My Favorite Character (That I Created)

I originally started this post as part of the previous one, listing off many of my character descriptions from past drafts and matching them with AI images. I realized that this character and story is too special. It's had a long history. I've had many drafts done and the project has evolved so much that it warrants its own post.

There is one project I keep coming back to now and then over the past 20 years. It bubbles to mind often because of the merits (or lack thereof) of the main character. She is a pop star in a dystopian city, in an age where most of the world has flooded from climate change and society has become oppressed by sinister corporate and government powers. The story goes that this character--Mary--will discover that she is genetically engineered and is not a real person. When the city's mayor tries to forcibly marry her, she resists and finds a way to fight back--going so far as rallying a major rebellion against the city and fighting for the poor and downtrodden. It's intended to be a pulpy, action-packed biopunk experience. At the center of it all, Mary is built up to be sexy, sassy, and tough. She has a lot of attitude that often lands her in trouble, leading to unpredictable events (and plenty of funny banter). As I contemplate rewriting the old draft, however, I also plan to put more effort into building an arc: as a pop star, she would start off as conceited, hedonistic, and materialist--the story will naturally humble her, bringing out the stronger qualities of resilience, gratitude, and maybe even some wisdom. On even further reflection, I also realize her arc should incorporate an artistic struggle--she is a musician who becomes a freedom fighter, which is a little ridiculous. It'd be much more creditable to put the focus on music--her commercial music as bland, mass-produced noise, but when she becomes an outsider, she learns the artistic value of music and starts to find her own unique voice.

Originally inspired by Ripley from the Alien movies (especially the fourth movie, where she was a literal clone), this was originally just going to be a weird thriller of some kind, but it evolved into something more involving. At this point, the story falls in line with dystopian sci-fi franchises I love, such as Alita: Battle Angel, the Dark Angel TV series, maybe a hint of Bubblegum Crisis. I often look up to Mary as a composite of Ripley, Sarah Connor from the Terminator movies, Aeon Flux, and the Bride from Kill Bill--all hardened survivors who endure much trauma and loss before finding a fighting spirit. Heck, there might even be a hint of Barb Wire in there. However, recent drafts may also factor in the characteristics of real-life divas like Madonna, Britney Spears, or Lady Gaga.

Going back to the oldest draft I have, I started to find some kind of stride by incorporating a city setting. The first attempt at a draft (dated 2004) looked like this:

Mary took a shower and had a light breakfast. She took some hormonal medicine, prescribed to her ever since she was a teenager. Without it, she would be bombarded with uncontrollable impulses of lust and desire.

She groomed herself in front of the mirror meticulously, and regarded herself. She was twenty-seven years old, but still looked to be twenty-four. She had long black hair that came down to the small of her back. Her eyes were bright blue, and she had long thin eyebrows arched over them. She was slim, but strong. Above all, she was highly attractive.

The problematic patterns of my older writing stand out poorly here: very simple descriptions that tell more and show less. Explicitly describing her age is goofy here, especially since she's described as looking three years younger than she is, but a three-year difference is not really that noticeable on anybody. This description stems from her looking into a mirror--this is a trope that's overused and I'm a bit ashamed to have used it here. Worst of all though is the last line--she was highly attractive. The adjective is useless, but the sentence overall is pure telling--the description itself should have done all the work to show us how she's "beautiful." It also doesn't help that this opening is as boring as they come--the story begins with Mary literally waking up and going through her whole "slice of life." She's not a pop diva in this draft either--she's a dockworker.

One attempted draft (dated 2005) started the story off in a totally different place--it appeared to start at the end, with Mary captured and brought before her creator, with the intention to jump back to the beginning in the next chapter and tell everything up to that point. This is a technique I like and it can work in some stories--it could even work with this one. Over time though, I felt that a better hook can be found by simply starting from the beginning.

In this draft, Mary is introduced this way:

The guards forced the prisoner to sit down in front of a black desk; she glowered at David with wicked blue eyes.  At the age of twenty seven, she was remarkably gorgeous; her black hair was soft and shiny, her figure was slim but extraordinarily curvy, and her face was long but supple.  Even with the bruises and cuts she had on her face and arms, she was still beautiful.

It's maybe a little exploitative to start off with Mary in this powerless and injured state. Sadly though, my writing style was still at its weakest, still hinging on too many weak descriptors, weak adjectives, and vague terms. Neither of these drafts went far because I didn't know where I was going with them.

I had another draft around the same timeframe that started this story off in yet another direction--with Mary being experimented on in a genetics lab. However, the description I used for Mary is the same text as the above--I merely recycled it from the older draft.

Finally, in 2012 I had a complete draft finished, and this is where I made the defining choices to start Mary off as a pop star. Her initial appearance in the first chapter has no description to start with--it kicks off with her singing in a concert, with just a couple of scattered details (with a passing line like "she pranced giddily around the stage, whipping her golden hair and spraying her sweat into the audience"). Only after the concert did I jot down the following description:

Without answering, Mary slammed the door in Lester’s face, before sitting down in front of the mirror and undressing. The water she poured on herself during the show made her blonde hair uneven, but it maintained its most basic shape and sheen. The makeup on her face had worn off, revealing the pores of her face. Otherwise, she was every bit as desirable and exotic of a woman as ever existed. Draped down her shoulder blades, her hair was long and soft. Her face was narrow, with soft cheeks and a moderate-sized nose. Her eyes were dark, with a seductive gleam, and were further accentuated by her moderate-sized eye-brows. Her lips were luscious and full. Her body was slim, curvy, and her breasts were well-endowed. She had always known that she was perfectly beautiful; the crowd’s obsession affirmed her conceit, for she knew that they agreed and desired her.

Despite everything, this writing leaves much to be desired. It is still very on-the-nose, tells more and shows less. It still uses the mirror cliche--sorta. 

Obviously, I made the choice to turn this character into a blonde. However, when she endures a procedure that changes her DNA, her hair will turn to black, like in these previous images. The changes in appearance is meant to reflect her change from a naive pop star to a jaded freedom fighter. I find that changes like this can add a certain dynamic to the story that I don't often see--characters don't have to remain the same throughout the whole story, they can grow old and change their appearances on purpose. This can be a natural consequence of time, or caused by the story's events. In my rewriting plans, I intend to also have this character go through breast reduction surgery--it would be her way of combatting the objectivation she otherwise faces throughout the story (and, in itself this would be a theme worth exploring in context of mass media).

In this day and age, a character changing gender or body type would also not be unheard of. There is dramatic potential in these kinds of developments. The film Predestination, and the original Heinlein story its based on, is one example of a story that hinges on these types of changes. As I contemplate potential sequels for this story, the possibility exists that clones of Mary could have different genders.

Same character, different looks.

Later drafts I've attempted had the opening scene changed a bit, and Mary's initial description appears like this (coinciding with her manager's description too).

It wouldn’t have been the first or last time Mary would have to deal with overzealous fans, but if anything happened now it wouldn’t all be her fault. Crossing her arms, she glared at her manager. Sweat glistened off his round forehead, while his bulbous body hustled from the control booth towards her. He flapped his meaty hand, gesturing for her to follow him. “Mary, we got to go now!”

She flicked her head towards the stage, and thick strands of wet golden hair bounced off her shoulders. Her eyes—the shape and color of almonds—remained locked on the fat idiot before her. “Don’t you hear all that, Lester? The show’s got to go on.”

It's a greater attempt to sprinkle the details around instead of dumping them all in one place. Also a bigger emphasis on the verbs and showing details in action. I think the dialogue and subtle gestures go a longer way in describing Mary than most of the previous paragraphs I've penned over the years. There's even a little bit of Mary's signature sass leaking into the narrative prose, which is ideal.

In the redraft, after Mary endures genetic conditioning and brainwashing (which is every bit as creepy and unnerving as it sounds), her altered appearance is described in these paragraphs:

A pair of guards presented Mary with a green spidersilk dress and matching shoes—they glimmered under the fluorescent lights like liquid jade. They opened a door for her, and she changed into it in private. The uniform she was in was so plain—why was she wearing it in the first place? It wasn’t like she was a prisoner, was she?

When she was ready, she exited the office and was escorted to an elevator. It sped upwards, and she was taken to a make-up room where some ladies applied make-up, blush, eyeliner, eyeshadow, and lipstick to her. They applied gel to her hair and combed it until it became a glistening, straight black curtain down her back. With a spray of perfume, she smelled of jasmine.

Seeing herself in a mirror, she beheld someone that couldn’t possibly be her. Voluptuous, beautiful, and clean. A body fitting for a superstar. Somehow, the perfect body didn’t look right to her. It looked like a doll, and she wished it was different. The body, too thin. The breasts, too big. Her lips, too puffy.

The make-up people told her it was time to meet her future husband. Something about the words made her nauseous. Angry, even. She hadn’t even met him, but she already knew something about him was sleazy, and this arrangement was a fraud.

If this comes across as unsettling and creepy...it's supposed to be. This is a messed-up situation where Mary is transformed into an artificial, unnatural caricature for somebody else's pleasure. This is the crux of the conflict in the end--Mary will reject her place as an artificial idol and strive to become a real human being. 

Some of these descriptors I'm actually more proud of. It helps that it's filtered more thoroughly through Mary's own POV, so we have greater insight on her introspection and attitudes, which does change the way she describes herself. To have her observe--and even dislike--her image is one of the big building blocks to this part of the story.

I attempted a rewrite around 2021, starting the story off in yet another point in the timeline, but I didn't really bother to provide a description of Mary at all. Aside from the fact that she was blonde and quite irate to have been kidnapped by Orcco's freedom fighters.

On my latest rewrite, dated 2022, I went back to starting the story off with a concert (I find that I've had a devil of a time figuring out where to start this story, but duh, it should start at the beginning, and this is the beginning). In this draft, it incorporates some elements from many previous attempts.

Sweat covered her whole body, cementing her white dress against her skin. It had the effect of revealing the curves of her bust and hips, her largest and most coveted features. For ninety minutes, the crowd experienced the extent of her talents and watched her voluptuous body swaying, bouncing, jumping to the rhythm. They ran the gamut of all her most popular songs.

Her eyes—the shape and color of almonds—spied on her manager, Lester. His arms were crossed across his chest, resting on his bulbous stomach. The expression on his red, flabby, sweaty face told her exactly what he expected, which was to take a bow and exit for the night. Then, her car would whisk her to the after-party in Olympia. Even though it’d offer a cornucopia of pleasures, it never measured up to the thrill she of the stage, where the spotlight was focused solely on her.

She pivoted towards the stage, and thick strands of wet golden hair bounced off her shoulders. Walking towards the stage, she faced the [crowd] with her arms outstretched. Shouts coalesced into a continuous roar.

Probably could use some touch-ups of some kind, but this represents the best of my abilities at the moment. I tend to put the focus on a couple of areas: keeping things moving with physical action, and leveraging narrative voice. Hopefully you can read this with Mary's attitudes reflected in the prose, which will provide more insight on her character (even in third person). There are other priorities that are layered into the text, such as putting some focus on the tension with Lester, and hinting at a place called Olympia, which is a part of the world-building. Ultimately, I think it reads a little less like cringe, and I certainly hope it reads a little more like substance.

I still have plans to take a crack at yet another redraft of this story. I stopped my last attempt when I realized the whole story could take a completely different direction. The antagonist could die in the first quarter of the story (but come back to life through cloning). The powers that be would try to clone a new version of Mary when she takes to the streets--in the original draft, Mary found her clone and killed it (because symbolism!). But maybe it'd be more interesting if her clone was left alive to take Mary's place. But then, it could be a whole new book to show the clone's perspective, experiencing harassment from a seeming doppelganger, only to find that Mary is an older, hardened version of herself. And what the heck, the two could team up like the two Arnolds in The Sixth Day. Why not?

There are actually a myriad of other issues that plagued my older drafts and have kept me from pushing this as a publishable product. It simply isn't ready just yet. The plot could be better, and worst of all, the writing style was pretty weak in my older days. I am working to bring the writing, plotting, and characterization up to par to best realize this story in the best way. There is a potentially cool experience in this project, and work will continue to refine it until it's the best it can be.

My Own Character Descriptions

Some combination of re-reading my older drafts and toying around with the Freepik AI image generator spurred me to think harder on the way I've employed character description in my own writings. I've found that my methods have changed over time as my understanding of the craft changed. I thought it'd be a neat exercise to pull up my various character descriptions to explore what worked and what didn't.

Note About AI Images

I understand that AI image generation is a controversial tool that doesn't create "real" art, but a mere copycat based on countless real artists. It is not my intention to undercut or exploit real artists--I only wanted to use AI as a tool to quickly visualize my written word, in place of me trying to sketch my characters (but unfortunately my drawing skills are extremely janky). If I get the chance, I would consider these images for marketing purposes, but for a proper book covers or published illustrations, I'd rather support real human artists.

Characters can hit very different between how they are written in the text and how they appear in artwork. It has been eye-opening for me seeing how my text can be interpreted by a machine. In the spirit of showcasing ideas behind the scenes though, I will post the AI images to go with the descriptions.

Early Attempts

My oldest writings are as off-the-cuff as they come, with me simply plopping down the details as they came to me, often in one big infodump. I'm pretty sure there are cases where I didn't even bother describing certain characters. Much of it carries an amateurish quality, but as I peek into some of the older literature I used to read, I'm pretty sure I just modelled my style off of older conventions that have since changed.

----------------------------------------------------------

In my first novel, Rider of the White Horse, I barely even described the main character. As the story progresses, however, he does gain longer hair and a beard (then shaves it). His only other unique feature are his gray eyes--gray, because of his heritage as a clone. In this book, I have described other characters--here is an excerpt that describes a distinguished side character (the protagonist at this point is referred to simply as "the soldier" and has no name):

There was a man standing there. He was tall, but not as tall as the soldier, and he had hazel eyes and black hair. He was of medium build and he wore an elegant uniform; the soldier guessed that his uniform signified some important rank. Perhaps this was the warden or a Warlord, but he could not tell. He appeared charismatic, dignified, and intelligent.

Just your average El Presidente.

This is quite straightforward, breezing through all the basic characteristics. The sentences are rather bland though, with too many that simply state "he was x" or "he was y." Just about all of these could be jazzed up easily, replacing "was" with stronger verbs (such as "he stood tall" or "his hazel eyes gazed"). Comparing height to the soldier is probably pointless since we have no idea how tall the soldier actually is (at least in this scene). Worst of all though, the last sentence is pure telling and not showing--all those characteristics concerning charisma, dignity, and intelligence are best left unstated, with the character's actions expressing those qualities in the story.

If you think that's bad, wait until you hear this guy talk. For whatever reason, I made his stereotypically British, like that airplane pilot from 1999's The Mummy or something. Imagine the President of the last humans strutting around like "cheerio old chap!" and it is a little goofy.

----------------------------------------------------------

My next novel, The Garrison, introduced its main character with the following text:

He was a paladin: a special knight trained to uphold virtue and morality in the kingdom. His name was Sir Seth Chamberlain. He was a tall, young man, muscled from long years of tough practice at arms, yet wise from long years of education. He was seen as strong, but compassionate; firm, but merciful. His cool green eyes reflected the virtue within him, and instilled peace in everyone he looked upon.

Wow. So heroic.

Once again, I had hinged too much on a lot of telling and not much showing (although his actions are heroic throughout the story). It was brought to me attention much later in life that Seth's description is a little too glamorous, and I realized I had created a Gary Stu. He is described (and ultimately characterized) as flawlessly righteous and good, and it comes across as rather silly. I think the narrative voice has also shifted to a more objective standpoint, likely because I treated this story with more of a storyteller's voice (like Stephen King's Eyes of the Dragon, although he had done it much more effectively).

----------------------------------------------------------

Other short stories and novel drafts I made have fared no better. One of the more distinctive characters I invented (but might not actually use) was in an ambitious military sci-fi novel I tried to make as a trilogy--a big epic titled Void. This character was made distinctive by having purple eyes. The in-universe explanation was that she grew up on another world (and the insinuation is that genetics could change over generations in an alien environment). Her introduction was written like this:

“Tonight is a beautiful night, is it not?” an accented voice questioned.

“Most,” Jack replied. Turning to face the voice, he immediately froze. Before him was a woman with short white hair and purple eyes - characteristics of someone born from one of the colonies beyond Earth. Her lips were full, her face was soft, and her body was slim. Jack found her striking.

I kinda wish I described her hair more explicitly--it should have been in a bob style, like these pictures. 

I also see that I described her voice as "accented," but didn't specify which one. She was likely meant to have an accent from planet Aquarii, although that doesn't exist in real life--it would have been helpful to describe that voice in some way (and it likely would have resembled a French accent to some degree). Funnily enough, I never bothered describing the main character, Jack. At least not in this draft.

When I attempted to redraft Void in 2016 or so, I described this character with the following introduction scene:

Looking up, Jack beheld a young woman with fine white hair that came down to her neck. She had a lean and slender figure beneath her black and purple uniform. Most striking of all, Jack noticed her purple irises ordaining her smooth narrow face; they gleamed with vitality, but made her appear exotically otherworldly. Checking her rank along her arm, Jack counted six bars, identifying her as a Master-Sergeant.

Better? Worse? I dunno.

This text might be a grade more dynamic, but it's still plagued with some telling-not-showing details (especially describing her as "exotically otherworldly," that is two adjectives smashed together and that's pretty bad). Some time after writing this, I started to lay off of the semicolons and verbal phrases (although both are grammatically legal, I don't think they served me as well as I thought they did).

Upon re-reading some of these older writings, I found myself liking the older directions better. The purple-eyed woman, for example, was originally named Kara Storvy, but I was worried it might be a little too off or something so I renamed her to Kayla Naemora in another draft. Looking at it now, I seem to prefer the original name--Storvy. Even the original descriptive paragraph seems to read fine now, whereas the redrafted version feels more stylistically try-hard. Sometimes a simple style is all you really need.

----------------------------------------------------------

One of the worst descriptions I've written is the following. This was from a bizarre space-opera trilogy I attempted to put together: it was a very cringey, try-hard mess of nonsense, and for whatever reason my writing style was at its absolute worst.

One of the newcomers was a young lady named Ryla Corinthia. She was twenty-five years old with soft turquoise eyes and sandy blonde hair. She was slender and beautiful.

One happy...prisoner?

This was wedged in the middle of a larger paragraph, where Ryla exits a shuttle and enters a labor camp. The AI image is a heck of a lot more colorful than I originally envisioned (and Ryla herself appears so dang happy despite the fact she was framed and her whole life fell apart).

The problem with the text is that it's so bland, so matter-of-fact, and so direct. There is no good narrative voice to this--precisely because it's a very objective type of third person before I really understood what omniscient voice should be. Calling out her exact age is a little too precise and it's not a detail anybody really needs--her being young is enough. The last sentence--slender and beautiful--seems so hasty, on-the-nose, and could be seen as another show-don't-tell violation. The more I look at this specific story, the more I hate it (although I like this character's name--Corinthia, would have been fitting for a Star Wars character, and Star Wars one of my influences for this).

My main character in this saga--Rathen Maddox--was introduced with this enthralling sentence:

Gerard looked around the mess hall like a predator. His eyes settled on a man sitting alone at the corner of the room; a big man with big muscles. He had blue eyes and messy black hair.

Rathen at the beginning is rather non-ceremoniously described in the most simplest of sentences: a big muscle man with black hair. It's as vague as can be. I likely modelled him after Guts from Berserk, especially since Rathen starts this saga as a brute. He is a corporate scientist of some kind who was wronged though, so he has a classier background than this. Later in the story, after he escapes from prison, he gets to wear a nice suit with a gold cape...because why not? The outfit still stands out in my mind. This initial description though--it doesn't really say enough about this character, it's way too skimpy.

Missing from this picture: a cool diamond sword, because AI can't figure that out for some reason.

I tried to rewrite this around 2016 or so, changing a lot of aspects of the story and its writing style. In the redraft, Ryla's introduction read like this:

Ryla spent hours turning on the cot, trying to find a comfortable position. While she was on her side, her turquoise eyes settled on her forearm. Her name was branded there in red ink, with numbers associating her with her criminal record and sentence. It looked like a tattoo made of blood. She still felt a residual stinging on the flesh, from the sentencing process. When the robot sounded out her file, she gawked at the machine and trembled. In a broken voice, she told it, “There has to be some mistake. I should be on Mitheria Sigma at the worst. But…Corjo?”

“There is no mistake,” the robot declared, before guards carried her to the cell. The unfeeling voice continued to haunt Ryla. Her crimes were minor, and she expected to be taken to a standard prison. When she recalled her sentencing, she realized that her incarceration on Corjo was no accident. Somebody purposefully arranged for her to be there. She was accused of spying on executives. Now, they made sure that she’d never reveal the few secrets she learned.

There really isn't much description to this, but later in the text she is revealed to have blonde hair. Bigger focus was on the branding on her arm, which leads into bigger details on the world-building and larger story. I was flexing more of the introspection here, to make the POV deeper, but there are still a few weak areas. One of the things that stands out to me is the line "she recalled her sentencing, she realized that..." and all of this could have been cut. It could have simply been left as "Her incarceration on Corjo was no accident." It's a bare thought, and we know it's hers, so deep POV is achieved this way.

All that being said, more description would have been welcome. It feels skimpy to me.

In this version, I gave Rathen a different intro. Descriptions are still sparse, but I was focusing on a more arresting scene with this.

The bunker contained a pit thirty feet deep, covered by a thick iron grate. At the bottom of the pit, Rathen Maddox sat alone in pitch-black darkness. His wrists were shackled, connected to chains that tied him to the walls. The remnants of his last meal cluttered the dirt floor by his feet. 

In solitary confinement, Rathen appreciated the cold, damp air and the smell of Corjan soil. He rested his head against the pit’s wall, wanting nothing more than a clear, quiet mind.

It still seems skimpy, but like with Ryla's scene, I'm happier with the focus put on the introspection and atmosphere. That being said, this could have definitely used more. Even the descriptions that are used (like the "remnants of his last meal") could have been much more specific, to provide a clearer picture of this scene.

----------------------------------------------------------

Later Techniques

Some of the stories I tried to write in the last ten or more years have leveraged a variety of interesting characters, and as I learned more about the craft, some of the descriptions became more substantial. My style hasn't always worked, but it was an effort to stand out in some way.

For a long while, I tried to realize a dystopian sci-fi novel about a world where individuals have no independent thought--they are directly controlled by an omniscient AI. This book was called Thoughtless. I made the main character a blank slate on purpose, and in the course of the story he comes across a group of rebellious "deviants." This is one of them:

Leaving the car, Tom walked through the park. A few people walked on the stone paths and sat on benches. Children played on the grass, kicking a ball back and forth while laughing. Tom watched them in fascination. Even at their age, NORA spoke to them to make sure they were polite, made apt decisions, and could process through school adequately. Despite her presence, the children didn’t hold back from letting themselves run freely across the park and let shouts escape their lips.

When Tom looked at the few adults in the park, he realized that something was wrong. Somewhere between blithe childhood and apathetic adulthood, something was lost. He realized that it happened to him just as it had to everyone else. A part of himself was gone and would never come back. He never gave it any thought before, but he always knew that it happened. Now that he saw what was missing, he was disturbed.

He jumped in surprise when he noticed a woman standing next to him. He was even more startled when he saw how outlandish she dressed: fishnet stockings, a short black skirt, a denim jacket with patches haphazardly stitched at random places, a dirty midriff shirt that exposed her belly button with a steel stud in it. She looked to be twenty-five years old. Her face was smooth and angular, with sharp green eyes surrounded by black eyeshadow. Her black hair was slicked back with gel—spiky locks that pointed backwards.

Everything about her screamed deviancy—there was no way NORA would advise such attire to anyone. Tom’s suspicions became more and more valid when he saw the way she crossed her arms and stuck her nose in the air.

Regarding the children, the woman sneered and said, “What a bunch of brats.”

Tom didn’t know what to say.

Running across the grass, the woman barged in on the game and kicked the ball away. It bounced out of the park and into a busy road. A car rushed into the ball—it rolled off its hood and continued to bounce away. The children gawked at her, their faces stricken with disbelief and dismay. Turning around, the lady walked back to Tom with a devilish smile stretched across her face.

Tom blinked rapidly. “What did you do that for?”

She shrugged and replied, “Because I felt like it. What, you got a problem with it?”

“I don’t know. It’s…”

“Ohh, I know, it’s deviant, right?” The woman smirked before rolling her eyes. “So, what? Will NORA arrest me for kicking a ball? Give me a break.”

Cyberpunk 2077, eat your heart out.

This is still one of my favorite characters, precisely because I built her up as a literal punk. When I shared this text with some coworkers, one of them thought the clothing was rather risqué, but I have no plans on changing it. I was rather proud of the character's fashion choices.

I shared a lot of the scene above to demonstrate the actions and dialogue that best define the character--she's snarky. Defiant and rebellious, sure, but also irreverent and care-free. These characteristics aren't expressed with descriptors--they're shown through her actions and attitude.

Shortly after this scene, the antagonist is introduced in this scene:

Looking to the source of the voice, Tom saw a skinny figure rising up from a mattress on the floor. He was a lanky man with skinny arms and legs. Locks of messy black hair draped over his scalp, and partially covered his dark green eyes. He wore jeans and a black shirt. His sleeves were rolled up, and Tom saw that parts of his arms were bumpy and contorted—burn scars.

The figure looked Tom up and down. He turned to the woman and said, “Emilia, what did I tell you about picking up strange men?”

Shrugging, Emilia smiled innocently and answered, “Nothing.”

Few cool things going on with this scene: this is the moment the woman is positively identified by name, and the dialogue tags adjust accordingly. It might be a bit of a tropey shortcut to give a character scars and injuries to suggest a prior tragedy he endured. That is indeed the case with this guy, but I did design a backstory to explain the burn scars, which is connected to the motivation behind this character to oppose the AI called NORA. In this case, I think it would have serviced the story well. Giving the character scars without developing the backstory, however, would come across as shallow.

----------------------------------------------------------

These are excerpts are from my draft of Heathen, which was penned as an experiment in genres. Feedback on this description were actually positive:

[Rook] stood up from his hiding place. Sunrays sizzled the back of his neck, and his brown leather duster felt like a hot blanket. Sweat droplets beaded on his clotted strands of black hair and dripped on his gaunt cheekbones. As he descended the slope, his steel-toe boots clomped on the hard dirt.

This is one of my first attempts to try and jazz up the style. Even though this is a mash-up between cosmic horror and post-apocalyptic fiction, the wardrobe befits the desolate Utah setting, and it invokes the western genre. One of my critiquers seemed to enjoy this detail, and I suspect it works not only because of the setting, but because Rook is a kind of rugged drifter comparable to western characters like "the man with no name." This is a case where writing what you know can be helpful--I knew what this character was supposed to be as an archetype, and I wrote to that image instinctively.

There is a backstory to this character, in which he had a daughter who became lost. To give him some kind of personal attachment to the past, I gave him a gecko keychain that she once had. But to add some (unusual) personality and symbolism, I kept harping on the lizard characteristics as a motif: Rook describes her as "his little gecko," in one scene she is described as scampering "like a gecko," and in one instance she makes a face:

She made her best impression of an unamused chameleon, her thin lips stretched and her eyes bugging out. How did she make each eyeball look in different directions like that? He had to laugh again.

In a way, I had hoped to describe this character as having a lizard-like face, although this seemed to prove weird and difficult. When she appears as an adult, I gave her the following description--whether or not this reads like she has a reptilian face might depend on how the reader envisions it, so it might not come across that directly. At this point though, giving her a lizard-like face might not be as important as, simply, describing her as a real human being.

Her wide face tapered down to a narrow chin. Her lips were thin, and the corners curled upwards as if always grinning. Locks of brown hair crowned her scalp, much of which was bundled into a spiky ponytail.

This novel has plenty of other vivid characters, probably my most eclectic cast of them (by nature of this being a piece of weird fiction). In another flashback, Rook's former wife is described with the following paragraph:

Trey Smith scowled at Gretchen, who stood in front of the TV with her arms crossed. Her platinum-dyed hair was an unkempt bob that covered one of her glowering brown eyes. Her lips were drawn into a frown across her round, squat face.

Later in the story, they gained an ally, although their initial meeting is terse. I had described this new character this way, but the AI image is decidedly a bit more badass, and chances are I'll tweak the description to match it.

From inside the cavernous substation, a single figure stepped out and aimed an assault rifle at Rook and Leigh. The stranger was a woman with puffy white hair. A pair of sunglasses covered her eyes, but did little to cover the winkles that invaded her face and stretched down her flabby neck. Her torn jeans and lightweight blouse were covered in leather patches. A heavy poncho hung from her shoulders, ordained in jagged lines and squares—some kind of Navajo stuff.

Lastly, I started a side novella for this series, in which Rook encounters a community controlled by a leader obsessed with chess. There is a bit of a whimsical Alice-in-Wonderland vibe intended with this, but the text doesn't really draw attention to it--I was purely interested in presenting the character's image as-is and letting the reader imagine how fantastic the scene could be:

Sitting at the table, the White Queen studied Rook with her ice-blue eyes. Her long white hair was tied into a large bun. Her white dress hugged her slender body, with ordered lines running down her figure. A white cape draped down her back and fluttered gently in the breeze.

----------------------------------------------------------

Experimenting With Techniques

Over the past few years, I've tweaked my writing style to try and deliver character description in a dynamic way that meshes with the action of the story and won't slow the pacing down. Part of this means sprinkling details between character actions and dialogue. The bigger focus, however, is that I lean heavier on the verbs. It seems droll to describe a person and their details when it's still--in life though, everything is always moving. Characters can breathe. Wind can sweep through their hair. Maybe something gets in their eye and they have to blink rapidly. Maybe they're just walking. Small, mundane moments are all opportunities to sprinkle in the essential details I like to cover: hair color, eye color, body type, height, and unique features.

I haven't received enough feedback to know if my style changes actually work, but I feel more confident in this approach than in describing static scenes. I feel that this technique can work in any POV--first or third. In first, it's a way for the character to narrate about their appearance without coming across as too out-of-place and without using the dreaded cliche of having them look in a mirror. In third deep or limited, it's still the character's narration, although slightly more detached (and therefore probably more natural). In third omniscient, it's simply the author's voice.

Here's an example of my latest writing, in a fantasy novel called Kings of Zeshala, where I've sprinkled the description with the action (and I noticed I spread the description out quite a bit):

Twenty yards away [from the sphinx], Willard Valda stood by a pair of camels, which rested on the ground and chewed cud. The overhead sun beat down on his sweaty black hair, and he pulled up his cloak’s hood. He had never seen a creature like the sphinx recorded anywhere before.

At its base, an even greater wonder walked in the sphinx’s shadow. A hot breeze fluttered the white cotton thobe that encased Emmeline’s slender body. Unfazed by the sphinx’s enigmatic origins, she explored the statue’s foundation, her sky-blue eyes scanning the rubble strewn around the sand. She looked up, and long strands of auburn hair brushed across her freckled cheeks.

She called, “Willy! Won’t you get over here?”

Keeping his eyes on Emmeline, Willard left the safety of the camels and walked forward, towards the sphinx. So long as he focused on her and kept his hazel eyes off the statue, he no longer felt unnerved. She guided him like an angel.

Honestly, I think this could use more description concerning Emmeline's face, although I kept most of the focus on keeping the story moving. This might be a case where it's wiser to let the reader fill in the details with their own imaginations, especially since I didn't have any more distinguishing details behind these characters.

Also, yes, a thobe is a thing, it's not a misspelling or typo. It is a garment that befits this setting and period of history. I absolutely had to do a few seconds' worth of research to find that word, but it's there to accurately describe the type and style of clothing, which will hopefully come across as authentic. 

----------------------------------------------------------

Here is a scene I wrote where multiple characters are described in one big swoop. These characters appear in passing and might not be referenced again, but the descriptions serve to express the main character's disdain towards the pomp of royalty, and I wanted to use less-flattering details to villainize them to some extent. But since my main character has some sass to his narrative voice, and this was written in the style of a journal entry, this should hopefully come across as satirical.

Of course, the King’s advisor, Dolf Van Hordjen was present. Black pants squeezed his skinny legs, and with his bulbous gut nearly burst the gold buttons off his purple vest. With the fur-lined coat, he looked like some kind of disgusting fruit bursting out of a fuzzy shell. His round head protruded like some kind of pimple. The minute I stepped into the Duke’s court, Dolf’s beady eyes darted my way. When I smiled and nodded, his mouth twisted into a sneer.

Next to him was an exarch, who looked like a pale skeleton wrapped in black robes. A tall dark hat covered his scant strands of white hair, with a shawl draped from its rum down his shoulders and back. His thin, wrinkled lips were drawn into a scowl as his sunken eyes stared at me.

There were others who made it their business to stand in the Duke’s court: the treasurer, a captain of arms, some advisors. They all formed a line against the wall, in front of the Duke’s favorite tapestry—the one that showed King Krijers triumphing over the last of the Venkte tribes.

Finally, the Duke strutted into his court. His long-pointed leather shoes clapped against the marbled tile loudly. His fur-lined coat, dyed purple with red mandalas, sashayed around his lean body as he moved. When he shrugged the coat off, a servant immediately grabbed it and exited the court to hang it. In silence, he regarded all of us through wide eyes that appeared half-sleepy.

With a smack of his protruding lips, he asked, “Well?"

Character opinions can shape the reader's impression on other characters. Obviously, the above description is none too flattering towards anybody. If we switched to one of these other characters, they would likely describe themselves as handsome and Jurian as a goofy lanky stick man. If you read A Man Called Ove, the attitude of the main character leaks into the descriptions, often assigning sarcastic nicknames to his neighbors to reflect his own intolerance. This is all the value of how you tell the story using voice.

Chronicle of Progress

Across many other novel drafts and short stories, I have dozens more characters who have had varying degrees of descriptions in varying quality.

Ultimately, the point of this post is for me to plop down my old and new text to see how far I've come.  I've also been quite enamored by the AI images produced from my descriptions. No matter how interesting the characters come out (visually or otherwise), the actual written descriptions have evolved over the years. What was once a janky, unsightly chunk of exposition has gradually morphed into scattered impressions and moments that collectively build a portrait. Hopefully you can see examples of what hasn't worked in the past, and what might be working today.

Every writer handles this aspect differently, and even I might handle this differently story-to-story. In the end though, I am striving to make it as streamlined and dynamic as possible. Not only is it helpful to keep the story moving and interesting, but I also hope my characters leave a good impression.

How To Describe Characters

Another good "how to" article is long overdue. However, the the long gap may have been warranted since I've learned a substantial amount since I published the "how to describe a room" post and my writing style has changed since then. I find myself cringing a lot at my old writing and old blog posts precisely because my older style was rather weak--I had a tendency to overuse adjectives, over-describe certain aspects, and at times I was too try-hard. Regardless, I feel that I have learned enough now to talk about another sticky hang-up in story writing: how to describe people.

The power of AI has brought my character descriptions to life!

Characters are the most important aspect to most stories, and chances are that you may have a clear image of your characters in your head. You might have a strong compulsion to fill up pages and pages describing every physical aspect of your characters, from their measurements to their clothing, or the backstory behind a birthmark. On the other hand, you might forego the description altogether.

For better or for worse, there is no set standard for how much character description a story needs. Different writers will handle this in different ways. Some authors do not describe their characters. I just double-checked Cormac McCarthy's The Road and indeed I can't find any detailed descriptions anywhere (heck, these characters don't even have names). For this book, it's appropriate because the characters are blank slates, and the author is leaving it up to us to determine what they should look like. Ernest Hemmingway does the same thing.

Trade books, like those by Clive Cussler, Dan Brown, Michael Crichton, or James Patterson, tend to use a sparse amount of details. Their focus is more on action and dialogue, so they offer only a few passing lines of description with a few specific details to paint a quick picture, then move on quickly. These passages are to-the-point and straightforward. Often times, the rest of the book reads the same way--simple and easy to read.

Then, of course, there are some books that indulge in more artistic levels of description. Some of them might be regarded as literary masterpieces and have breathed life into memorable characters. The varied cast of JRR Tolkien's books are a grand example--the man indulges in substantial flowery prose to vividly visualize all the hobbits, wizards, elves, goblins, and more. Stephen King touts using only the descriptions that are necessary, but he can be wordy when he wants to be.

You have the choice to describe as much or as little as you want. The decision should hinge on these factors:

• Your writing style. If you indulge in slower-paced stories that paint vivid pictures of every scene, then more character description might be warranted. Pulp and trade novels warrant less description for the sake of pacing and readability. Omitting description can be an artistic choice, or simply a personal one.
• Your target audience. Are you writing for people in a hurry who just want a quick and easy pulp adventure, or are you writing for the people who want a fat, juicy literary experience?
• The genre and type of book you're writing. Granted, some genres like sci-fi and fantasy can befit any type of writing, but contemporary literature may demand meatier prose, while action/adventure writing can be barebones. 

I strive for that middle road of providing a quick description with only the necessary details or impressions before moving on. I have probably over-written some descriptions before, but this can be quite a chore to write (and read). The only reason I want to describe a person in the first place is the same as scene-setting: I want to paint a picture for the reader, so I tend to provide a fast and loose description and move on to the next thing. There are a few techniques I like to toy around with, but I'll mention those further down the post.

How To Describe

Although some writers will disagree, I believe it's important to describe your characters in the same instance they are introduced. First time they appear, they will either be observed by the POV character (in a third-person POV story) or they are the POV character (first or third POV). 

I suppose it's possible to describe the protagonist in second-person POV, but it'd be weird because then you're telling the reader they're somebody else. Maybe that could work, I dunno. The chose-your-own-adventure books I've seen don't describe the main character, leaving the reader free to fill that space.

When you need to write the description, you'd do so through the senses of the POV character (even if it's the same character you're describing, meaning they're describing themselves). When they encounter the character (or themselves), consider what they're seeing and write it out. You could write this top-down, describing the hair, face, eyes, body, or bottom-up, with the body and clothing first, then the face, eyes, hair. Depending on the scene, the character being described could be making a grand entrance, in which case you could describe all the relevant details as the character struts into the room. Your character could also have a more low-key introduction, and it can be just as interesting if they're just sitting at a desk focused on work, or sitting in front of a TV eating Cheetos. This is a case where a slice-of-life could be leveraged to add some dimension to the character.

Description should be done in the same narrative voice as the rest of the scene you're working in. If the POV character has a snarky tone, then they'd describe a character in a snarky way. A stiff and formal POV character might use more floral language. If you're flexing vernacular, then you can continue using slang and colloquial language for the description. The important thing is to be consistent with the voice.

In the same vein, a description means your character is making an observation. When there's an observation, there should be introspection (just as every action has a reaction, and every scene has a sequel). When your POV character observes another character (or even themselves), there is an opportunity to describe their impressions. If they observe a celebrity in the flesh, they could either be starstruck or disappointed, and that reaction will warrant a paragraph of introspection. If they reunite with a long-lost friend, there is an opportunity to delve into thoughts and feelings about that reunion, and there might even be space for a flashback scene. The length and depth of introspection is its own topic, but it's another tool you can use to describe the impression a character leaves. These impressions can be influenced by physical appearances and the way characters carry themselves.

The neat thing about introspection is that this not only reveals an impression on the focus character--it could also reflect the attitude of the POV character. If your POV character snorts and thinks cynically about a younger person, then you've suggested that your POV character has some kind of agist bias (which is hopefully done on purpose).

If your story has multiple POV characters, you also have the opportunity to show different viewpoints by having completely different introspection on the same observed character. If character A sees the observed character as dumb, but character B sees them as smart, then you've created a more rounded view of the subject (and possibly revealed more about the attitudes of characters A and B).

With every physical description you give to the characters, you are making a conscious choice that can contribute to their characterization. Sometimes it's fair to be straightforward--maybe the villain should be ugly, a hero can be handsome. A rich person could be dressed in a fancy Armani suit. A working-class person could be smeared in soot wearing overalls. However, you have the option to go against the expectations if it means underscoring a specific characteristic through contrast. Imagine how interesting it'd be to make a villain virtuous and a hero more wicked? This is what happened in the film Ladyhawke, where the story's villain is a priest wearing white, and the hero is a rugged knight wearing black. Aside from overtly turning the knight into an antihero, there are implicit themes behind villainizing a man of the cloth--it suggests the abuse of power. Similarly, a rich person wearing a plain tee-shirt could suggest humility. A blue-collar worker wearing Gucci clothes could suggest pretension. These details can emerge either through the natural progression of the story (especially as twists come up recontextualizing the characters), or can be immediately identified by a very perceptive POV character.

What To Describe

When the moment comes when you feel it's necessary to start sketching the character's description before the reader's eyes, you have the option to focus on these details:

• Hair. Color is usually the singular thing worth mentioning, but I find that hairstyles are worth bringing up if they make the character stand out. Having one or more characters with an unusual style can be fun, but you wouldn't want to populate the whole book with wild styles unless you're writing a crazy world where that's normal (like it is in the film for A Clockwork Orange). I find that many authors describe bangs and braids a lot, especially for female characters, but I rarely read about quiffs, mullets, or other specific hairdos.
• Eyes. Once again, color is a prominent detail, and you can easily Google eye color charts to find the most basic descriptors for the most common irises. You can make a character stand out vividly by giving them exotic eye colors (like amber, red, violet), but overusing this can come across as trite. In fact, the most common eye colors (like brown) seem less common in fiction, and it makes me want to use it more (honestly I think I flip-flop between something wild like purple eyes then everybody else is brown-eyed). Eye size can be as simple as "big" or "small" (although you can flex character voice to make this stand out better). I don't think I've ever read a passage that described eye spacing, although if they're spread out like Halle Bailey or something, it might be worth mentioning. Eye shape can come into play as well, whether they're wide, narrow, or otherwise (although some descriptions, like "almond-shaped" or "slanty," could be construed as racist). One interesting condition I rarely see in a story is Heterochromia--though rare, it is entirely possible for characters to have two different eye colors, and it might be worth researching for something a little more different.
• Skin color. I'd only bring this up if it's really important to differentiate (and it might be if the character's ethnic background contributes to their development). If skin is not important to you, you can omit this detail and let readers imagine the skin color on their own. When I do signify specific characters' color, I tend to keep these descriptions simple (white, black, tan, brown, are all perfectly fine). I never really dipped into further details, but it is entirely possible to discuss skin texture and undertones. Distinguishing details, like scars, tattoos, zits, bruises, are all worth mentioning.
• Facial shape. I find it's easy to skimp over this aspect, but you can distinguish characters by mentioning unique facial shapes. They can be rounded, chiseled, soft, or hard. Skin could be tight or saggy. More importantly, the cheekbones, jawline, chin, and forehead can go a long way to make a memorable face.
• Body shape and build. Can be as simple as whether they're tall, short, skinny, rotund, muscular, lean, broad-shouldered, lanky, or any other type. This is also an opportunity to suggest through their physique whether they're physically active or not, and what their role in the story could be. Strong characters may demand muscular builds (although you could craft an interesting struggle if an unfit character must fight for their life). Different careers and life choices will shape how their bodies turn out in the end.
• Gender, as it is perceived outwardly. If the character is a total stranger, the POV character likely won't know the character's actual gender if they're gay or trans. Description is about how the character looks though, so the description should report on the male, feminine, or neutral aspects of their appearance. For cisgender characters, their identity will align with their appearance, and for them it's as simple as specifying if they're male or female. Unless your POV character is rather bigoted, it'd be wise for them to never assume another character's gender or sexuality until it is confirmed. But if these aspects aren't integral to the story, then it's also entirely reasonable to omit these details entirely and let the reader fill in the gaps themselves.
• Clothing. Obviously this will be influenced by the character's social standing and professional capacity. Some will have to wear uniforms befitting their jobs. Some might just be slumming on their wardrobes. Everybody should be wearing pants, a shirt, shoes, and maybe a jacket or coat, and these can come in all different materials and styles. High fashion is something that I never really considered for my characters, but it could be considered if the story/character warrants it.
• Unique characteristics. Your character has a scar, or a birthmark, or a cool tattoo? Then it's definitely worth mentioning if it's visible or known to the POV character.
• Age. When sizing up a character for the first time, the POV character will have no way of knowing an exact age (unless they're describing themselves), so they might generically describe people as young, old, middle-aged. They might even peg people in their 20s, 30s, 40s, and so on. What's more important, however, is to suggest age by focusing on the details that betray age: whether their skin is wrinkled or not, the color of their hair, their gait, and so on.
• Hygiene. If you want to flex some of those sensory details more, the scent of characters can be a clue on their cleanliness, which in turn reflects how well they take care of themselves. This can reflect their sense of self-worth, or it could simply be an indicator of their social status. Heck, the film Parasite made the smell of characters an important plot-point (which, in turn, correlated to social themes).

The real fun part about all these descriptors is that they should all contribute to the character in the end. If you're writing a gruff military commander, he would probably be a mature man with a muscular stature, wearing a BDU, with a scowl across his scarred, weathered face. Writing about a ballerina? She'd probably be a young, dainty girl in a pink tutu with her hair tied to a bun. It doesn't always have to be so obvious, however. If you describe a man in a trench coat, he can either be a troublemaker or an innocent person, we really can't tell from description alone.

It is entirely possible to use physical characteristics to hint at deeper aspects of a character. A scar or amputated limb will have a backstory to go with it, and it could be background that influences the way the character acts. These traits will certainly impact the way the character presently acts, since they might be self-conscious about such injuries or traumatized by their cause. 

Obviously, the focus of this post is the physical descriptions, but this is only one dimension of a character (the surface dimension nonetheless). Depth is ultimately achieved based on how characters move and talk. These are aspects that warrant a completely different discussion. But the combination of looks, action, dialogue (plus motivation, wants and needs, emotions, background) is what will bring them to life vividly. 

DO:

• Consider the option to leave some details up to the reader to imagine, or to simply not describe a character at all.
• Consider using differences between POVs to paint a more complex picture of a person. Nobody looks at the same person the same way, and if you have multiple POVs in play, it's an opportunity to leverage different perspectives. One character might look at a character positively, another could be negative.
• Consider contrast. For example, it is entirely possible to have a beautiful villain and an ugly hero. There are implicit characteristics in this kind of contrasting portrayal--a beautiful person who is ugly in spirit might be inundated with ego, whereas a homely-looking protagonist could be seen as humble.
• Be up-front with the description, revealing important details in the same scene the character is introduced.
• Be specific with the descriptions you do use. Strong verbs and specific nouns will make your writing more precise and the image becomes clear.
• Become familiar with common and specific terms for body parts, hair styles, eye colors, skin color and texture, body and face shapes.
• Maintain the same voice used in the rest of the scene.
• Let characters change their appearance over time.
• Consider aspects beyond the physical, and work in ways to show those details through movement, dialogue, expression, and whole scenes.
• Work in details that can hint at their occupation, hobbies, or personality.
• Work on fleshing out characters, giving them nuance and depth. Even side characters can stick out with a little bit of a reason behind their actions.
• Write what you know, especially when it comes to experiences of other cultures, races, genders, and faiths beyond your own. If you don't know enough to write on them accurately, then it's an opportunity to learn through research and exploring other people's stories.
• Have fun with it. The more you engage with the character's appearance, the more likely they are to stand out and be unique.

BE CAREFUL ABOUT:

• Adjectives--details described by adjectives can be revealed with stronger words/verbs, or by seeing the characters in action.
• Having characters look in a mirror or other reflective surface and narrate their description. This is an over-used cliche that will irritate readers (and heck, I'm sick of it too).
• Optionally, you can use introspection to reveal the POV character's impressions. I'd recommend caution that the narration doesn't become shorthand for telling (and not showing) broad characteristics that can otherwise be revealed with action.
• Using traits as shorthand. One of the most common might be using scars to suggest that a character is tough and rugged. This can be effective if there is a fleshed-out background to substantiate the scars, but having the scars with no thought to how they received them could come across as shallow and cliched.
• Sprinkling the details throughout the book. It will throw readers off if you describe hair or eye color long after a character's introduction, because by then the reader will have made up their own image in their heads. Those details should be up-front, but other things (such as, say, a hidden tattoo) can be revealed later.
• Describing side characters--if they have little impact on the story, it may not be worth drawing that much attention towards them. Stock characters in particular have their purpose and don't necessarily need description.
• Using famous celebrities in a story. Fair use and the First Amendment does allow it, but it can be a sticky legal issue if the celebrity considers it slander or commercial exploitation. In spite of this, I also wouldn't bother comparing a fictional character with a well-known celebrity in the prose (although I have referred to actors to envision characters behind-the-scenes).
• Sexy details. If your character is horny, they will hyperfixate on certain details. And this is fine if your goal is to focus on a romantic or physical relationship. However, I distinctly recall one or two books (including one by Crichton) where women characters are described as having "good legs," and something about it rubbed me the wrong way. It runs the risk of making the characters objectify other characters, and in turn, it might make it seem like the author does the same. It might be wise to avoid starting with "the male gaze" or even "the female gaze," especially if it means your characters are acting like peeping Toms. It's better to save these intimate details for when spicy scenes are actually important.

DON'T:

• Compare skin color with food. That's just wrong.
• Broadly generalize the eye shape of Asian characters. This might only come to mind because of the epicanthal fold. However, their eyes are as varied as anybody else's. Focus solely on eye shape and size, with no influence from the character's race. To do otherwise may be considered offensive.
• Build characters based entirely on stereotypes and cliches, especially regarding race and gender. More importantly, those aspects should not be the sole characteristic that defines the characters. Every character should have deeper characteristics--motivations, backgrounds, hopes and dreams, likes and dislikes--that determine their actions.
• Infodump the details and attributes in one long passage.

There are many tools and many uses for simply describing a person's physical looks. There are many techniques and no real right or wrong way to do it. It's even fine to not do it at all. The only failure you can run across is if the description reads disingenuously or becomes offensive. Sticking with factual physical details (free of assumption) will help you avoid those pitfalls. Great writing, however, can achieve these descriptions with a strong narrative voice that commands attention, even during something as mundane as description.

Naturally, the best way to learn this is to practice for yourself and read broadly. Learning from multiple writers can inform you on what techniques work and which ones don't. For me, the way I've described characters has changed dramatically over the years as my understanding of the craft changed. It might always be a learning process, and I hope that my lessons learned will be helpful to your learning experience.