Describing the undescribed.

[David Evil Overlord]

I've recently got my first book into a publishable state, and even got a publisher. The book should be available for preorder on the 19th of November, and fully on sale by the 28th.

Meaning it's too late to change anything.

There is a character, who was only ever meant to be a minor character. She's there to get Our Hero into a difficult situation one day, and that's it.

Now she's going to have a larger role.

In the first book, she had no description beyond being a high school teacher.

In the second book, she's described as: ...all lithe muscle and brass-framed glasses and dandelion-clock hair, and big clunky bracelets that looked like they could maybe probably stop bullets. She looked like her super hero name should be Athletic Nerd Woman.

One thing in this description (maybe more than one, eventually) is absolutely vital for the development of the character.

What I want to know is this - if the character had no physical description in the first book, and you got to the second book and read that, would you be okay with that?

 

[Jo Zebedee]

I'd be fine with it.

 

[David Evil Overlord]

Excellent!

 

[RX-79G]

She looked like her super hero name should be Athletic Nerd Woman.

I hate this part.

Why do you think describing her in the second book for the first time would be a conflict? I assume she has no description in the first because her appearance does not elicit a real impression on the characters, or she doesn't actually appear.

 

[David Evil Overlord]

She appears, she runs a class that goes badly wrong for Our Hero. No physical description, because it wasn't needed. Now, it is.

Our Hero lives in a world of super heroes, and she often thinks of people in terms of ridiculous super hero codenames, usually based on physical appearance, occupation, or behaviour. The first book had Hot Dog Man (a hot dog seller), Walrus Man (with huge white moustache), and Weasel Woman (a less-than-ethical lawyer).

However, this is the first rough draft, and that name may not survive the editing process.

 

[TheDustyZebra]

I've had to revise my estimate of what a character looks like many times, so I don't think it would bother me. I'd probably assume that I just wasn't paying proper attention in the first book, if I had any impression of her looks that didn't coincide with the second book's description.

I know I've mentioned it before, but one of the big ones that I flubbed was Malfoy, in the Harry Potter books. I pictured him as dark-haired, despite ample description, and when the movies came out I was mad. I went back to prove they'd messed it up, and found I just hadn't read that part properly. In your case, I'd probably go back and try to prove my brain was right and you'd messed it up, only to find that you hadn't said a word about it. So that's ok.

 

[David Evil Overlord]

Now I'll have to check and make sure I really didn't describe her.

 

[TheDustyZebra]

 

[LittleStar]

Yeah, I dont see a problem with it, DEO. My preference is for the description to be in the first installment, but if that's unavoidable then there isn't a big issue, if she wasn't part of the story no need to describe her... Though to get around it if it was bothering you, is it vital that she is the new character? Or could it be a completely new one?

 

[hopewrites]

Often in life someone who isn't memorable upon first impression becomes important later.

So for me it would depend on how the new description is dropped in. Hotdog Man created an impression, and so got a Name. This teacher did something Plot Driving, but not memorable enough to get a name, and now shows back up doing something Name worthy? Or enough plot takes place in her class for you to feel authorally bound to fit her in as part of the landscape?

 

[Vaz]

No problem with it, wouldn't bother me in the slightest.

 

[paranoid marvin]

If she was only mentioned briefly in the first book, then I wouldn't expect her to be described in detail - unless there was perhaps something very peculiar about her.

As for her description, I'd lose either 'maybe' or 'probably' (personally I'd stick with 'probably')

 

[David Evil Overlord]

Okay, thanks for the feedback everybody.

The teacher has a real name. It's used in the first book. It's also used in the second book. But Our Hero is giving her impression of what this teacher looks like, now that it actually matters.

 

[Juliana]

The teacher has a real name. It's used in the first book. It's also used in the second book. But Our Hero is giving her impression of what this teacher looks like, now that it actually matters.

In that case, I don't think it's a problem at all. We know it's the same person (by name). There was no reason to describe her, now there is.

 

[David Evil Overlord]

She only needs a description now because something in that description will be very important later on...

 

[hopewrites]

Fore hinting...

All good then.

 

[AnyaKimlin]

One thing in this description (maybe more than one, eventually) is absolutely vital for the development of the character.

What I want to know is this - if the character had no physical description in the first book, and you got to the second book and read that, would you be okay with that?

I don't know - is there enough of her in the first book for me to have formed my own clear picture of her before that? If so then yes it would bug me because I'd already have a view or I'd not really register your description.

 

[David Evil Overlord]

She runs on class, sport, and sets up what's supposed to be a boys-against-girls capture the flag game. Unfortunately, since everyone else is upset at Our Hero, it becomes a game of everyone-else-against-Our-Hero.

It was supposed to be this teacher's only appearance, so no description was really needed. Now she's going to play a much bigger role in the future story arc.

And the best way to hide the one vital fact is in a detailed description including several things that might be important.

 

[Mad Alice]

claw back your book and insert part of the description?

 

[Mad Alice]

too much gloom. i knew that everyone was going to try to clock me one, and i knew this teacher would not step in. not after that "solve yourown problems" lecture of hers. i looked at her for any traces of sympathy but only saw another deliberately blind-to-others-torturing-you-for-your-own-good hapless nerdvana-ite ...Even the teachers hair waved insouciantly.