Writing Passionates discussion

27 views
Reviews & Critiques > Older books

Comments Showing 1-3 of 3 (3 new)    post a comment »
dateDown arrow    newest »

message 1: by Hope (new)

 Hope Some things I've noticed about older books like Wuthering Heights and such is that they are very good at describing the way that places look but they don't describe very well how the characters look. It is harder to get a picture in your head when there isn't much information about the picture. Does anyone agree?


message 2: by Veronica, What the neck!? (new)

Veronica (v_a_b) | 2889 comments Mod
Well, I don't usually describe how my characters look, because I don't even know. I don't really describe places either... It's kinda like, "city" or "small town" or "the middle of the woods."

I prefer to focus on the plot and how the characters react to things that other characters do (that was a bit redundant, sorry) and how they feel. See, you have to show/expalain how a character feels, because the reader can't fill in the blanks as easily. However, any reader with a vivid imagination can picture a character or a setting. Although not everybody will see the same thing, it usually doesn't matter, because it isn't particularly relevant to the plot. I mean, how important is it that everyone knows the exact shade of green of the eyes of your character? Or whether they have curly or straight hair, or even the color of said hair (although there are exceptions. If your character has blue hair, that's important, because it says something about their character, presuming they're human, of course.)


message 3: by Kritika (new)

Kritika (spidersilksnowflakes) I agree that older books have a lot of description on how places look, and even more on what the society is like at the time. But some of them do have character descriptions thrown in. I usually don't care so much for physical descriptions. I might imagine a character to have straight brown hair and gray eyes, for example, and even if the author writes about their abundant golden curls, I would still imagine the character my way.

Your question reminded me of another one that I found interesting. A lot of "classic" or "older" books are just well-loved and well-read because of their status as a classic; some really are great, but others, not so much. What do you think makes some books considered "classic"?


back to top