I tend to hop over a lot of description (as in, completely not doing it), in most of my stories. I've found that if I write in first-person, description comes much better. But any other way, I don't have as much description as I want (or as it might need). Maybe because I'm eager to start writing a specific part, or I just don't think about it (I think it's both). But any suggestions would be great.

I think it has a lot to do with writing styles. You may not put a lot of detail in your writings, but with my writing style, I put a decent amount in. Some people believe I put too much detail in but I'm a very visual, imaginative person, and I like to know what the author is seeing. I like to know character descriptions and descriptions of the land. I usually don't put a whole lot of detail in landscaping unless it has something significant to the story. I've got to say, I skimmed over quite a bit in The Fellowship of the Ring because Tolkien went on and on about the landscape, in my opnion.

So yes, in a roundabout way of saying it, I think it's just the individual's writing style.

Hi Zoey,
I don't get a lot of posting in around the forum...I tend to skim posts a few times a week, but life keeps me from chiming in very often. But I'm a sucker for talking shop about writing, so I'm going to see what I can come up with here.

As for description, there are varying schools of thought. Some writers (e.g. Stephen King...while I don't read his work, I've heard this around many forums) who advocate almost a complete lack of description. Leave it to the reader, these authors say.

I, personally, don't think this is a great policy when we're talking fantasy. A big element of the appeal of fantasy is that it draws the reader into a sense of wonder...it transports him to a time and place unlike his own. How can an author accomplish this without offering some description of what this other world is like? While I don't think you need to do a three page description of the terrain, as did Tolkien in much of LotR, I do think you need to call out the details that are pertinent to your point of view character.

Some folks like to establish the look of the entire environment, giving the reader what some would call the "establishing shot," to borrow a film term. Others like to pepper in the appearance of the setting as your character interacts with it, which is more the technique I like to employ. (Sometimes I do and establishing shot, but more times than not, readers start to skim if that gets too long. It's not just you.)

I recommend hunting down pictures that look a bit like what you are trying to describe. That will give you a jumping off point, and then you can embellish the real-world image with elements that make it particular to your story world. But if you feel you are weak in the department of description, don't try to pull it all out of your head. It's not something you can just decide to be better at. The tool of having a starting point will help a lot, and keep you from describing every door as a heavy wooden one, or every landscape as a set of rolling hills dotted with oak trees.

Hopefully that helps a little.

Thank you for your replies! It helps a lot.

Beckyminor:
I like the idea of looking for real-life pictures to use to help describe things. I probably describe people and animals (more often made up animals) than landscape.

Is it OK to use both ways of describing? Using the establing shot and 'peppering' it in as you go along? Thinking back, I might have done both at one point or another in stories.

Calenmiriel
I think I kind of remember Tolkien's long desriptions, but I get your point, a lot of description can get tiring.

I'm the same way. I like to see descriptions of people (sometimes landscape), which is why I usually try to put in a description of characters early on.


What can I use to, when describing a mountain for example, so I won't use the same terms over and over?

I'd probably love what you write, Zoey! I tend to be one of those people who prefers not to have everything spelled out so that I can imagine most of it for myself.XD

However...if there are creatures in your story that don't appear on earth (there usually are in fantasy) or anything out of the ordinary, I'd say describe that first.

After that...I would say that if description flows well, use it to describe characters and such.

Maybe it's just my taste but long paragraphs of the scenery annoy me.

Yeah, too much description of scenery can tend to get a bit tiring.

There have been times when things are described for me, but my mind imagines something a little different. For one, it's the layout of a house, and my mind shifts doorways and furniture and such around so it fits what I imagine, but not quite to the book.

But I really enjoy rereading a book I like, and read things in it I probably didn't notice before. So every time I read it, my mind adds something 'new' to the description my mind took in.

OK... dunno if that was all relevant to the topic. My bad.

Gosh, I've been gone a while. And here I thought I would have some free time over the summer.

Anyway, to answer your question, I would say, "Yes." It's fine to use more than one technique in describing things, especially as you keep the pacing of the story in mind. The establishing shot technique is fine if you are not in a fast paced section of the story, but if you are escalating the pace, I'd use the peppering technique for a couple reasons. One, you don't want to bring the story momentum to a screeching halt so you can take the time to expound upon every spot on the underbelly of the vicious harwutzle bearing down on your hero, and two, your POV character probably wouldn't have the time to take in the details in a rushed moment. In the interest of having a strong voice when it comes to revealing your POV character, what you describe when is important.

So I'd say the two techniques apply to places, creatures, people and anything else you want your reader to get the feel for. And when you do write that description, don't forget other senses. The smell of some creatures is even more memorable than how they look! Or perhaps the creaking sound of a giant scorpion's massive exoskeleton is just the sensory experience you need. I'm sure you see what I mean. I better quit before I write a novella here.

Thanks for the advice. I love the harwutzle part.

I didn't know scorpions creaked. That's something to keep in mind.

I think I just got something important out of Beckyminor's post up there: that you should describe what the character sees.

I read an interesting article the other day in the Wall Street Journal on description. It was saying how we don't necessarily have to line out everything about the layout (i.e. the way the furniture is arranged, or every frame hanging on the wall) but you can cause your reader to visualize it by pointing out something that sort of symbolizes or characterizes the entire room (the shabby sofa with a pair of worn house shoes sitting next to it). That really helped me in choosing what to describe about the surroundings.
Plus, its a whole lot more interesting to describe (and read) one thing in detail vs. the chronology of a scene.

Some people are action-writers, some people are description-writers.

I've always been a describer.

Why? you might ask. I'm not really sure. It started several years ago, when I first started writing (I wrote Elsie fan-fics ). I enjoyed description - especially characters and places. Whenever I wrote, it was like magic appeared... making every detail stand out and allowing the reader to picture everything in her mind.

I'm going to try writing a blog article on this.

Yay! Blog articles!!!