Is it OK to add description just because a chapter has none?

Question

I am trying to write without description, only narrating the perceptions of my protagonist, both external (what happens) and internal (what she thinks). I want to avoid all those explanations that are obviously only added for the benefit of the reader but wouldn't be part of the protagonist's actual experience.

Sometimes I feel as if my characters and events are "floating in space"; as if they are appearing unrelated and meaningless to a reader, who has yet to read far enough to understand the underlying plot.

I am uncertain whether or not I should add in some description to connect the "free-floating" bits.

Here is an example from my own writing to illustrate what I'm talking about. The original, without description:

So how did this animal suicide thing start? Ironically, it began the night I decided to die. But why? I had good health, friends and family who cared about me, plus I'd just been admitted into university.

The only thing we know is that it's nighttime and the main character is in her apartment, searching stuff on the Internet.

I felt this was not enough to provide context and meaning for the reader, so I added some description:

So how did this animal suicide thing start? Ironically, it began the night I decided to die. That's right: I locked myself in my apartment, closed the blinds, and, veiled in the darkness, planned how to end with my life. But why? I had good health, friends and family who cared about me, plus I'd just been admitted into university.

Is doing this justifiable? Did I improve the passage with the extra description or just added unnecessary clutter?

Answer 1

The first thing you should ask yourself is whether or not the additional description helps to further the story. If it helps the reader get a better sense of the setting or mood of the scene, then you should consider adding it. However, if you are only adding it to increase the amount of content, then definitely don't do it.

Your second example does do a slightly better job of establishing the narrator's mood, as well as the general setting. I'm not sure I'd go with those exact words, but I think that this scene would benefit from the information. It does a better job of showing how the narrator is feeling than just telling.

Answer 2

It's a balance. When I read the first version, it just barely verges on being "too sensational", but it works. The second version offers an improvement of sorts, but phrases like "That's right" which acknowledge how sensational/confusingly disparate the events are, instead of just letting the reader realize that for herself, are deleterious.

I.e.: know how disparate is too disparate, and don't write anything that comments on how disparate it is. Know your reader and her limits—to give you an idea, the first version you posted seems fine—and then trust her to follow you through.

Have you seen Tarantino's movies? Resivoir Dogs and Pulp Fiction are both fairly broken-up—they depend on it—but it works. Knowing that limit is probably something you get from reading your story and having others read it.

Minor editing suggestion: "plus" results in a kind of pseudo run-on. Using "and" would be better, in my opinion.