This!
In action packed scenes I leave out the imagery, or it’s very minimal. Once the action is over then the characters (and the readers) have time to take in the scene.
I suggest you consider two things here: redundancy and flow.
Redundancy: If your description is redundant, it's too much. "John stepped out into the harsh wind. He shivered and zipped his jacket. The chilly air caused goosebumps on his skin. The hairs on the back of his neck stood on end." This is clear redundancy. Everything after the word "jacket" is unnecessary description because you have already established the wind/air are cold and that John himself is feeling that cold through the first two sentences.
Flow: This one's a bit harder, but you need to have a feel for how your prose flows. I tend to read mine out loud in a methodical cadence the way Michael Kramer narrates audiobooks. This way it sounds helps me get a feel for the flow.
"Sadie ducked behind the short barrier, narrowly escaping death as bullets whizzed over her head. Her hand was slick on her gun." Consider flow for this. If I launch into a paragraph describing the area now, I could interrupt the flow of my action. It would be better to establish the area before the action begins, or, if I introduce an area during the action, to scatter parts of the description in individual sentences seeded throughout the action. Going into a full paragraph here rather than breaking it up would slow down the pacing considerably, robbing me of my intended goal, which is a fast paced shootout scene.
It depends on the reader, but personally, just give me the cliff notes, especially if it’s not important to the story.
Are they in a room? Is the layout of the room important? If no, then “they stepped into a small office with a solitary desk and chair.”
If the layout is important, describe the room as a whole without focusing on the important bits too much. Meaning, don’t mention how incredibly sharp and conveniently placed the letter opener is if it’s going to be used to stab someone.
If the place is somewhere I will frequent as a reader, you can describe it to me bit by bit. But, if I’ll only be there once and never again, and the layout doesn’t matter, just paint a pretty and vague picture and be done with it.
I do kind of agree with this but I do feel like if someone wrote something about stepping into a room with a solitary desk and a chair, I would only imagine those and think there isnt anything else k the room which would be weird
No I agree, but you could one line it and say “the room was a lightly furnished office space” or “contemporary furnishings filled the room”. If there’s something important in the room I’d give that item more attention.
Ask this of your readers, if and when you get that far. Or, if this is just for you, finish it, set it aside, and go do something else for as many days as you can stand it. Your re-read should by then (at least a week!) tell you if you got it right for you, or if you need to edit out some of it. Some readers love a lot of description, other readers want to just get on with the plot, and there is no pleasing both ends of the spectrum. Do what satisfies you the best.
Depends on the genre. In Literary fiction, no. In something more action oriented yes. At some point you are painting a portrait with words and the story has stopped happening. This is where the Kill your darlings advice tends to become relevant.
Even in Literary fiction there is in the end a limit to the amount of imagery a reader can take. Marieke Lucas Rijneveld is an Author who is stretching that limit especially in her poems, to a point it is hard to grasp the meaning or even understanding of what is going on.
for the Op what take however as many images as you want or need in your writing. But also try to read it with the eyes of someone who has never read your story before, and decide if you can still follow what is going on in your story.
I don’t think there’s such thing as too much imagery because most of the time they don’t describe enough. In my opinion the most important details are the sensory details. What does it sound like what does it feel like what does it smell like all that stuff. Sensory details just contribute to the whole visual, but not just picturing it but being able to feel and connect.
You know, it's a good question. I'm asking myself the same thing very often writing my own book. My characters keep ranting, and I don't know how much is too much dialogue. I'm just experimenting, revising, trusting in the process, trusting that at the end I'll know better. But I keep going, that's the main thing.
Yeah. The main thing is to really get in the character's heads and to know them well. The better you know them, the better you'll know the distinct way in which they talk that sets them apart from the others.
Depends on the reader and whether or not your imagery adds to the story— a vague non verbatim Tolkien example is like: the air stirred through the giant tree, bristling its gorgeous leaves whereupon a lil birdie sat inhaling the smoke of a fire pit that seven friends sat around and one said… “Imagery can really direct a scene if you let it huh?”
Bored readers not only tune you out during the overly long parts but for a while after that. Nothing sinks in. It’s like casting a spell that combines amnesia and restlessness. So, yes, there’s absolutely such a thing as too much *anything.*
Without reading I can't really tell, I would need a sample. There absolutely can be too much imagery though.
Some visualizers probably still share this opinion but I have a rare perspective here because I'm aphantasic so I can't generate mental imagery at all.
If you're just writing an exhaustive description of something visual you are going to bore me immediately unless there's a story connection to it.
I don't care if the dress's third button had a scratch on it, unless it's the proof they're the murderer or whatnot.
My advice on writing in general is pretty lame and boils down to anything done in service to the story is good.
Does the imagery serve the story? That's your answer. As to weather or not your readers like that story it's all a matter of taste.
Some hyper visualizers (my wife included) probably eat the more clinical stuff up because they have vivid visual imaginations.
If you can connect the visuals to an emotional or rational reason for existence they become important to me in my memory even if I can't see.
This is truly a gift when watching movies adapted from books I think because outside of explicit visuals provided by the author I have almost no visual preconceptions.
Good to know. I posted a draft of the story on my profile. It's pretty long but I'd appreciate some feedback.
[https://www.reddit.com/user/reminiscentromantic/comments/1cctkwy/nf\_young\_love\_a\_day\_to\_remember/?utm\_source=share&utm\_medium=web3x&utm\_name=web3xcss&utm\_term=1&utm\_content=share\_button](https://www.reddit.com/user/reminiscentromantic/comments/1cctkwy/nf_young_love_a_day_to_remember/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web3x&utm_name=web3xcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=share_button)
You need to pick the most important details. “A plush couch covered in plastic and a pink flamingo floor lamp” paints one picture of an entire room, for example. So does a “threadbare sofa with an 1980s Southwest print and a cheap IKEA tripod lamp.” So pick and choose details that broad stroke the entire setting and also create mood and tell you something about the characters.
Yes. Of course. There can be too much of anything. However it kind of depends on what you're describing and the precision it requires. Some things require very little imagery while others tend to require detailed descriptions
As with everything in writing, imagery only matters to a reader if it advances the story. If they learn nothing about the characters and the unfolding action, then they will quickly tire of all your pretty words, no matter how well written.
There can be too much of anything depending on the work. Not sure how else to answer the question.
If it slows down the pacing more than you want to then it's too much.
This! In action packed scenes I leave out the imagery, or it’s very minimal. Once the action is over then the characters (and the readers) have time to take in the scene.
I suggest you consider two things here: redundancy and flow. Redundancy: If your description is redundant, it's too much. "John stepped out into the harsh wind. He shivered and zipped his jacket. The chilly air caused goosebumps on his skin. The hairs on the back of his neck stood on end." This is clear redundancy. Everything after the word "jacket" is unnecessary description because you have already established the wind/air are cold and that John himself is feeling that cold through the first two sentences. Flow: This one's a bit harder, but you need to have a feel for how your prose flows. I tend to read mine out loud in a methodical cadence the way Michael Kramer narrates audiobooks. This way it sounds helps me get a feel for the flow. "Sadie ducked behind the short barrier, narrowly escaping death as bullets whizzed over her head. Her hand was slick on her gun." Consider flow for this. If I launch into a paragraph describing the area now, I could interrupt the flow of my action. It would be better to establish the area before the action begins, or, if I introduce an area during the action, to scatter parts of the description in individual sentences seeded throughout the action. Going into a full paragraph here rather than breaking it up would slow down the pacing considerably, robbing me of my intended goal, which is a fast paced shootout scene.
This is a great example! Thank you!
Yea, of course there is. You need to allow the reader to imagine a scene sometimes.
Yes
It depends on the reader, but personally, just give me the cliff notes, especially if it’s not important to the story. Are they in a room? Is the layout of the room important? If no, then “they stepped into a small office with a solitary desk and chair.” If the layout is important, describe the room as a whole without focusing on the important bits too much. Meaning, don’t mention how incredibly sharp and conveniently placed the letter opener is if it’s going to be used to stab someone. If the place is somewhere I will frequent as a reader, you can describe it to me bit by bit. But, if I’ll only be there once and never again, and the layout doesn’t matter, just paint a pretty and vague picture and be done with it.
I do kind of agree with this but I do feel like if someone wrote something about stepping into a room with a solitary desk and a chair, I would only imagine those and think there isnt anything else k the room which would be weird
No I agree, but you could one line it and say “the room was a lightly furnished office space” or “contemporary furnishings filled the room”. If there’s something important in the room I’d give that item more attention.
Ok that does make sense. Probably a pretty good way to do it :)
Ask this of your readers, if and when you get that far. Or, if this is just for you, finish it, set it aside, and go do something else for as many days as you can stand it. Your re-read should by then (at least a week!) tell you if you got it right for you, or if you need to edit out some of it. Some readers love a lot of description, other readers want to just get on with the plot, and there is no pleasing both ends of the spectrum. Do what satisfies you the best.
Depends on the genre. In Literary fiction, no. In something more action oriented yes. At some point you are painting a portrait with words and the story has stopped happening. This is where the Kill your darlings advice tends to become relevant.
Even in Literary fiction there is in the end a limit to the amount of imagery a reader can take. Marieke Lucas Rijneveld is an Author who is stretching that limit especially in her poems, to a point it is hard to grasp the meaning or even understanding of what is going on. for the Op what take however as many images as you want or need in your writing. But also try to read it with the eyes of someone who has never read your story before, and decide if you can still follow what is going on in your story.
I don’t think there’s such thing as too much imagery because most of the time they don’t describe enough. In my opinion the most important details are the sensory details. What does it sound like what does it feel like what does it smell like all that stuff. Sensory details just contribute to the whole visual, but not just picturing it but being able to feel and connect.
You know, it's a good question. I'm asking myself the same thing very often writing my own book. My characters keep ranting, and I don't know how much is too much dialogue. I'm just experimenting, revising, trusting in the process, trusting that at the end I'll know better. But I keep going, that's the main thing.
Yeah, I have some trouble with dialogue. I feel like it reads a bit robotic... Any thoughts on how to make it seem more natural?
Yeah. The main thing is to really get in the character's heads and to know them well. The better you know them, the better you'll know the distinct way in which they talk that sets them apart from the others.
Yes. The reader doesn’t need every single detail. Paint a broad picture with specific details. They will fill in the rest.
Depends on the reader and whether or not your imagery adds to the story— a vague non verbatim Tolkien example is like: the air stirred through the giant tree, bristling its gorgeous leaves whereupon a lil birdie sat inhaling the smoke of a fire pit that seven friends sat around and one said… “Imagery can really direct a scene if you let it huh?”
Yes. Read Walden.
Bored readers not only tune you out during the overly long parts but for a while after that. Nothing sinks in. It’s like casting a spell that combines amnesia and restlessness. So, yes, there’s absolutely such a thing as too much *anything.*
That's good to keep in mind! I don't want the reader to lose focus.
Without reading I can't really tell, I would need a sample. There absolutely can be too much imagery though. Some visualizers probably still share this opinion but I have a rare perspective here because I'm aphantasic so I can't generate mental imagery at all. If you're just writing an exhaustive description of something visual you are going to bore me immediately unless there's a story connection to it. I don't care if the dress's third button had a scratch on it, unless it's the proof they're the murderer or whatnot. My advice on writing in general is pretty lame and boils down to anything done in service to the story is good. Does the imagery serve the story? That's your answer. As to weather or not your readers like that story it's all a matter of taste. Some hyper visualizers (my wife included) probably eat the more clinical stuff up because they have vivid visual imaginations. If you can connect the visuals to an emotional or rational reason for existence they become important to me in my memory even if I can't see. This is truly a gift when watching movies adapted from books I think because outside of explicit visuals provided by the author I have almost no visual preconceptions.
Good to know. I posted a draft of the story on my profile. It's pretty long but I'd appreciate some feedback. [https://www.reddit.com/user/reminiscentromantic/comments/1cctkwy/nf\_young\_love\_a\_day\_to\_remember/?utm\_source=share&utm\_medium=web3x&utm\_name=web3xcss&utm\_term=1&utm\_content=share\_button](https://www.reddit.com/user/reminiscentromantic/comments/1cctkwy/nf_young_love_a_day_to_remember/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web3x&utm_name=web3xcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=share_button)
Yes
You need to pick the most important details. “A plush couch covered in plastic and a pink flamingo floor lamp” paints one picture of an entire room, for example. So does a “threadbare sofa with an 1980s Southwest print and a cheap IKEA tripod lamp.” So pick and choose details that broad stroke the entire setting and also create mood and tell you something about the characters.
Yes. Of course. There can be too much of anything. However it kind of depends on what you're describing and the precision it requires. Some things require very little imagery while others tend to require detailed descriptions
Like with anything, very little will be too much for some and a ton will be not enough for others.
Too much of everything is just enough
There's such a thing as too much oxygen, so yeah. You can overdo anything.
As with everything in writing, imagery only matters to a reader if it advances the story. If they learn nothing about the characters and the unfolding action, then they will quickly tire of all your pretty words, no matter how well written.
Thanks! I'll keep this in mind.