What Blows Away
Blood spatter was artfully arranged.
This is the first line from my first Billie Quinn book. And readers come to discover that the eccentric Lewis LeBarge, Billie's boss, keeps crime scene photos and frames them as art. He also has a pet tarantula that he has a habit of losing. And he has a brains-in-formaldehyde collection. And posters of zombie films. But you find all that out later. For now, on the first page, it's enough to know about his crime scene art.
I was in a writers' group once with someone who insisted on starting her books with a long paragraph of scene setting down to wallpaper choices--none of which was important to the storyline. I've edited some books that went along with this type of scene setting--long descriptions with minute detail. I tend to not write from that camp. But you need to set the scene, right? So how?
With a nod yet again to a certain JVZ from my writers' group, I've learned to ruthlessly cut. But I also wasn't a very "wordy" gal to begin with. And when it comes to scene setting, I often put in nothing. It's usually the one thing I have to add to my second draft. In fact, dialogue--solid. Characterization--got that down. Setting the scene? Not so much.
But what I've come to conclude is scene setting is only important for what it shows. That's it. Scene setting should advance your story. That's ALL it's there for. Think about the movies. Two characters are screaming at each other in a confrontation. Is the camera panning the room letting us see the chintz-covered chairs? Not likely.
Thus when I set a scene, I think only of what it says about character. In my Billie Quinn books, Lewis LeBarge has blood spatter pictures. Ava and Tom in The Roofer . . . have ONE painting on the wall that has emotional significance to them--and a set of bookshelves, which, if you've read the book, you know the story behind THOSE. When she has to go on the run at the end of the book, she takes a SINGLE photograph in a frame.
I lived through four hurricanes before I left South Florida. In one, I had 11 extra people sleeping in my house, all of us hiding behind metal hurricane shutters, with no power, and the howling of the wind ripping palm trees up. When a hurricane comes, you bottom line your life pretty f*cking quick. What are the things that could fit in a suitcase that I would be devastated if I lost? For me, it was all about kids' photos and the little drawings they made me. A picture of my grandmother I can't replace. My furniture is nice. But I don't give a shit about any of it. It's the pieces of my heart I couldn't bear to lose.
THAT'S how I set a scene. What tells you what you need to know about the character who inhabits that room or office? Even if it's barren and cold and belongs to the villain--you need to know that. Other than that . . . most of it can be blown away by the hurricane. It doesn't matter and you're just bogging down your scene.
Right now, I'm looking around my office as I type this. It's cluttered with pieces of my heart. If I had to leave in five minutes, I'm taking the picture of my grandma in the NY Mets shirt I bought her, the picture of my grandma that she signed to her sweetheart (my grandfather), the cookie jar that was my grandmother's (sensing a theme here?), the picture of my dad when he was 6 or 7, as many loose photos as would fit in a gallon zip-lock bag. My kids' files (they have their artwork and cards they made me). That's it. That's all you need to know about me.
Thoughts?
17 comments:
Scene setting is my weakest thing too. I always have to go back in later and add stuff, because I basically have a lot of dialogue and action happening on a fairly blank canvas. I see it in my head but I just assume readers will be able to make up mental pictures too. And I've always found too much description really jarring because often someone's mind comes up with the pictures before the author gets around to describing what they're picturing. Then when the author's version doesn't match the reader's, it's jarring.
Hi Zoe:
I find a lot of description boring. I usually skip over it. I just figure when it's a whole paragraph or two of detail, it's like a big mental blah, blah, blah to me. As a person, I skipped grades in school, I generally read four or five books at once--I find myself IMPATIENT (thus rushing through school) and sometimes I write that way. So now I concentrate on finding those few items that are important to character.
E
Thank you for saying this! I get impatient with long-winded description, too. Anything more than the basics, and I skip it. I usually just rewrite it in my own head anyway so the characters look the way *I* picture them, as do the settings. Because of this, I, too, have to go back and add setting to my scenes, because it can get a little sparse otherwise. But, again, that's for a later draft. First I get down the basics--the dialogue, the emotions, the plot movements. The fancy stuff, the wallpaper, can come later.
Hi booklady:
I just think everything is just about character and plot development. Getting to know the heart of the book. So the scenes should support what's the emotional core. Those are the books I like myself, I guess.
E
I'm a scene-adder-later writer as well.
I too skip lots of description, just don't enjoy reading it, UNLESS it shares something about the character, thus adding to the story.
I "so" like the idea of culling for just the right (and few) descriptions that are important to the character.
Thanks, Erica. Great post!
Kathy
I like to zero in on "telling" details, ones that show elements of character. Also, I try to incorporate description into action as often as possible.
And sometimes it's fun to include a fairly long passage of description immediately before something shocking happens, juxtaposing the mundane with the extraordinary.
I don't like a lot of details because they bog down my imagination. For me, putting my own spin on the setting with minimal description is part of the fun in reading. Not to mention, I've read material where the writer gets so "flowery" with their descriptions that it feels like mire on the brain. I can't enjoy something like that.
Yeah. I have so little attention, lately, for books that start slowly. There are just so many books I want to read and so many things competing for my attention, that I just can't get into it.
Although, I do love when setting is nearly a character in the book. But I don't think that happens just because someone describes the wallpaper. :-)
Hi Kathy:
Yes. That's it for me. Culling for just the right one.
E
Hi Jude:
I tend not to incorporate into action--depends. But if action is from the hero's POV, for example, I feel like, if it's a fight scene, or a gunplay scene, like too much is going on for the character to take note of too much description.
All in the execution of course.
E
Hi Spy:
That's what I'm trying to do with a new wip. NYC is a character, too.
E
Hi marcia:
Me, too!
E
I'm not big on description, unless it means something. Just enough to ground the reader and give her a visual. I'm with the Elmore Leonard school about not writing parts that people skip.
That's a good point, Erica. If my hero is dodging a kick to the head, he might notice his opponent is wearing cowboy boots, but he's probably not going to care much if they're snakeskin or ostrich. :)
I was thinking more of sentences like this one, from James Lee Burke's Pegasus Descending:
"Then two men of a kind you never want to meet came through the front door, the taller one beckoning to the bartender, the shorter man scanning the tables, waiting for his eyes to adjust to the darkness of the bar's interior."
We get a visual of the men, the bartender, the tables, and the dark bar, without having to stop the action to describe any of it.
Edie:
I've quoted him before on the "skipping" parts, too! I love his thoughts on writing.
E
Erica,
I skip long description too. The only exception is when the description is really funny or just so engrossing I can't not read it. There are always exceptions to my "skim the description" rule. Only this year I can't skim it. I'm doing the 50 book challenge, and I feel like it's cheating if I don't read every single word. I can't say I read 50 books in a year if I'm skimming.
I'm wondering...what do you think about physical descriptions for main characters? For minor characters it can really add something, but I kind of feel like the reader tends to have their own image of the "hot hunky guy" and if what I describe is a turn off for them, I'm losing them.
Spy,
The book I'm writing, the house is a Character I'm just not sure if I'm pulling it off. I like for a book to get going and not meander and build up too much, but...by the same token, I HATE books that just start right in on the action without giving me a chance to know if I like the character enough to go on the journey with them. It feels a bit like a hostage situation. I think some build up is necessary.
Hi Zoe:
When I wrote Diary of a Blues Goddess, the house was a major character--they called it The Heartbreak Hotel, and the house's "ghosts" even slammed doors on occasion.
As for main character descriptions, I'm in the J.K. Rowling camp. I pick maybe two things, three tops, to identify my hero or heroine and let the reader fill in the rest. I try to pick SOMETHING distinctive. Like in the proposal I finished yesterday, my main female character has very pale, transluscnt skin and gold freckles, grey eyes. The male lead has greenish eyes and a horseshoe-shaped scar by his left eye. And he wears his hair long. That's about it.
E
Post a Comment