your reader what to see, leave it to their imagination. Books are good at activating that little node in the back of your brain that paints its own pictures. Let's try again.

Using imagery:
It was a riot of every color in the rainbow covering the whole wall. Colors danced together in thick and thin lines, overlapping like freshly fallen leaves on a snowy lawn. I became lost in the chaos of it all as I tried to ascertain what the empty space in the middle was trying to tell me. Reminiscent of a Pollock painting on steroids, it drew me in and left me breathless.

Now, your reader's brain is activated. They paint the image in their head as they read. You aren't telling them what to see, you're letting them decide for themselves. Is it exactly what you see? Probably not. But, that's what's beautiful about it.

Paint vivid pictures with strong verbiage and allow the reader to feel the scene, rather than just be a bored onlooker.

• Riot
• Chaos
• Reminiscent
• Breathless

Those are all words that make the second passage much stronger than the first. Needless to say, I got fussed at a lot in design school for my creative briefs. I would launch into something like the second passage and not be succinct enough. They wanted straight and to the point. Blah. Bland. Phooey!

Let's not be bland. How about we strive to be artists of a different kind: Authors.

What about you? What do you prefer when reading?

Well, that's all for today, folks! Until next time, WRITE ON!

Jo