Tips and tricks to describe more

Question

I'm careful with the phrasing of this question as it is dangerously close to be opinion based. Everyone has their preference regarding the amount of description they expect to find in a work of fiction.

I tend to write with a first person narrator, as I find it more dynamic and more personal. However, I'm having a hard time (no matter the style I favor) to describe things lengthily. I tend to go from point A to point B in a very straightforward way, which provides only the essential information and does not add much to the narration.

That said, what tips and tricks one can use to force oneself to describe more, and in a more extensive way?

Answer 1

While I'm not the OP, I struggle with this, too. I've written a 500 line story with four or five lines that were not exclusively dialog or blank. I'm autistic and I imagine visual elements visually, rather than in words. It took me decades to realize that isn't something that most people do. I've been working on writing up this very question for a few days, so thank you, Nyakouai, for beating me to it.

I have some rules I try to stick to and I try some techniques as well. I don't know how well these are overall, but it seems to work better for me than nothing. I am excluding some of my dialog limiting rules from this, as this question doesn't state that the issue is excessive dialog. I would of course welcome constructive criticism on these points. There are probably issues here. But this is what I have, so I'm using it as a starting point.

1. Never leave a multi-line quote stand unadorned. Someone is saying it. Who are they? What tone of voice are they using? (This is particularly difficult for me, because I often miss tones.) Are they doing anything as they are talking?

2. Never pass dialog back and forth between two characters without mentioning who is saying what for more than half a page. It may be helpful to limit your screen size to better be able to judge this distance.

3. Periodically look back at what has been written so far, especially whenever I've gotten to the point of a scene change. Has it been explained why the scene change has happened? Have the characters performed any actions that haven't been stated? Most of the time, semi-involuntary actions like breathing and swallowing go without mention, but if there is a significant change to them, that's important to mention.

4. There must be action before dialog. This action doesn't need to be a lot; it could just be somebody preparing to speak. But before the first double quote of the section, the identity of the first speaker must be firmly established. Since you've only said you need to describe more, you may not need this rule, but my characters talk a lot. I tend to be frustrated in conversations, especially if there's more than one other person in the conversation, and it tends to come out in my characters.

5. When actions happen during dialog, sentence boundaries are a good place to break to describe it. Longer descriptions can often wait until the current speaker finishes speaking. If someone is speaking when an object comes out that might need to be described, it may make sense for them to have a pause in speech to examine it. You can describe as much as you want between conversations or action scenes, and should at least consider whether there is anything that could bear describing that hasn't been described.

6. Fight scenes or other high action do not need to describe as much if the characters in the scene would be distracted from the things you might describe. This is ok, they're busy. However, next rule:

7. Main characters are not allowed to run into the void. You must describe where they are going before the characters actually arrive, unless they're teleporting. (Teleporting is something that happens in a small portion of my stories.) However, even when teleporting, they either need to be going to a previously described place, or they must not be aware of where they're teleporting to. If a character teleports to an unknown location, describing their new location must happen next if they have any senses active (that is, if they're unconscious, you get a freebie here.)

8. Similarly, the main character in a scene can't interact with anything non-standard in that scene without having at least some minimal description of it. (Why/how is it non-standard?)

9. Use an editor that autosaves files to a temporary name. You're not allowed to save the file to its proper name without reviewing to make sure there's enough description, or there are at least tags to remind you to put descriptions in places later. On writing this one down, I realize I haven't been following it enough lately. Sigh.

---

There's a book called The Wind in the Willows. It was written to be a children's bedtime story book. Unlike most books in this genre, it doesn't have a lot of pictures, instead it tries to describe with words. It was adapted into a TV series that ran from 1984 to 1990 which started off each episode with a paragraph or two of descriptive narration. For those episodes which were directly adapted from Kenneth Grahame's written works, this narration was at least sometimes directly from the books.

The technique I've tried that seems to work best for me is to start each chapter with one to two full paragraphs establishing the scene, and imagine that text being spoken aloud by Ian Carmichael (the narrator from that series). In that opening, there's no action or dialog allowed. If there's a significant change of scene within a chapter (this is rare for my stories, as I tend to make significant scene changes be chapter breaks), there may be another one to two paragraphs of required description.

I'm not recommending that one goes to the extent of this book. I'm figuring, if you're like me, there's no risk of that happening. I am instead more trying to push you to taking note of books which do describe things. I'm also not necessarily saying that you would have to use this book as a reference. You can take any book that you think is described really well and use it instead, and you can use any narrator's voice that works for you.

I think Reading Rainbow is probably another good source for examples of well read stories that describe things well, although I'm not as familiar with it as I'd like. I was just over the target demographic age when I first heard about it, and I don't have kids. I do think LeVar Burton has an excellent reading voice.

There are undoubtedly fine narrators in any language; I'm just sticking with people who narrate in English because I'm unfortunately monolinguistic.

--

Another technique is to imagine you're telling the story to a three year old. Like many three year olds, this child's favorite question is, "Why?" You're not allowed to just say "because". The child's next favorite question is, "What does that look like?"

--

My final technique is to imagine that after you finish writing this, somebody is going to turn it into a film. And they're going to depict everything that you haven't described in the worst way imaginable. This technique never works for me; the thought of my work actually getting that level of recognition is just too funny to me. I'm just including it because I remember someone having suggested it to me at one point.

Answer 2

Do you actually need to write longer narratives?

A sparse writing style can often work well. Here, every word is important. You must carefully choose what you say and how you say it because you have fewer words to carry the meaning.

Other times, being too sparse can keep the reader from understanding or immersing her/himself into your story.

Find readers and ask them to describe your story.

A critique group can be invaluable here. If one isn't available, ask a teacher or friends/family who will be completely honest with you. You don't want people who will say "it's great." Just like with writing, sometimes you can be too sparse with feedback.

Don't ask them if it was okay or if they understood it. Ask them to describe it. Ask what they think happened in the scene or what they think the motivations of the characters were.

Even if your writing is spot-on perfect, you'll get readers with different interpretations of it. That's okay. What you want to watch out for is when readers are confused or simply can't figure out what's happening.

Instead of trying to describe more in general, focus on the areas your readers tell you aren't working.

It's very hard to make yourself change something when you think it's already okay. But if a couple readers tell you a part was problematic, you can focus on that. I find that much easier than a general "describe more things."

For example, if your readers get that it's a dismal rainy day but they are confused by why your character went to her ex's house, you don't want to waste your time beefing up descriptions of the weather.

Or maybe your readers have no problem understanding your brief explanations of your character discovering that her ex cut managed to cut off her internet and phone service and why she chose to confront him in person, but they'd like to see more about her reactions to the inside of his house, about whether he's recreated their old home together or left her and her influences behind (which all helps her understand why he pulled that dirty trick).

Once you get feedback a few times for multiple problem points in your work, you'll start to anticipate them. You likely don't want to make yourself go on more about every aspect of a scene.

Choosing few words carefully is a fine approach. The trick is not how to write more, but how to know which parts need more attention.

Answer 3

Coming from a very short, scene and dialogue oriented style, I struggle with this too. I'd argue that sometimes you want brevity and a few quick lines of dialog between two characters are all that is needed to carry the plot forward.

But since managing the pace of a story is a whole other can of worms, I'd just leave her some suggestions to add more meat to your descriptions; at least, the same things I follow when I'm stuck in your situation.

Sensory information

this is probably an advice heard from Brandon Sanderson (either from Writing Excuses or his video lessons on youtube). The point being, most human beings have five senses. We are always subconsciously aware of what is happening around us thanks to those five "channels", but as writers, we often forget less "direct" senses like smell, touch and taste. Hearing gets kinda a bad treatment too, since it mostly comes in handy where's dialogue to be heard. But dialogue doens't happen in silence - silence, truth to be told, is a rare commodity.

So, sensory data can be used to convey the idea of a place or of a situation. From a first person POV, this can be easily done (since you're describing what your character is feeling directly).

To wrap it up, if you want to add more beef to your descriptions, include sensorial data from all the senses. It works and it adds immersion.

Describing behaviour

As above. When two people speak, a lot of the communication travels in a non verbal level. Everything we do carry information - from our body stance to the tone of our voice, from where we are glancing at to what we are doing with our hands or feet. This is, more or less, a corollary of the infamous "show don't tell rule". Often, a line of dialogue will look like this:

"I don't want you to leave" Martha said, nervously.

but if you're going for a more lenghty description, it's more rewarding to show the reader that she's nervous through her behaviour, rather than just shorthanding emotions like that. Consider:

"I don't want you to leave", Martha said in a quiet, almost whispered tone, as her gaze raced to the tips of her shoes. He noticed she was fidgeting with the lower end of her shirt. Her white, long fingers were tugging the cloth so harshly that it seemed on the verge of being tore apart.

Of course don't take my extract as an example of superb writing, since I'm pretty sure it's not, but it is an example of showing, in a way. The audience knows what a nervous person will look and sound like: if you show a character acting that way, they will make the connection. And even possibly bad, possibly cliché descriptions like mine are somewhat more informative than a single adjective or adverb.

Write first, return later

This is something I often do when I'm not in the mood for lenghty descriptions or well crafted sensorial hints. Sometimes, it's perfectly fine to drive the story forward and to just zip from point A to point B. Learn to write it down even if you know it's not the best you could write.

One of the most useful things I've learned nowadays is that I don't have to write it perfectly the first time. If something doesn't feel right as you write it, but don't know how to fix it, it's way better to avoid getting stuck and go on. Just take a note and fix it later.

Personally I mark in yellow on my word file everything that feels odd or needs more work. This way, when my eyes scroll down the page, I see those yellow stains and I'm inclined to go back and see what the problem was (you could always leave a comment also, if need be). Those days when I don't have the strenght to write forward, I can always fix those yellow marks, and it's somewhat rewarding.

This is somewhat akin to editing, of course, except that you don't have to do it on your second draft. Leaving marks and notes as you go forward will help the revision process later, however you do it. This, of course, is more a general advice, but I think it's relevant as you can always write quick dialogues iff you're in the mood for it and work on expanding later.

Answer 4

This is also my problem. The trick to solving it is to understand WHY description is necessary. You're not just checking a box or jumping through a hoop. Description puts the reader inside the perspective of the character, giving a vital context for the dialog and the plot. The best descriptions engage all of your senses, thus giving a fully immersive experience.

All your description should do double or triple duty. It should describe the setting, so the reader can picture being there, but it should also illuminate the POV character's personality and mood. "The trees were gentle maidens, their arms stretched out in a warm embrace..." versus "The trees were stern soldiers, guarding the path..." versus "The trees towered over the pathway, threatening and dark..." Those are three different descriptions of a walk in a forest, but they also tell you information about the POV character and how she is feeling at the time. Description can additionally tell "mini-stories" that illuminate the main plot. For example, the "gentle maidens" version might be for a love story, the "stern soldiers" version for an action adventure, and the "threatening" version for a horror story.

If your first instinct is to skip over all the descriptions, you might be unobservant. We tend to write more and better about the things that we love and that fascinate us. Luckily there are ways to make up for this. Spend some time observing the things around you, and coming up with creative ways to describe them. Picture how the descriptions would change if you were a different person, or in a different mood. Once you understand the role descriptions play, they'll become more fun and easier to write. (With all that said, however, you might also consider that your talents might best be suited to another form: plays or screenplays, which are mostly plot and dialogue.)