Descriptive Detail in HF

[Julianne Douglas]

Okay, here's a question I hope isn't too vague. As a writer, I'm curious to know what kind of descriptive detail you like to find in the historical novels you read. What makes a scene come alive for you? Visual details, smells, textures, sounds? Obviously all are important--I suppose what I'm getting at is how "historical" do you want these details to be? Do you like descriptions of obsolete items? Clothing? Architecture? Feel free to discuss anything that has to do with "scene-setting" in a historical novel. How much detail is too much?

[Misfit]

Interesting question. I love small (and large) historical details, but the catch is to make them effortless so it doesn't drag the story down. EC's books are the best example I can come up with, the details are so seamless you don't even realize how quickly she's sucked you in to another century. From small details of food/clothing, etc. to smells and sounds.

On the flipside, I had a very hard time with Mistress of the Sun (I know, I'm in the minority) -- the details were so over done and over bearing to the point of distraction from the story.

[Rowan]

I guess for me, I don't need that much descriptive detail of things, because I can generally find info about them online. Be historically accurate even for the little things. I would expect soldiers to use the proper weapons for their time, etc. What makes things come alive for me is simply the accessibility of the people I'm reading about. Don't sound boring and overly factual or you begin to sound too much like a text book.

[Tanzanite]

I just finished reading a book that I think is guilty of way too much detail (Colleen McCullough's The October Horse - 1047 pages). I do like the kind of details that you describe - but they don't have to appear in every single scene and they don't need to be repetitive (how many times do I have to be told the Romans ate a particular kind of food!). I'm sure that it's difficult to find the right balance. I've read plenty of books that I accuse of lacking any sort of detail. But for me, too many of those details can bog the story down making it a chore to read and not an enjoyable experience. And even though I remember enjoying reading McCullough's The Thorn Birds in high school, I'm sure that I won't read any of the other books in her Roman series - I've been turned off by the thought of having to plod through all those details.

I appreciate descriptions of obsolete or little known items/words or some kind of context in which you can tell what the thing is or what it was used for. I like descriptions of architecture - especially if the structure is no longer whole or has been dramatically changed. But a three page description might be a little much!

[michellemoran]

I love descriptions of landscape and food! A close third and fourth would be clothing and jewelry.

[Susan]

I like description that makes me feel as if I am there. I want to know what the characters are seeing, hearing, smelling, feeling, and tasting.

[Leyland]

I would prefer the same types of details that would be included in a well written contemporary set novel. In other words, just enough to set the scene in the best way possible to make me feel in the moment with the character.

Since what I wrote above might not get my thoughts across all that well, think Mary Stewart. Fans of her books, The Moonspinners, might be able to bear with me. At the beginning of the book, Nicola sees a white bird and a goat path and since it's such a lovely, sunny, dusty day, she takes off after the bird to explore. Every sight, sound, texture, and emotion is so superbly described that it wouldn't matter what century Nicola is living in, I'm there and feel it all.

Many of you know that Mary Stewart paints with words like no other and it seems that quantity just doesn't make up for quality. If I want more information about some particular historical details, I'll look them up, but I don't want to feel dragged out of the moment with a run of lecture material.

[MLE]

It all depends on how interested I am in knowing those details. For instance, I can wade through an awful lot of renaissance detail that I would consider poor writing, because I speak at a renaissance symposium and these facts might be gist for some part of my talk. I will put up with a tremendous amount of detail that helps me understand my Muslim friends.

But Colleen McCullough often bores me to tears with her Roman details. For one thing, I already know what she's telling me. And it slows down the story. Her Australian books didn't do that -- maybe because I don't know that much about Australia?

I don't see any reason why HF should be different from contemporary fiction in this regard. You don't stop to describe the kind of car James Bond is driving unless it has something to do with the scene.
Otherwise, what's important is that it gets him from here to there. Now if the passenger seat has a secret 'launch the bad guy into space' mechanism, it would be important to know that it was a sports car with a sun roof. And if some readers didn't know that a certain make/model had a sun roof, you might mention that ol' 007 casually slid it open before pressing the eject-bad-guy button.

Far better to make the details part of the story. If they don't further the plot or the characterizations, leave them out, or figure a way to weave that in. So if the roads are unpaved and muddy, have the lady dirty her dress, and make that play into something important coming up.

I'm trying to think of examples that were done really well. MM Kaye can do that, but she also beats you over the head with an excess of plot-clogging history in places. It is one of the best things about Clavell's Shogun, that his whole story involves the minutiae of an alien culture, and each detail is important, often life-or-death. So the reader is as fascinated by them as the protagonist is.

Geraldine Brooks did a nice job in Year of Wonders (disclaimer: stupid ending) when she made lead-mining an important sub-plot and forced the protagonist to endure all the dangerous processes involved.

The Thrall's Tale had TOO MUCH INFORMATION. I do not need to hear in detail about how excreta piled up inside the house in a Greenland winter, and how long it took to clean it out. Not unless it had something to do with the plot, which it didn't.

Cecelia Holland makes her details part of the plot. You learn a lot, although it makes her novels rather slow-paced. But they are very seamless in that regard. In fact, the more detail included, the slower the plot, on average. On the other hand, the novel Pompeii did a nice job of making every detail part of tightening the screws as you waited for Vesuvius to explode.

[LCW]

I like to picture a scene in my mind like a movie. I want enough detail to get an accurate picture in my mind but not too much that it overshadows the plot. It should enhance, not detract from what is actually occuring in the scene.

So I guess I like a balance of the description of the architecture, furniture, lighting, clothing, etc. Oh, and food! I love descriptions of the food!

[boswellbaxter]

A little goes a long way with me. I like the occasional "telling detail," but when description goes on for a while, the writer had better be very, very good or I start skimming.

[Virgulina]

I want enough detail to help me get a feeling of the place, time and characters, so as to form a mental picture, I like to learn a little about the customs, clothing, etc., but not too much so as to bore me to tears, if I'm interested enough I'll research the rest on my own.

There are exceptions of course, sometimes an author is so good that he/she manages to weave the description in the story in a way that you just want to learn more and more. An example that comes to mind is "The Heaven Tree" by Edith Pargeter, in this book I was so involved with the construction of the cathedral that all the tiny details just helped make the story come alive.

Ana

[EC2]

I like detail to give richness and texture and believability to the novel. I need to believe that I am in the century being described by the author and also inside the people he or she is writing about. There's a fine line between too much and too little, between having a bald stage and an over-dressed one. Leyland is so right about Mary Stewart and the beautiful word pictures she paints. Dorothy Dunnett is another one. Basically I want the sights, sounds, smells, the feeling and the taste of the time I'm reading about, and I want it filtered through characters who are of their time. It should all flow organically together and not be an info-dump.

[Ash]

I also am one who likes to picture a scene; I usually read books as if I am seeing a movie. But I agree with this

>but the catch is to make them effortless so it doesn't drag the story down

Once its obvious and over done, I'm done. And this isn't just about HF, but any book I am reading.

[Telynor]

I also am one who likes to picture a scene; I usually read books as if I am seeing a movie. But I agree with this

>but the catch is to make them effortless so it doesn't drag the story down

Once its obvious and over done, I'm done. And this isn't just about HF, but any book I am reading.

Just so. I think that historical fiction cries out for plenty of 'colour' in the writing, and plenty of description. After all, the writer is trying to create a place and time that's very different from our own. And sadly, when a writer blows it in historical fiction, they tend to do it horribly. (Eloisa James comes to mind, along with PG)

Authors who I do like for their ability to take me somewhere else are: Sharon Kay Penman, our very own EC, Dorothy Dunnett, David Liss (A Conspiracy of Paper is terrific), Georgette Heyer, Karleen Koen -- all of them have managed to create not just interesting characters, but also settings and actions that help me have a 'mind-movie' as it were.

[diamondlil]

Geraldine Brooks did a nice job in Year of Wonders (disclaimer: stupid ending) when she made lead-mining an important sub-plot and forced the protagonist to endure all the dangerous processes involved.

.


Totally totally stupid ending!

[Julianne Douglas]

I'm surprised by how many of us like details about food! :)

There are so many good points made in the responses, the most important being, in my opinion, the importance of filtering the details through the perspective of the characters. If the viewpoint characters is, as Leyland points out, running through a field, the reader needs to know what that character is seeing and hearing and feeling, not read a dissertation on the flora and fauna of the English Midlands. Likewise, most male characters wouldn't describe his fiancee's dress in minute, technically correct detail. This issue of setting the broader scene for the reader when I'm writing in a close third-person viewpoint is a challenging one for me. I know some writers (Dunnett for example) often begin chapters from a broader, descriptive viewpoint and then bring the focus down to the viewpoint of a specific character, a technique I want to try in my new book.

Several of you said that it doesn't matter what century the character is in--you want to connect with him/her and not get distracted by the research. So true! You've mentioned Mary Stewart and Geraldine Brooks and Dunnett as good examples of writers who weave the historical detail seamlessly into the narrative--any other examples?

On a related note, what about complicated political situations? Do you like to have genealogical trees, character lists, and maps for reference at the beginning of the book, or do you prefer to have the details come out only in the narrative?

[Tanzanite]

I love family trees, character lists (especially if the cast of characters is large with many similar names) and maps. They are very helpful if the book is one of the first ones I am reading about that particular time period/country. Once you are more familiar with it, you can always ignore the same information in other books, but I really appreciate authors who include that information -just in case I need it!

[Misfit]

Oh, maps, geneologies, character lists, bring them on. The more the better to have a reference point (I love maps) especially in the more complicated stories. Within the Fetterlock was a good example, he not only listed his cast of characters he listed them by house (York, Lancaster, et al).

My only complaint is when the authors stick this stuff in the back of the book and don't tell you. I won't peek at the end of the book and then I finish and find it after all is said and done. Grrrr.

[LCW]

Do you like to have genealogical trees, character lists, and maps for reference at the beginning of the book, or do you prefer to have the details come out only in the narrative?

That would be a resounding YES! Maps help me visualize a journey, for example, better, geneological charts help me place a person in the history of their time, plus I love coming across other historical figures I've read about previously on a chart. And a character list is a huge help in the meatier more complicated novels, like SKP's novels.

[Leyland]

Family trees are marvelous! Think Katherine and all of Edwards III's children and grandchildren - a lot to keep up with. And maps - totally yes. Especially in areas with tiny duchies and principalities that changed 'property lines' a great deal over centuries, so much we'd barely recognize the area today on a map. Think Germany. I still can't quite get Swabia and Thuringia straight in my mind.

[EC2]

There are so many good points made in the responses, the most important being, in my opinion, the importance of filtering the details through the perspective of the characters.

On a related note, what about complicated political situations? Do you like to have genealogical trees, character lists, and maps for reference at the beginning of the book, or do you prefer to have the details come out only in the narrative?

Julianne, that's one of the key points I make when teaching the writing of historical fiction to students - not that I do much of the latter these days, I don't have time! As much story and detail as possible should be filtered through the understanding, mindset and experience of the characters.

As a reader myself I don't mind whether there are maps and genealogies in the book, but I know that my own readers have asked for them and so nowadays I include them - especially since moving into biographical fiction.

[MLE]

When it comes to clothing details, one of the best ways to cover them is the process of getting dressed. This is very recently on my mind from a Renaissance Faire a few weeks ago. You can do a whole short story on climbing into and out of that clothing!

Modern people, with their nearly effortless zippers and buttonholes and elastic waistbands, have no idea how complicated keeping things on and looking just right was. Renaissance modesty: bosoms OK to view, even the whole darn thing (breastfeeding very ordinary) ankles shocking, calves scandalous, and as for knees -- there goes your reputation.
And codpieces -- oh my!
I'm sure that primitive clothing was also difficult. keeping lengths of cloth wrapped just so requires practice. Anybody spent a day in a sari or a sarong?

If it's a woman's book and a conversation is required to set up some plot bit, send the ladies shopping while they talk. Even if they can't afford to buy, they can always drool while they discuss whatever moves the story forward.

I'm afraid including food descriptions through cooking them only works if the character is lower-class. Otherwise, your stuck with describing eating, which is pretty overdone.

[Divia]

For me its those little odd facts that sometimes people overlook. For example in one Victorian novel I read there was a woman who decided not to put hair extensions in becuase it would take too long and that's one reason she was able to dress so quickly compaired to other women. Those types of things make me stop and go ohhh yeah....

[Telynor]

I have some of those historical bits of clothing, and for renaissance gear, I need help getting dressed, as a corset and farthingale are involved. Not to mention the sleeves -- those are really a two person job, even with my simple Italian Renaissance dress. I've made men's hose, with cod-piece and all -- one of them remarked that attending to 'necessary business' was much easier with a codpiece, and wondered why they ever went out of fashion...

How to get a man into your cluches: after cutting out the cloth for hose, remarking, 'oh dear, we may not have enough for the codpiece...'

[EC2]

I'm afraid including food descriptions through cooking them only works if the character is lower-class. Otherwise, your stuck with describing eating, which is pretty overdone.

Well so are cookery books, but some writers rise to the top not only by their recipes but by their presentation. It may help that Nigella Lawson for e.g. is an attractive woman, but if you read one of her books, her descriptions of food are wonderful and make you long to try every recipe in the book. An author talking about food needs to do more than describe it in passing. It's a perfect opportunity to chew gum and walk so to speak. i.e. make it not just description for description's sake by filtering it through the awareness of the characters and making the food a mini character in itself. Do they eye the dish with pleasure or disgust? Does it hold memory and association for them? Is it every day gloop? What does it taste and feel like on the tongue? How are they going to manage that very delicious but drippy sauce without getting it down their new outfit? Especially when they are trying to impress the person beside them. Is there a bishop eating a spiced custard tart at Lent? What about the diner grimacing as he cuts away the blackened crust of his bread because the oven has been too hot? See it through the character's eyes, make it part of the character development rather than background 'busy' and away you go.

[Catherine Delors]

I agree with much of the above. As a reader, I resent historical detail being shoved down my throat for its own sake. I can hear the author's voice in the background: "See the research I did! Bet you didn't know women wore three petticoats at the time!"
As a novelist I don't like writing descriptions (but publishers insist on it.) Sometimes I imagine a modern editor scolding Jane Austen: "How many times do I have to tell you, Jane? Your readers WANT descriptions of people, food, clothes, furniture. Now be a good sport and tell us more about Darcy's physical appearance. His eyes: green, blue, dark? His haircut? How is the reader warm up to him if she doesn't know more? Come on! About the style of the upholstery in Pemberley's drawing rooms? You need to liven this up a bit, dear, or we'll be lucky if we sell 5,000 copies."

[donroc]

Give me the meat and flavor of the times as many have described above -- clothing, food, accessories, furniture, weapons, the smells, the works -- with the caveat to show as much as possible without boring the reader with too much telling.

I try to do the same when writing.

[Divia]

I agree with much of the above. As a reader, I resent historical detail being shoved down my throat for its own sake. I can hear the author's voice in the background: "See the research I did! Bet you didn't know women wore three petticoats at the time!"
As a novelist I don't like writing descriptions (but publishers insist on it.) Sometimes I imagine a modern editor scolding Jane Austen: "How many times do I have to tell you, Jane? Your readers WANT descriptions of people, food, clothes, furniture. Now be a good sport and tell us more about Darcy's physical appearance. His eyes: green, blue, dark? His haircut? How is the reader warm up to him if she doesn't know more? Come on! About the style of the upholstery in Pemberley's drawing rooms? You need to liven this up a bit, dear, or we'll be lucky if we sell 5,000 copies."


Thats an interesting way to look at it. I guess I never thought about it but it makes sense. What a fine line you guys must walk! You need the detail but like you said you dont want it shoved down people's throats.

[MLS859]

I very seldom put a book down once I've started reading but one that I did was a classic -- ANNA KARENINA -- I felt absolutely suffocated by the details. I need for my my own imagination to be able to soar -- just give me enough details to get me airborne!

[Misfit]

As a reader myself I don't mind whether there are maps and genealogies in the book, but I know that my own readers have asked for them and so nowadays I include them - especially since moving into biographical fiction.


One caveat for these geneologies, maps, etc. I just picked up a book from the library that had a gorgeous geneology listed out, but it's on the inside flap. The library wraps their books up so tightly to protect the covers that I can't see half of it. Please add it to an additional page or two so all readers can see it and enjoy it.

[Misfit]

When it comes to clothing details, one of the best ways to cover them is the process of getting dressed.


That's an excellent way, but authors please don't overdo it. I had a book recently that went into minute 3-4 page excruciating detail over a princess's morning routine of dressing for the day, and she wasn't even a major character in the book.

[Margaret]

I'm with MLE: Far better to make the details part of the story. If they don't further the plot or the characterizations, leave them out, or figure a way to weave that in. So if the roads are unpaved and muddy, have the lady dirty her dress, and make that play into something important coming up.


There are authors I love who use lots and lots of setting detail, as well as authors I love who are rather sparing with it. But when the story stops dead in its tracks while the author lavishes description on something that doesn't play a role in the plot and isn't particularly important to the characters, it's never good.

The last book I read was Dorothy Dunnett's Niccolo Rising. For my taste, she often includes a little too much detail. But in the first chapter, there's a wonderful example of making the story come alive through the expert use of detail. One of the characters is a scruffy young man on a barge moving through a canal lock. Another character is an aristocratic young lady ashore who is wearing a hennin - the classic medieval cone-shaped headdress. In a commotion, the hennin gets knocked off her head and lands in the canal water. The scruffy young man goes to great lengths to retrieve it for her, but by the time he fetches and returns it, it has come unglued from the water and is stained blue from the dye on his hands (he's a dyer's apprentice). The whole scene is full of motion and tension. We don't get a static description of the hennin - it's central to the interaction of the characters, helping to characterize them as individual personalities and to move the story forward by showing how the two of them meet.

[EC2]

One caveat for these geneologies, maps, etc. I just picked up a book from the library that had a gorgeous geneology listed out, but it's on the inside flap. The library wraps their books up so tightly to protect the covers that I can't see half of it. Please add it to an additional page or two so all readers can see it and enjoy it.

The problem is that every extra page costs money and if you print numpty thousand copies you're paying for a lot more paper - that's how publishers see it anyway! Economics!

[Divia]

The problem is that every extra page costs money and if you print numpty thousand copies you're paying for a lot more paper - that's how publishers see it anyway! Economics!

What I want to know is how some first time authors can get so much fancy stuff in their book when frankly their book sucks? Who makes these decisions? meanwhile you have established authors who dont always get the bells and whistles.

[EC2]

What I want to know is how some first time authors can get so much fancy stuff in their book when frankly their book sucks? Who makes these decisions? meanwhile you have established authors who dont always get the bells and whistles.

Ummmm.... pass. I haven't a clue Divia. I just know it's an issue with my lot and with my foreign language publishers - not the maps as such, but keeping the word count down. I would assume it's the same across the industry. Perhaps your idea of what sucks isn't the same as the commissioning editors and they expect the book to be a bestseller? You can never second guess editors. I was asked to give a quote for a novel that I thought was truly awful and I refused, but someone must have thought it worth the paper. It's published both sides of the Pond anyway. One person's meat etc.

[Divia]

I hear ya. Who knows what goes on in other people's heads. Maybe they think its the next big thing, or something. *shrugs*

[Mara]

Just this morning I started reading another historical for reviewing - and within 5 minutes I became bored by the detailed description in the opening chapter of every guest, their hosts, and their family, at the dinner table (too many of them anyway). And all was told in omniscient pov, incl a profile of the main female character from whose POV I would have expected the description to come from. Not only was it confusing, as it jumped from one character to another and added nothing to the scene but it also began to annoy me. So much so that at the end of the chapter I wondered whether to continue or send the book back.

I did continue reading and the style improved but still, the damage was done.

Too much detail of unnecessary characters or items, especially early on, puts me off. I'd rather imagine things, given hints only. But that's just me...

[Volgadon]

I recently began reading Chekohv, and am amazed by the detail he could put in the scene, without actually using much of it at all!
Don't think historical or contemporary matters, because any author has to let the reader into his world.

[Ash]

One caveat for these geneologies, maps, etc. I just picked up a book from the library that had a gorgeous geneology listed out, but it's on the inside flap. The library wraps their books up so tightly to protect the covers that I can't see half of it. Please add it to an additional page or two so all readers can see it and enjoy it.

I've screamed about this more than once. So close, and yet so not accessible!

Penman's books for me give the best balance of description - enough that you can see, but not so much that you are overloaded with minutia (SP). And the one EC book I've read so far is the same :) And I agree with Margaret - the best descriptions are those that have to do with the story. The girl in Slammerkin running down the bad streets of London circa 1700 is a perfect example. Donogue managed to describe that part of the city while at the same time showing you what was happening to the girl in that setting and why